Corn ethanol, thought by many to be a promising fuel for America’s new clean energy future, has seen its popularity dwindle this year, thanks in part to recent reports that growing corn for fuel could disrupt the world’s food supply and that corn ethanol has a higher carbon footprint than previously thought. One particular concern is the possible conversion of non-agricultural lands–such as forests and grasslands that are vital to the environment–into farmland for raising corn for ethanol.
But a new study released last week by Air Improvement Resource (AIR) reveals that expansion of corn ethanol production to 15 billion gallons per year in 2015 is unlikely to result in the conversion of non-agricultural land in the U.S. or abroad. According to the study, which was conducted for the Renewable Fuels Association, increasing crop yields and growing supplies of nutrient-dense feed co-products are likely to nullify the need to expand global cropland to meet the corn ethanol requirements of the U.S. Renewable Fuel Standard program, which will increase the volume of renewable fuel required to be blended into gasoline from 9 billion gallons in 2008 to 36 billion gallons by 2022. Says Tom Darlington, president of AIR and author of the study, “The best estimate of land use impacts of expanding corn ethanol in the U.S. between 2001 and 2015 is zero.” Because of this, the study concludes, corn ethanol should not be charged with greenhouse gas emissions resulting from indirect land use change in the modeling currently underway at the EPA and the California Air Resources Board.
This may, at first, seem like good news for the corn ethanol industry. Minimal land disruption, minimal impact on the environment, right? But let’s take a look at what’s allowing for those “increasing crop yields” referred to in the study so that more conversion of non-agricultural lands isn’t necessary: namely, genetically modified corn and heavy pesticide use. The Union of Concerned Scientists has recently voiced its concerns about using genetically modified corn for biofuel; it believes that genetically modified corn will inevitably mix and contaminate corn for the food supply. And researchers last year reporting in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences said that expansion of corn ethanol production in the U.S. will worsen the growing “dead zone” in the Gulf of Mexico–an area of ocean so devoid of oxygen that it cannot support sea life, thanks in large part to the use of nitrogen-based fertilizers for corn production.
A better bet for the future of ethanol production in this country? Cellulosic ethanol, which can be made from plant waste that already exists, like corn stalks, cobs, and wood chips. To read more about recent research from the University of Minnesota that shows the environmental benefits of cellulosic ethanol (versus corn-based ethanol and of course, gasoline), click here.
–Jennifer Grayson
Like this post? Subscribe to The Red, White, and Green RSS feed
March 2nd, 2009 at 11:49 pm
You gotta love the optimism. Cellulosic ethanol has been going to save the environment “in five years” for the last twenty years. There is supposed to be 600 million gallons of cellulosic ethanol this year in the EPA quota demanded by EISA 2007 and it isn’t going to happen. EISA 2007 is causing huge unintended consequences because it is an E85 corporate welfare bill and Flex-Fuel cars are DOA now. Taking all of our gasoline E10 is having economic consequences in the marine and aviation industry and causing property damage to antique and classic cars and motorcycles, boats, all manner of small engines used in recreation vehicles and public safety applications like generators, pumps and tools. If the congress doesn’t wake up and modify EISA 2007 by banning the blending of ethanol in premium unleaded gasoline so the rest of us can survive, the lawsuits will mushroom and the public backlash will only increase.
March 3rd, 2009 at 8:58 pm
Actually, genetically modified corn reduces the use of pesticides. And the amount of fertilizers used per bushel of corn produced has decreased over the years as growers get more efficient.
The GM corn you are referring to in this article (and link) is actually a new variety that converts more fully to ethanol – increasing the ethanol output per bushel. Many believe it should not be planted until it is approved for food use – and that is likely what will happen.
Discussion over the dead zone is interesting – as the amount of fertilizer runoff from farm fields has dropped significantly as farmers have switched to no-till practices. Yet the dead zone remains (at varying sizes depending on the year). Perhaps all those nice green lawns and golf courses, runoff from parking lots and streets, etc. have something to do with it.
Cellulosic ethanol will be great, but we need to get there first. And we need a system in place to make it work. Corn-based ethanol gets us that system and gets us there.
For a good study on ethanol (the U of MN study has been demonstrated to be of bad science), check out the report linked to from this post: http://nebraskacorn.blogspot.com/2009/01/university-report-slams-corn-ethanol.html