Michael Foster wrote:
Apparently the cost of burning the corn is about a third of that of natural gas for the same heat. This raises some questions. Is the real cost of the corn reflected in the sale price, or is it the result of government agricultural subsidies?
It is the result of government subsidies to agriculture and -- oddly enough -- fossil fuel. If we paid the real, full cost of oil, about $5 per gallon for gasoline, corn would be far more expensive than it is, and alternatives sources of energy such as wind and solar would be more competitive, and conservation would be far more attractive.
Does the raising of the corn use more fossil fuel energy than the corn provides?
Yes, far more.
Is it "immoral" to burn food as fuel even if it is animal feed?
Yes. It is also immoral because U.S. methods of growing corn are rapidly and permanently destroying the topsoil and the water table. Burning corn is like strip mining in slow motion.
And finally, why not grind up and pelletize the rest of the corn plant and therefore provide even more energy?
Because that would waste even more energy. It is bad enough converting 1 or 2 MJ of fossil fuel into 1 MJ of corn fuel.
- Jed
