Corn Ethanol Vs Corn

Main Point # 1 - Corn’s versatility, global demand, and profit margin has led the over grown grass to emerge as America’s number one crop. The USDA evaluated corn’s crop value to be $76.9 billion in 2011, making it a huge contributor to the American economic system (National Corn Growers Association, 2017). Research gathered by Duke University found that the U.S. produced 40% of the world’s supply, 10% of which comes from the small town of Constantine, Michigan while an additional 10% is produced from the surrounding areas (“U.S and Employment,” 2015; Motz, T., 2016). These spikes in corn’s global demand have created an opportunity for farmers and mid-western field workers to become involved in the growing and profitable industry.

Although a 2002 agriculture law superseded many parts of FAIRA, acreage was still increased because of the growing demand for corn in animal feed, the need for corn in ethanol manufacturing, and the increased possibility to make food with corn byproducts. These seem to be good and fair reasons to focus our efforts on increasing output, however, the same issue arises: the more corn that is made, the less stable a livelihood farming becomes, regardless of the subsidies that the federal government provides.

In my opinion, corn is a renewable resource and should be used as a new source of energy.In paragraph 1 on page 1,it states,”Caron is processed to produce different energy products.For example,corn can be used to create ethanol.” this shows an example on about how corn can be a new source of energy. It is grown with solar energy so it is a renewable resource,and there will be plenty to go around for the U.S. and the WORLD!

Corn is not the ideal nutritious food. It wreaks havoc on the animal;s' digestive system and gets turned into sweeteners that makes people obese, aside from giving us an unhealthy diet. In other words, the industrial food chain that American man is sustained on is largely based on corn, whether in its direct form, fed to livestock, or processed into chemicals such as glucose, and the cheapest forms of these are high-fructose corn syrup and ethanol. The former, particularly, through a combination of biological, cultural, and political factors, appears in the cheapest and most common of foods that constitute the American diet. It is the ingredient that results in obesity, and, since it appears in the cheapest products, the ingredients that more poor, than wealthier individuals, consume.

I also believe it is important to research the corn crops and corn-based ethanol a little bit more before jumping into a decision like this. According to the 2014 Illinois Crop Budgets corn crops “have lower returns than received in recent years,” suggesting that incomes will be down for corn farmers in comparison to previous years (Schnitkey, 2013). Even with the increased demand for ethanol, knowing that projected incomes are potentially in decline is something one should not take lightly before making such a drastic career

By researching the questions for the five different speakers for our trip St. Louis, I was able to have a better understanding of the issues that are at hand. While we did not get to ask the Deputy Director of Agriculture of Illinois any questions, I am sure we all had many. I truly have a different understanding of what Ethanol means to our industry. Having the opportunity to talk to someone that is so passionate about ethanol truly made me research the topic more when we returned. Some key factors that I was able to grasp was that, Director Fordcye of Missouri, has a true passion for agriculture but even more so the youth in agriculture. While I was looking up questions for the director I was able to find a few key aspects that supported that.

Comment: Pollan mentions that the excessive production of corn only benefits agricultural businesses like ADM and Cargill, but the farmers who grow these crops are failing to strive. This is similar to today’s issue of minimum wage and the class gap.

First, the production of corn ethanol negatively impacts the U.S. food supply. That is, within the last few years, there has been a decline in corn-based food. As Kripke notes, “In 2008, the USDA estimate that 3.1 million bushels of U.S. corn will be used to produce biofuels. That’s an increase of nearly 50 percent over 2.1 million bushels last year.”

The introduction of chemical fertilizers and other technological inputs created a surplus of corn on American farmland. In the early 1900’s farmers were only able to grow small bushels of corn but today there is an excess amount. Although such an overabundance represented a great achievement in American agriculture, the excess corn needed some use and one way to reduce overage is to feed it to farm animals; especially cows. Corn does not require a lot of space to store and it is extremely easy to collectively feed a considerable number of cows. Feeding cows low-priced corn as required by the Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation’s “CAFO” is economically efficient and enables the production of large quantities of marbled meat that was once a luxury for many Americans. However, even though feeding corn to cattle helps in the process of fattening cows for slaughter, it also produces many health risks that the United States Department of Agriculture “USDA” overlooks in their effort to help eliminate the corn surplus, and bring rapid profit to the few corporations that run the meat

In a world where close to one out of every nine people are starving, having food prices rise due to corn being wasted on ethanol, is detrimental to the poverty stricken of this world and makes their lives even harder because they cannot afford basic food (Hunger Map 2015). The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) created a mandate for Ethanol production in the united states that increases every year till 2022, in 2022 the mandate will be thirty-six billion gallons of ethanol produced in the United States (Stop Fueling Par 4). This mandate creates extremely high demand for ethanol production, which uses ample amounts of corn to produce ethanol, because of this, demand for corn increased dramatically causing prices to rise. Once corn prices began to rise, farmers started to grow more corn because they could sell it at a higher price, also they switched from growing other crops to growing corn so they

Today corn is used for so much more than just food production. Corn is used in over 400 nonfood items, from adhesives to explosives. Although, in the United States, corn is a very important part of the economy. There are three different varieties of corn, Sweet Corn, Field Corn, and Popcorn all in which contribute to the United States economy. Today, sweet corn makes up less than 1 percent of all corn grown in the United States.

A comparison of results with the no-subsidy results and with actual prices and quantities shows separate estimates of the impact on corn. The general pattern of corn prices would have been the same as in the historical period without ethanol subsidies or without expansion of ethanol, rising from 2005 to 2007 and then declining to 2009. Corn prices would have still risen dramatically in 2007, to $3.75 per bushel.

According to the graph corn produces the most energy demand and soybean is the most efficient. Because corn uses 9 billion kwh/acres it produces the most energy input and is the least favorable choice. However, Soybean regulates the least energy based on average input. When regarding the average energy yearly 54,597 kwh/yr the energy content is much lower compared to corn and canola feedstocks. The energy production of soybean accurately reflects our usage of electricity per day. The soybean is sustainable feedstock with a productive result and lower energy cost compared to corn feed stock. The results of soybean are closest to the expected energy usage , while corn is higher than the expected energy usage. While corn is a feasible

Creating biofuels like corn ethanol is an energy-intensive process. The steps involved with growing a feedstock like on an agro-industrial scale – think farm equipment, fertilizer, harvesting, transporting the feedstock into the ethanol and further transporting the biofuel to a petroleum refinery or service station –

Dry-mill, the more common and standardized of the two processes, utilizes the four basic processes of ethanol production, “clean corn is ground and mixed with water to form a mash… enzymes are added to convert starch to sugar… yeast is added to ferment… then distilled and dehydrated to create fuel-grade 99-percent ethanol” (Shapouri 2). The Wet-mill process commonly referred to as a “biorefinery” process approaches ethanol from a more atomic level. In Wet-mill ethanol production “grain must be separated into is components including starch, fiber, gluten, and germ” (Shapouri 2). Nevertheless Wet-mill production still uses the three processes above to create ethanol, the difference between Wet and Dry-mill is the quality of their byproduct. Through Dry-milling you avoid the complexity of multiply biochemical disseminations, which save energy and money through lower skill labor and lower tooling costs. However Wet-mill production makes more efficient use of mass and higher quality byproducts that will have greater market value. In the end the net cost of either method is variable, yet on the average the cost to produce a gallon of ethanol is less for Dry-milling than for Wet, yet when you consider the sale of extra byproducts this figure is reversed (SEE Table 2).