which are shipped around the country to be burned, injecting carbon into the atmosphere.
While I broadly agree with your comment, this line is a stretch. The carbon released is only from transportation and fertilizer production. The carbon inside the ethanol itself is actually pulled from the environment, so that part is actually carbon neutral.
The big problem with ethanol production is that it takes 5 gallons of fuel to produce 4 gallons of ethanol. It’s literally just pissing away time, money, and resources just to subsidize farmers.
I should say that the corn is carbon neutral but the other inputs, such as the fertilizer and the machinery used to irrigate and harvest it do product net positive carbon. In addition, the opportunity cost is that we’re not using that water and land to grow food creating secondary affects for the people that need to eat food.
While I broadly agree with your comment, this line is a stretch. The carbon released is only from transportation and fertilizer production. The carbon inside the ethanol itself is actually pulled from the environment, so that part is actually carbon neutral.
The big problem with ethanol production is that it takes 5 gallons of fuel to produce 4 gallons of ethanol. It’s literally just pissing away time, money, and resources just to subsidize farmers.
Yeah it isn’t the strongest point, I’ll admit.
I should say that the corn is carbon neutral but the other inputs, such as the fertilizer and the machinery used to irrigate and harvest it do product net positive carbon. In addition, the opportunity cost is that we’re not using that water and land to grow food creating secondary affects for the people that need to eat food.
It’s valuable for reducing smog and makes great fuel for performance cars
@nBodyProblem @mnemonicmonkeys at a 40% efficiency hit yes. It is great for turbos!