[Marxism] Ethanol?

[Louis Proyect <lnp3@xxxxxxxxx>]

NY Times, June 25, 2006
The Energy Challenge
For Good or Ill, Boom in Ethanol Reshapes Economy of Heartland
By ALEXEI BARRIONUEVO

This article was reported by Alexei Barrionuevo, Simon Romero and Michael
Janofsky and written by Mr. Barrionuevo.

Dozens of factories that turn corn into the gasoline substitute ethanol are
sprouting up across the nation, from Tennessee to Kansas, and California,
often in places hundreds of miles away from where corn is grown.

Once considered the green dream of the environmentally sensitive, ethanol
has become the province of agricultural giants that have long pressed for
its use as fuel, as well as newcomers seeking to cash in on a bonanza.

The modern-day gold rush is driven by a number of factors: generous
government subsidies, surging demand for ethanol as a gasoline supplement,
a potent blend of farm-state politics and the prospect of generating more
than a 100 percent profit in less than two years.

The rush is taking place despite concerns that large-scale diversion of
agricultural resources to fuel could result in price increases for food for
people and livestock, as well as the transformation of vast preserved areas
into farmland.

Even in the small town of Hereford, in the middle of the Texas Panhandle's
cattle country and hundreds of miles from the agricultural heartland, two
companies are rushing to build plants to turn corn into fuel.

As a result, Hereford has become a flashpoint in the ethanol boom that is
helping to reshape part of rural America's economic base.

Despite continuing doubts about whether the fuel provides a genuine energy
saving, at least 39 new ethanol plants are expected to be completed over
the next 9 to 12 months, projects that will push the United States past
Brazil as the world's largest ethanol producer.

The new plants will add 1.4 billion gallons a year, a 30 percent increase
over current production of 4.6 billion gallons, according to Dan Basse,
president of AgResources, an economic forecasting firm in Chicago. By 2008,
analysts predict, ethanol output could reach 8 billion gallons a year.

For all its allure, though, there are hidden risks to the boom. Even as
struggling local communities herald the expansion of this
ethanol-industrial complex and politicians promote its use as a way to
decrease America's energy dependence on foreign oil, the ethanol phenomenon
is creating some unexpected jitters in crucial corners of farm country.

full: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/25/business/25ethanol.html

---

NY Times, June 25, 2006
A Range of Estimates on Ethanol's Benefits
By ALEXEI BARRIONUEVO

Would using ethanol save energy?

That question, it turns out, is not easy to answer. Ethanol's enthusiasts
point to the potential benefits of replacing gasoline with a renewable
energy source that they contend will reduce America's reliance on foreign
oil and cut greenhouse gases produced by fossil fuels. But the benefits of
ethanol, particularly when it is produced from corn, are not so clear cut.

A number of researchers who have looked at the issue have concluded that
more energy now goes into making a gallon of ethanol than is contained in
that gallon. Others, however, find a net benefit, though most see it as
relatively modest.

Those who question whether ethanol is as "green" as advertised say that
supporters ignore or downplay the large quantities of natural gas used to
produce ethanol, as well as the diesel fuel used to transport it from
plants to markets. Moreover, growing corn requires heavy use of nitrogen
fertilizers, made from natural gas, and requires extensive use of farm
machinery, which burns fuel refined from crude oil.

Given the complexities of the calculations, there is a wide range of
estimates of the benefits of ethanol.

On the positive side, analysts at the Agriculture Department concluded in
their most recent assessment that ethanol offered a substantial gain,
producing a positive output 67 percent greater than the energy inputs. But
others who view ethanol favorably are more conservative, with several
estimating the net energy benefit at about 20 percent.

David Pimentel, a professor of agriculture and life sciences at Cornell
University, is one of several researchers who has challenged the
Agriculture Department's conclusion. He has estimated that ethanol requires
29 percent more energy from fossil fuels than it delivers in savings from
not using gasoline.

Dr. Pimentel, along with Tadeusz W. Patzek, a civil and environmental
engineer from the University of California at Berkeley, published research
finding that the Agriculture Department's analysis excluded the energy
required to produce or repair farm machinery, as well as the steel and
cement used to build the plants.

The Agriculture Department counters by noting that the professors failed to
consider the energy benefit of certain ethanol byproducts, including corn
oil and corn gluten, and said they were using old farm machinery data.

"They put all the energy on the ethanol," said Roger Conway, director of
the department's office of energy policy and new uses.

full: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/25/business/25ethanolside.html


________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism