Tortillas, Ethanol, and High Fructose Corn Syrup

A recent leaked report from the World Bank, stating that 75% of the increase in world food prices is due to biofuels, has served to reignite the food vs. fuel debate. In particular, many are outraged that even as food prices rise corn continues to be used for ethanol rather than tortillas. However, what is lost in all the biofuel controversy is the fact that tremendous amounts of land are devoted neither to fuel nor nutritive food, but rather to non-nutritive uses like tobacco, high fructose corn syrup and cane sugar.

Blame Meat and High Fructose Corn Syrup
The fact of the matter is that if we are really concerned about rising food prices and endemic hunger/poverty, then we'll have to do more than question the biofuel mandates in the United States and the European Union. In truth, we'll have to call into question much of our agricultural system. For instance, we might ask the world's billion or so wealthy citizens to curtail meat consumption, which is not only responsible for 20% of global greenhouse gas emissions, but also uses tremendous amounts of land, water and food--all of which could be devoted to staple crops that the poor need to survive. Or, we might take a second look at the amount of corn that is used for high fructose corn syrup, which does little more than contribute to the American obesity epidemic.

I'm certainly no fan of food-based fuels (in fact, I believe the future of our transportation system is electric), but it strikes me as hypocritical to blame them when there is so much else that could be done. As my good friend, and UCLA Urban Planning PhD student, T.H. Culhane writes on his blog, "the public is being fooled into thinking that there are fields that grow corn and fields that grow tobacco and that corn should be used for food and tobacco should be used for cigarettes, and you violate some sacrosanct principle by using some corn for ethanol. The critics of biofuels never mention that for every acre of corn you plant for fuel you could simultaneously take an acre of tobacco out of production and grow food corn there."

Let's Have an Honest Debate
The bottom line is that if we are to have an honest discussion about biofuels -- which will become more socially and environmentally viable as algae and cellulose replace corn and soybeans --we need to take a look at the entire picture. Before questioning subsidies for ethanol, for instance, why not demand an end to subsidies for tobacco farmers? Just as Americans are blaming high oil prices and the credit crisis for the recent economic downturn, rather than the war in Iraq (which has cost $2 trillion with zero return on investment), critics of biofuels are only seeing a small part of what's behind the rise in food prices. Rethinking the way we grow food, as well as what we grow and why, may be the only way to put the food vs. fuel debate in perspective while at the same time addressing climate change, hunger and obesity. After all, while cheap corn syrup merely makes Coca Cola a more profitable company, subsidies for ethanol at least have the potential to spur innovation leading to advanced biofuels.

Quote Via: ::Solar Cities (Blog)

More on Ethanol and Oil
Will the High Price of Oil Make Americans Skinnier?
"Food vs. Fuel"--A False Debate
End of the Line for Biofuels?
Crop Prices Shutting Down Ethanol Plants--And Plans

Comments

[jonbw]

The world's poor don't need food they need condoms and birth control. If there was not an explosion of people in the third world there would be plenty of food to go around. World population has increased by 36% in the past 20 years. With growth rates like that food technology will not be able to keep pace in the long run.

[Biofuelsimon]

Ok how about cutting the obesity problem and making the fuel problem a little easier. Not lipodiesel, just ferment a little of the high fructose corn syrup... and replace it with artificial sweeteners.

[GreyFlcn]

Okay Andy, lets be honest then.

Where do you think all this raw biomass is going to come from?
http://greyfalcon.net/biolimits.png
http://greyfalcon.net/algae4
http://greyfalcon.net/mythsofbiofuels

Also given that scarcity, is it really such a good idea to create an infrastructure which is essentially identical to Coal-to-Liquids.
http://greyfalcon.net/coskata
http://greyfalcon.net/cellulosics.pdf

[leduck]

corn based ethanol is bad idea food or no food
it has a very low EROIE
i don't know if it's positive or negative
but either way, it's low
EROIE:
oil (when it used to gush out of the ground under pressure) 100:1
oil now 20 or 15:1
Corn based ethanol 1:1 or at most 1.5:1
net energy
in other words, for it used to take one barrel of oil for every 100 barrels we got back
now we get 15 to 20 barrels for every barrels we use to extract it
but we takes one barrel of corn based ethanol to get one barrel of the stuff

just isn't worth it
time to move on to next scheme

[markie1111]

the bottom line IS: the planet is overpopulated with homo sapiens. reality IS: the planet is losing it biodiversity, (ie that is becoming a monoculture, ie homogenized), at an unnatural rate. the biological consequence IS: all monocultures eventually collapse. if you all stopped for a moment and looked at the planet from afar, you'd be saying: stop the madness down there. and as far as i can tell, not much in the winds to change.....

[leduck]

i agree
the planet is way over populated
butr i can't say it
or people on this post will get angry

[jvarga]

You can say it, just propose your solution.

[NL207]

"the planet is overpopulated with homo sapiens. reality IS"

We've heard this argument before. Think about where various socialist have gone with this in the past, an where various socialists are going with it now. Can you think of a country where the state plays an active role in this question? I can. That country is Communist China.

[RRK70]

Thanks for the article, this seems to be a point everyone is missing. In my opinion the rise in the price of food has as much to do with modern agriculture's addiction to petroleum in the form of fertilizers, herbicides, pesticides and transport costs as it does increasing biofuel use.
The people criticizing biofuels should instead try promoting more sustainable, local agriculture.

[DragonMama]

plenty of us do both. My family is a member of the local CSA and trying to get garden-produce-swapping going at our church. And we complain loudly about potential food being used for non-food purposes and potential fuel being put on our food plants when compost goes a long way but so much ends up in the landfill.

I'm trying to nudge the local communities into imitating Toronto's green bin program. What are you doing?

[dissolvethecorporation]

Use sweet sorghum for biofuel and not to feed cows, and the problem is solved. Anyone who still eats meat is just not paying attention, for their own safety let alone the carbon footprint.

[research]

15% corn now goes to ethanol.

4$ of corn goes to corn syrup.

10% for human food.

Sorry, Corn ethanol is a terrible idea. Only agricultural waste should be used for energy, then fertilizer.

http://www.ers.usda.gov/AmberWaves/February08/Features/CornPrices.htm

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0521/p09s02-coop.html

[Scarabus]

As a political reality, one would have to make it at least a break-even deal for tobacco farmers...and that means subsidies.

[guajiro]

Just love the idea of posting this article's ideas on other sites. There's nothing but conservative media where I live and the local radio station has fits whenever a progressive calls in. I'm calling in first chance I get, to "air" the idea that if the conservatives are concerned that growing corn for ethanol is robbing food from the poor, then instead of subsidizing tobacco, they ought to take that land that's planted in tobacco and use it for corn. GREAT!! Love it!