is this true?
Yep. “In terms of energy output compared with energy input for ethanol production, the study found that: corn requires 29 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced”
“Yep. “In terms of energy output compared with energy input for ethanol production, the study found that: corn requires 29 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced””
Does it cost more to produce than what you get?
If so, I guess the free market would not have needed to conduct a study in the first place. They would never have chased after a loss.
Evil aliens created government.
I’ve seen that Cornell report. It’s kind of like recycling. A lot of folks at school are into recycling (I work at a private school run by Catholic nuns), but part of that is due to a culture of simple living, so sheets of paper are reused. I don’t fool with recycling things that will be sent outside the building myself. I use the analogy of having a pure stream running next door to your home and reusing your own urine for drinking water - it’s not a good idea. Once recycling is practical private industry will pay people to do it.
Not sure how people justify using corn as a fuel when it’s a net loser in energy.
Yeah it’s kind of like the same fallacy as recycling. I have a large number of friends that are recycling sticklers. They’ll look at you funny if you throw out a plastic bottle. When I’m feeling spunky I like to inform them that the act of recycling is actually MORE damaging to the enviornment than producing new stuff. It requires more energy, more chemicals, and more waste than producing a new bottle from raw materials. And it ofte produces an inferior product that will break down sooner.
The exception to this is metal and glass. Glass though is an entirely abundant resource. Metal I do make an effort to recyle, even though I’m (usually) not seeing the profit from it.
Watch Food Inc.
Corn is subsidized hence why corn made foods are so cheap thus gov subsidies to corn artificially cheapen corn made foods resulting in more obesity especially in the poor.
Another corn fact is that it’s worse to fed to cattle than grass.
"“Watch Food Inc.”
thats a good one…Also watch King Corn.
someone needs to fix the quote system on this forum.
Recycling will have a net benefit in the future if the cost of the good rises. Cellphones use a rare metal in them to work. 60 years from now, that useless cell might be worth thousands if supply of that rare metal is low, ( or restricted by a monopoly aupplier.)
Another example if movies and videogames cost rise to $50-$200 per disc, used media would rise in value.
If ethanl was produced with renewable energy, no matter the energy loss, it would be worthwhile if oil prices go bonkers.
I have a large number of friends that are recycling sticklers. They’ll look at you funny if you throw out a plastic bottle. When I’m feeling spunky I like to inform them that the act of recycling is actually MORE damaging to the enviornment than producing new stuff.
I just tell people like that to mind their own business. If I want to buy plastic cups and burn them in my back yard, that’s my business.
The exception to this is metal and glass. Glass though is an entirely abundant resource. Metal I do make an effort to recyle, even though I’m (usually) not seeing the profit from it.
The effort involved is too much. I only recycle metal if I have a few hundred pounds and can sell it at the scrap yard.