Big Think

David Brown on January 17, 2008, 10:45 AM

I agree, current evidence suggest corn and soybeans are poor choices for alternate fuels. Using either for fuel substitutes will be inefficient and drive food cost up. The only ones who will benefit will be those receiving the subsidies.

But shouldn%u2019t we look carefully at using sugar cane or switchgrass as potential energy alternatives.

David Brown on January 17, 2008, 3:45 PM

I agree, current evidence suggest corn and soybeans are poor choices for alternate fuels. Using either for fuel substitutes will be inefficient and drive food cost up. The only ones who will benefit will be those receiving the subsidies.

But shouldn%u2019t we look carefully at using sugar cane or switchgrass as potential energy alternatives.

Matt Bennett on January 31, 2008, 10:22 AM

Atta Boy, McCain! We're not talking about helping Joe the good-natured, Iowa corn farmer here. Subsidies for ethanol are subsidies for Monsanto and ADM. Fact is, corn doesn't need any more subsidies. These guys get heaps already. And when the farm bill is more about energy than farming, something has seriously gone awry. Spend the money on plug-in electric cars powered by new nuclear reactors, now we're really talking about progress.

Matt Bennett on January 31, 2008, 3:22 PM

Atta Boy, McCain! We’re not talking about helping Joe the good-natured, Iowa corn farmer here. Subsidies for ethanol are subsidies for Monsanto and ADM. Fact is, corn doesn’t need any more subsidies. These guys get heaps already. And when the farm bill is more about energy than farming, something has seriously gone awry. Spend the money on plug-in electric cars powered by new nuclear reactors, now we’re really talking about progress.

Ryan Guerdon on February 14, 2008, 12:59 PM

I agree, I think using food sources as fuel is a recipe for disaster, although I strongly support research into all alternatives to burning fossil fuels, I believe that there are many better fuels than plants that we currently use as a major food source.

Ryan Guerdon on February 14, 2008, 5:59 PM

I agree, I think using food sources as fuel is a recipe for disaster, although I strongly support research into all alternatives to burning fossil fuels, I believe that there are many better fuels than plants that we currently use as a major food source.

Mark Powers on February 24, 2008, 8:04 PM

i have read that hemp would yield significantly more ethanol per acre than corn or any other food crop. Too bad that the general public has been misled to believe that hemp is the same thing as marijuana.

Mark Powers on February 25, 2008, 1:04 AM

i have read that hemp would yield significantly more ethanol per acre than corn or any other food crop. Too bad that the general public has been misled to believe that hemp is the same thing as marijuana.

Charles Caro on February 26, 2008, 7:20 PM

The main roadblock facing proponents of alternative fuels for vehicles is that the technologies and infrastructure required for widespread implementation of the alternative fuels is either not fully developed or simply not available as a technology at the present time. In the case of ethanol, which would be used as an additive for gasoline or diesel fuel, the cost of expanding manufacture of the additive must be weighed against the cost of expanding production for the raw material required for the production of the fuel. Production of ethanol provides two additional problems involving its distribution and use. First, the properties of ethanol make it impossible to transport in a pipeline, which means ethanol can be transported only by truck, train or barge. To reduce distribution costs due to the transport limitations it is important that ethanol production be relatively close to the final distribution point. Second, use of ethanol as a fuel produces less energy than gasoline, which means drivers must make more frequent trips to the pump.

Charles Caro on February 27, 2008, 12:20 AM

The main roadblock facing proponents of alternative fuels for vehicles is that the technologies and infrastructure required for widespread implementation of the alternative fuels is either not fully developed or simply not available as a technology at the present time. In the case of ethanol, which would be used as an additive for gasoline or diesel fuel, the cost of expanding manufacture of the additive must be weighed against the cost of expanding production for the raw material required for the production of the fuel. Production of ethanol provides two additional problems involving its distribution and use. First, the properties of ethanol make it impossible to transport in a pipeline, which means ethanol can be transported only by truck, train or barge. To reduce distribution costs due to the transport limitations it is important that ethanol production be relatively close to the final distribution point. Second, use of ethanol as a fuel produces less energy than gasoline, which means drivers must make more frequent trips to the pump.

Mansour Hadidi on April 30, 2008, 8:56 AM

Both Senators McCain and Clinton have suggested a gas tax "vacation" over summer of 08. Assuming an average family uses 15 gallons of gas every week, for the whole 12 weeks of summer that family would save a whopping $33.12 (180*.184)
Wow!!! what a relief!!

Mansour Hadidi on April 30, 2008, 12:56 PM

Both Senators McCain and Clinton have suggested a gas tax “vacation” over summer of 08. Assuming an average family uses 15 gallons of gas every week, for the whole 12 weeks of summer that family would save a whopping $33.12 (180*.184)
Wow!!! what a relief!!

petty deh on June 24, 2009, 4:20 AM

Ethanol alternatives will take so long.. so maybe I’ll spend my money first on what is already exisitng, plug-ins eletric cars (moog parts).