Complain about a product or service

Ethanol Benefits Questioned

Environmental Effects Not Proven, Efficiency of Process Questioned

By Joe Benton
ConsumerAffairs.com

July 11, 2006

Ethanol • Soaring Egg Prices Blamed on Costs of Fuel, Feed, Chicks • Chicken Prices Headed Up, Tyson Warns • Ethanol Gives Consumers Half a Loaf, Bakers Say • Ethanol-Blended Fuel Blamed for Boaters' Problems • Sales of Ethanol-Burning Cars Up 10% • How Green Can Your Drive Get? • Ethanol Producers Say Rising Food Prices Not Their Fault • Ethanol Driving Up Meat Prices, Congress Told • MIT Gas Saver: Ethanol Turbocharger • Ford Flex-Fuel Claims Challenged • Tests Find Ethanol Cleaner But Not Cheaper • Ethanol Lobbying Disclosures Questioned • Ethanol Benefits Questioned • Chrysler to Step Up Flex Fuel Production • Automakers Want More Ethanol Pumps • Ethanol Increases Consumers' Fuel Bills • Ethanol A Waste, Study Concludes • Ethanol Bandwagon Rolls on in the U.S. Senate

Ethanol would supply only 12 percent of America's motoring fuel, even if every acre of corn were used to produce fuel and not food, suggesting the fuel is no cure-all for U.S. consumers facing high gasoline prices.

That assessment comes in a new report warning that expectations about ethanol dramatically changing U.S. dependence on foreign oil are probably exaggerated.

The new research also claims that ethanol is not as environmentally friendly as once claimed. Ethanol from corn produces roughly 25 percent more energy than is consumed in growing the corn and producing and delivering the fuel.

University of Minnesota researchers concluded that biodiesel from soybeans is the better choice for the future than ethanol from corn.

They estimate soybean biodiesel nets 93 per cent more energy than the amount required to produce the fuel.

But their analysis concludes that neither biodiesel nor ethanol can replace much petroleum without impacting food supplies. Their research was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The research findings challenge earlier studies that argued there is a net energy loss in the production of ethanol from corn once the cost of farm equipment, environmental impacts and distillation are factored in. That is good news for the ethanol industry.

The researchers warn however, that regardless of benefits, neither soybeans nor corn should be the foundation of an alternative fuel industry because they can replace only a fraction of U.S. petroleum consumption.

The research says that the use of nonfood materials such as switchgrass, prairie grasses and woody plants to produce cellulosic ethanol would be a major improvement, yielding greater energy output and lower environmental impacts.

But even that is not enough.

The production of ethanol from non-food sources remains in the laboratory research stage and most research agrees that this form of ethanol would also fall far short of replacing gasoline.

In an effort to answer the public outcry over gasoline and crude oil prices, members of Congress as well as the Bush administration have embraced ethanol as an alternative to gasoline to help move the country closer to energy independence.

Report Your Experience
If you've had a bad experience -- or a good one -- with a consumer product or service, we'd like to hear about it. All complaints are reviewed by class action attorneys and are considered for publication on our site. Knowledge is power! Help spread the word. File your consumer report now.

Share		Follow us on Twitter.

Back to the top |