Environment & Energy
In reply to the discussion: NASCAR hits 5 million miles on 15% Ethanol blend, with 20% less emissions... [View all]kristopher
(29,798 posts)And the average will be substantially lower.
Money spent on ethanol is a bad choice for carbon reduction efforts.
"Cumulative costs under some mandate proposals exceed $1 trillion by 2030.
Even using favourable assumptions, reduced greenhouse gas emissions from biofuels are far more expensive than other options: more than $100/mt CO2e even for cellulosic ethanol and nearly $300/mt CO2e for corn-based fuel.
Despite rising concerns, environmental screens in existing subsidy policies remain weak or non-existent."
Int. J. Biotechnology, Vol. 11, Nos. 1/2, 2009
State and federal subsidies to biofuels: magnitude
and options for redirection
Doug Koplow
Earth Track, Inc.,
2067 Massachusetts Ave., 4th Floor, Cambridge 02140, MA, USA E-mail: dkoplow@earthtrack.net
Abstract: Hundreds of government subsidies have fuelled the growth of ethanol and biodiesel in the USA, worth half or more their retail price. Cumulative costs under some mandate proposals exceed $1 trillion by 2030. Even using favourable assumptions, reduced greenhouse gas emissions from biofuels are far more expensive than other options: more than $100/mt CO2e even for cellulosic ethanol and nearly $300/mt CO2e for corn-based fuel. Despite rising concerns, environmental screens in existing subsidy policies remain weak or non-existent. A platform- and fuel-neutral policy structure forcing all alternatives to conventional fuels to compete for market share should be deployed instead.
http://earthtrack.net/files/uploaded_files/IJBT%20Ethanol%20Subsidies.pdf