Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Coloradostoneman t1_j82rsn1 wrote

Reply to comment by doubledippedchipp in [OC] Sugarcane was first introduced to Brazil in 1532. Half a millennium later, the country produces over 700M tonnes yearly (roughly the same amount as all of Asia, and 7x the amount produced by Africa) by latinometrics

Corn is actually an amazing plant in terms of calories per acre and per gallon of water. It is a C4 plant and Midwest corn burst is the most intense bit of photosynthesis anywhere on the planet per day.

8

Roadkill_Bingo t1_j82xdgd wrote

But think about what ethanol production is. It’s distillation. Turn sugar into alcohol, easy. Well grains are seeds, so by their nature they’re starchy, so you have to convert them into simpler sugars first before you ferment. Not even considering the differences in yield (of which corn is inferior to sugarcane), the production costs are much lower for sugarcane ethanol. Thinking globally, it just doesn’t make sense using that valuable Midwest US land to grow corn for ethanol knowing you can import it from the tropics.

But indeed, no arguments here. Corn is an amazing plant with an absurd number of uses.

4

Coloradostoneman t1_j84ibnp wrote

My degree is in cellular and molecular biology. I do understand fermentation and related fields pretty well. Do you understand global economics? If we stop using corn for ethanol and ship it to places that might be willing to eat it, it will be so cheep that it will harm their local farmers tremendously ultimately making those places less food secure.

What else should we do with the corn?

1

Roadkill_Bingo t1_j84lfpb wrote

The point you raise is an important one. There’s no one way to do globalized trade without collateral damage. Specialized production has huge weaknesses in practice - just look at juggernaut oil producer Russia - it’s risky. The solution is not relying on Brazil for world ethanol production either.

My original critique was just pointing out the false narrative we’re given about ethanol production in the US. It’s marginally carbon negative and there are more productive ways to use the land in terms of climate change and/or human well-being. Food or grassland restoration, for instance.

2

Coloradostoneman t1_j84w7bt wrote

That is a much more nuanced response then just "we are wasting food". The world is not short on food. It might be short on sustainably produced food. It might be short on food in the places it is most needed. but it is not short on food.

Ethanol, as a fuel, is not carbon negative. Corn based ethanol is not even particularly better than say natural gas given the fertilizer input.

1

40for60 t1_j8cbzzn wrote

The US has been able to over produce its food needs since the 1940's this is why we started the Food for Peace program now called USAID and corn based ethanol, both ideas came from Minnesota.

1