• Aphelion@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Corn to ethanol is already energy negative, why are we going deeper into this fallacy?

    • girsaysdoom@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I wonder if it’s some sort of rationale for keeping the corn subsidies while also framing it a a greener alternative to crude oil extraction.

      Edit: After actually reading the article, yes this is the case. Apparently their proposed methods emit roughly 50% less emissions, which I think might be worth it depending on how much is expended to grow the corn and process the fuel. You could be right in the end though but if there are less emissions in general, it might be worth it.

  • MtnPoo@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    So we’re going to give food to planes instead of hungry people. does this guy know it’s an election year?

    • silence7@slrpnk.netOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      We’re actually giving about half the US corn crop to cars already. The other half goes to animals, with a rounding error going to people.

      I also recommend reading the article: the policy makes it difficult to get a subsidy to convert corn into jet-a fuel