Ethanol and Water, Part Two
I'm reminded of the farmer who was asked whether he believed in baptism. He replied, "Of course. I've seen it done."
Well, as the ethanol boom has continued, I've seen new corn fields in Arizona and California where farmers water the fields with groundwater. Foolishness, oft repeated, does not become wisdom. Repeated claims by some of the comments that little corn is irrigated must come to terms with the map of the Renewable Fuels Association of the location of ethanol refineries in the US. Many are in the arid West.
For those interested in how much water it takes to grow corn, the Water Eduation Foundation (a respected California NGO) thinks it's 2,500 gallons of water to grow enough corn for 1 gallon of ethanol. The respected environmental writer, Ted Williams, pegs the figure at 1,700 gallons.
One comment gives a link to an article from Southwest Hydrology, but that article concedes that groundwater is often the water used for ethanol refineries.
Two larger points. First, I don't mean to pick on ethanol unfairly but it does use lots of water. So does almost every other type of energy production, including for you greenies, concentrated solar thermal. The point I'm making is the intimate connection between energy and water.
Second, the 100th Meridian traditionally marked the boundary between dry land and irrigated farming. But that is no longer true as farmer in the midwest, east, and south are increasingly irrigating their fields. This change in agricultural practices poses a substantial challenge as many parts of the country contront water shortages.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Ethanol or subsidies, not both. Last year due to the improved price of corn, there were no price support payments to corn farmers, soybean farmers or wheat farmers. There were incentive payments for enrolling in conservation programs (including maintaining crop residue cover to prevent erosion). So don't complain that corn ethynol production is going to oversubsidized farmers. It is the alternative to subsidies.
Agreed that other bio sources are better for ethanol. However, corn does produce a valuable high protien feed biproduct essential to dairies.
Challenge is putting it mildly. In fact there are water wars going on in various parts of the US and it will get ugly by mid century. Ethanol is a no-no for many good reasons and the excessive water usage is one of those reasons. The US should have never ever begun to subsidize ethanol production. That was a bad mistake and it will all have to be undone at some point. Farmers should be aware that an ethanol bubble will occur and then bust because it was never a sustainable idea and it takes land away from food production which raises the cost of food.
Try doing some research...here is some for you below so that you don't have to do much on your own. Argonne National Laboratory study summary below. You couldn't be more wrong about ethanol.
www.chicagocleancities.org/PDFs/Wang2005Summary.pdf
Myths die hard. While Achilles did have his vulnerable heel, water used to produce corn and ethanol doesn't bear out the analogy. It’s odd that there are those who appear environmentally concerned prefer to give oil a pass when it comes to fairly balancing the use of ethanol versus oil.
When it comes to water used by America’s ethanol industry, the facts are positive. The Argonne National Laboratory found “water consumption [by U.S. dry mill ethanol plants] decreased 26.6%” from 2001 to 2007. The most efficient ethanol plants use less than three gallons of water to produce one gallon of ethanol; most plants recycle their water. The St. Petersburg Times reported that a 40-million-gallon-a-year ethanol plant uses nearly as much water as an average 18-hole municipal golf course. And how does ethanol’s water use stack up against others: 1,851 gallons to refine a barrel of crude oil, 62,600 gallons to process a ton of cane sugar to make processed sugar, 2,075 gallons to make four tires.
Claiming that it takes 2,500 gallons of water to “grow enough corn to produce a gallon of ethanol” is nonsense since the water we are talking about is rainfall. More than 85% of all corn produced in the US is watered from rainfall. Further, an acre of corn gives off 4,000 gallons a day in water.
Instead of shooting arrows to hit a mythological heel, better to plow the ground for some salient facts.
Wow! Backpedal some more and you just might get the story correct. Approximately 10% of our fuel supply is being supplied by ethanol (mostly from cornstarch since we have such a tremendous supply in this country) which takes 3-4 gallons of water to process per gallon of ethanol compared to the Canadian tar sands (which supply about 10% of our gasoline supply) which take 30-40 gallons of water per gallon of gasoline to process.
This article claims to not pick on ethanol...I suspect that the author will fail to follow up with a report on water usage (not to mention the non-renewable & pollution rich attributes of gasoline - especially that that which comes from the tar sands of our neighbors to the north)....or maybe not.
Too bad. Always willing to jump on the anti-ethanol bandwagon but not say a word (or an article) against the environmental/economic unsustainability of gasoline or oil in general.
You need to do some reading. You are so far off base it is laughable!!! Ethanol is a real resource killer.
Here's some research for you... www.chicagocleancities.org/PDFs/Wang2005Summary.pdf
This is summary of the study done by Argonne National Laboratory. Bottom line - Ethanol from cornstarch is a far superior fuel (economically & environmentally) to gasoline and ethanol from cellulose is even better.
I am sure that your "reading" sources push the API's (American Petroleum Institute) propaganda. Start reading some unbiased sources/research and then start making these kind of statements.
Why must people push CORN ethanol? It is the most costly feedstock for fuel production. Sweet sorghum, sugar beets and most any other sweet fruit or vegetable is suitable for ethanol production and require less pesticides, water and overall care. Corn is only good for one type of flammable liquid...Jack Daniels.
And if Henry Ford had had his way, every farm would produce ethanol from the waste products alone! They could power their own machinery and sell the remainder. And if the research he began has continued, we would be at the point where cellulosic ethanol would be practicable further lessening the "drain" on food plants and increasing our energy independence as Farmers use more fuel than any other sector!
One of the greatest failures of world food policy has been trying to force the cultivation and consumption of corn onto poor and starving cultures that have no history of ever doing either! It is not a sufficient or acceptable diet for most of the countries we envision when we think about the tragic children with their swollen bellies. Rice, legumes, and root vegetables are the culturally accepted, and most easily farmed, foods for those regions. Not Corn!
In America, not to be facetious, but our poor eat more McDonalds than corn products, unless of course, you are counting the corn that goes to feed cattle for the burgers. Even in Mexico, where corn is the preferred flour for tortillas and breads, they balance their diet with an even greater intake of beans and other legumes, and fresh vegetables. Most corn in this country goes to cattle feed--its greatest misuse and contributes greatly to a variety of health problems other countries don't experience.
The fact is that corn is not the best choice for ethanol. It's the best choice for heavily subsidized corn farmers and their powerful lobby. Brazil has found a way to make ethanol, make it sensibly, affordably, and with no negative food impact. I suggest we study their success.
Before citing Brazil as an example, keep in mind that Brazil heavily subsidized its sugar cane based ethanol industry for decades; cane cutters are severely underpaid and exploited; and the growing of sugar cane precludes growing food crops. Both Brazil and the US are using government policy to promote a cleaner-burning renewable alternative to oil.
Okay , one more time!
ETHANOL = STARVING THE POOR!
GASOLINE = POISIONING THE POOR, MIDDLE CLASS & THE RICH.
ETHANOL = CLEAN & RENEWABLE COMPETITION TO DIRTY GASOLINE....THEREFORE UNFAIR ATTACKS THAT DO NOT MENTION THE WATER CONSUMPTION TO MAKE GASOLINE AND THE ECONOMIC/ENVIRONMENTAL DESTRUCTION THAT GASOLINE CONTINUES TO GIVE US.
Ethanol and gasoline should not be used for automotve fuel at all on a large basis. Neither of them are sustainable. Both suck up large portions of our natural resources and we should use hydrogen derived from solar electrolysis.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
