In a study that should surprise nobody, researchers published in Science magazine found that widespread use of ethanol made from corn could ultimately result in twice the greenhouse gas emissions as the gasoline it’s meant to replace.
The researchers said that past studies showing the alleged benefits of ethanol did not take into account changes in land use worldwide that would be necessary if corn ethanol became a widely used fuel source.
The study concludes that “using good cropland to expand biofuels will probably exacerbate global warming” because farmers trying to pay the bills with ethanol will plow under more forest and grasslands, releasing stored carbon through decomposition or fire.
U.S. reliance on ethanol would also affect farming globally as growers try to make up for the loss of land previously used for food crops.
The Renewable Fuels Association, which has an economic interest in foisting ethanol on us, said the new study is “simplistic” and fails to “put the issue in context” — unlike RFA-favored studies that ignore inconvenient agricultural facts to paint a rosy picture of biofuels as producing 20 percent to 70 percent less greenhouse gases.
The new study, conducted by scientists from Princeton, the National Academy of Sciences and other institutions, concluded that previous studies have been incomplete, to put it politely. (I’m shocked, shocked I say, to find there is bias and ineptitude in global warming research.)
“The other studies missed a key factor that everyone agrees should have been included, the land use changes that actually are going to increase greenhouse gas emissions,” said Tim Searchinger, a research scholar at Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs and lead author of the study.
The study found that corn-based ethanol will increase greenhouse gases by 93 percent compared with gasoline over a 30-year period. Biofuels made from switchgrass would result in 50 percent more greenhouse gas emissions.
The findings prompted a letter to the president and leaders in Congress, from almost a dozen scientists, urging Washington to pursue a sound policy (for once) that will not destroy millions of acres of land while increasing greenhouse gases.
The question that should concern taxpayers, however, is will the politicians ever listen to reason? The global warming hysteria is likely only to get worse.
Particularly as the presidential election approaches, candidates will feel constant pressure from the media, Algorites and other liberal lackeys, to “out-green” their opponents.
Despite the mountains of evidence that global warming is nothing more than a Machiavellian scheme for power, the chances of truth winning out anytime soon seem slim at best.
Subscribe to the RSS feed
