[HN Gopher] U.S. ethanol plants are allowed to pollute more than...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       U.S. ethanol plants are allowed to pollute more than oil refineries
        
       Author : DoubleDerper
       Score  : 30 points
       Date   : 2022-09-09 17:34 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.reuters.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.reuters.com)
        
       | credit_guy wrote:
       | > The EPA's resolve to rein in ethanol emissions faces a new test
       | this year as Congressional mandates for expanding biofuels
       | expire, placing the future of the RFS at the agency's discretion.
       | 
       | Great. They should just stop this charade then. There are 30
       | million acres planted with corn used for bioethanol production.
       | Out of 90 million total acres planted with corn. For comparison,
       | the US has about 800 million acres of forests.
        
       | tengbretson wrote:
       | This article does a great job of muddying the distinction of the
       | CO2 output of corn production in general and the output of an
       | actual ethanol plant.
       | 
       | To focus on the claim in the title, calling the CO2 byproduct of
       | yeast fermentation of a grain, in which its carbon all came from
       | atmospheric sources in the first place comparable to the
       | pollution of an oil refinery is absurd.
        
         | ZeroGravitas wrote:
         | There's also the recent work suggesting oil refineries led to
         | an uptick in strokes across the South-East US.
         | 
         | https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ac8943/...
         | 
         | The 'pollute' in the headline is misleading enough to be
         | considered a lie.
         | 
         | In particular because the point of an oil refinary is to
         | produce fossil fuels, which then get burnt, releasing fossil
         | carbon.
         | 
         | Having said all that, moving to EVs will reduce the use of corn
         | ethanol anyway.
        
           | Maursault wrote:
           | > Having said all that, moving to EVs will reduce the use of
           | corn ethanol anyway.
           | 
           | Ethanol for fuel was stillborn in the US by using corn to
           | create ethanol, which is too inefficient and competes with
           | food. What ever happened to the 20:1 ratio of using
           | switchgrass, which no one eats? And why mix ethanol with gas,
           | anyway? We could just use pure ethanol, which is more
           | performant than gas at the cost of a 1/3 of a tank less
           | milage, which is a fair trade.
        
             | tengbretson wrote:
             | In my opinion this isn't the best lens to view ethanol
             | through. If you start from the position that the government
             | manipulating the food market to ensure a near-constant
             | over-supply is beneficial for long-term food security, then
             | the ability to funnel excess production back to a useful
             | energy source at a rate even close to 1:1 is fine.
        
               | Maursault wrote:
               | > If you start from the position that the government
               | manipulating the food market to ensure a near-constant
               | over-supply is beneficial for long-term food security
               | 
               | I don't agree with the premise. Oversupply causes waste,
               | not food security.
        
             | ZeroGravitas wrote:
             | I think we will slowly increase the ethanol content of
             | gasoline as we transition to EVs, but still come out ahead,
             | particularly in nations that make their ethanol in slightly
             | greener ways than the US.
        
               | Maursault wrote:
               | I think it'd be better to cut off petroleum at the knees
               | and just exclusively use biodiesel and pure ethanol, but
               | made from a more efficient source than corn.
        
             | dieselgate wrote:
             | We could also use biodiesel produced with ethanol which is
             | more performant than gas and allows maybe 35-50% (or more?)
             | more mileage
             | 
             | Edit: mileage
        
               | Maursault wrote:
               | The average distance driven is only 40 miles a day. What
               | is the concern about having a vehicle capacity of 235
               | miles as opposed to 400? If greater distance capacity is
               | needed, biodiesel alone is an valid option. Mixing fuels
               | just seems silly to me.
        
               | dieselgate wrote:
               | How do you mean mixing fuels being silly? I'm no expert
               | but it seems quite common - hybrid vehicles for example;
               | biodiesel with petrol diesel (and other things like motor
               | oil); and not sure about gasoline but it seems to
               | commonly be mixed with other things like ethanol.
        
               | Maursault wrote:
               | Silly in that it is not necessary. Any ICE vehicle can be
               | converted inexpensively to burn pure ethanol, no petrol
               | required. Any diesel will accept biodiesel as fuel
               | without mixing with petrol. If fossil fuels are a
               | problem, and ethanol and biodiesel covers all petrol
               | applications, why bother keeping petrol around?
        
       | Hanschri wrote:
       | The US spends enormous amounts every year subsidizing corn, it's
       | the reason for corn-based ethanol, high-fructose corn syrup
       | instead of sugar, and so on. I've noticed this through
       | SwiftOnSecurity on Twitter pointing this out. An interesting
       | rabbithole.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-09-09 23:02 UTC)