[PeakOiler]

Reuters Science Article
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'B')y Charles Abbott

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - High feed costs, created by the explosive growth of the fuel ethanol industry, will lower U.S. beef and broiler chicken output this year by a quarter billion lbs from earlier forecasts, the U.S. government said on Friday.

[Twilight]

Food or fuel . . . interesting set of priorities.

[ozkrenske]

A quarter billion pounds estimated reduction in Beef and Chicken production. 250 million pounds.

Effectively one pound less per person able to eat meat in the US. Wow that doesn't appear to be that much, sounds a lot but it isn't. I'm sure that at least that much would be thrown away. That much is probably burnt up during cooking by McDonalds each year. Just slightly less fatty chicken and beef would probably cover it.

Of course everyone could just chhose the single quarter pounder instead of the double four times this year and the loss won't be felt at all.

[Baldwin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ozkrenske', 'O')f course everyone could just chhose the single quarter pounder instead of the double four times this year and the loss won't be felt at all.

[I_Like_Plants]

They were talking about this on the radio - Americans would indeed rather drive than eat, the suggestion was a vegetarian diet, anyone remember Textured Vegetable Protein in the 1970s? The lab chemists will come up with "food" that seems like meat, milk, cheese, eggs but it will be made out of sawdust or something, to keep the SUVs rolling.

[EnergySpin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ozkrenske', 'A') quarter billion pounds estimated reduction in Beef and Chicken production. 250 million pounds.

Of course everyone could just chhose the single quarter pounder instead of the double four times this year and the loss won't be felt at all.

[PeakOiler]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ozkrenske', 'A') quarter billion pounds estimated reduction in Beef and Chicken production. 250 million pounds.

Effectively one pound less per person able to eat meat in the US. Wow that doesn't appear to be that much, sounds a lot but it isn't. I'm sure that at least that much would be thrown away. That much is probably burnt up during cooking by McDonalds each year. Just slightly less fatty chicken and beef would probably cover it.

Of course everyone could just chhose the single quarter pounder instead of the double four times this year and the loss won't be felt at all.

[dukey]

economics is all about efficiently allocating goods and resources in the economy

ethanol is a serious misallocation of resources

[turp182]

But the economic optimization is to the profit side. Efficient resource usage and the human condition don't enter into the equation.

The issue will be resolved in the prices of food and fuel. Meat is only part of this equation. Other based corn products (including corn derivatives such as corn surup, and also grain products in general) will be impacted, which includes all cereals and grains (these are primary staples for the poor).

Food chain based ethanol utilizes the poor people's food as a fuel for the wealthy (where wealthy is anyone who can afford fuel).

This is the ethical argument against ethanol (maybe not sugar beet ethanol, but food chain based). But again, the market isn't about ethics, it's about profit.

[Tyler_JC]

Stop pretending that economics and ethanol have anything to do with each other.

The American corn/ethanol industry is one of the world's most subsidized.

http://www.slate.com/id/2122961/

"It also shovels yet more federal cash on the single most subsidized crop in America, corn. Between 1995 and 2003, federal corn subsidies totaled $37.3 billion. That's more than twice the amount spent on wheat subsidies, three times the amount spent on soybeans, and 70 times the amount spent on tobacco."

[turp182]

I've been mulling this over for some time. I think this argument works pretty well.

I think an argument can be made that is outside the world of commodity prices (I do mention demand which is obviously related). The prices of retail products will be mentioned.

Every bushel of feed/industrial corn that goes to ethanol removes some amount of corn, wheat, or soybeans from the food chain supply. It’s important to consider that all primary grains are impacted by higher corn demand.

This reduction results in a direct reduction in the food supply. Here are some possible examples: less feed corn for meat production, less soybean for tofu production, less wheat for bread production, and less industrial corn for corn sugar production. This is a direct reduction in the amount of food produced.

The United States population is increasing. This means that food demand is increasing over time.

So per capita food production will be decreasing, which will lead to higher food prices. Increased food prices won’t cut individual calories across all income classes. Food price increases directly impact the poor, specifically those living on the margin where “paycheck to paycheck” is barely cutting it and abject poverty is a real possibility (one medical issue away). Volunteer at a food bank to meet these people, they are a wonderful source of inspiration and humility.

Yes, imports could increase to offset the reduction in food supply. Except the United States is the largest corn exporter in the world. So this reduction in supply will impact other countries. Global population is increasing. So the amount of food per capita will decrease through the combination of food sources going to fuel production and increasing population.

Corn exports by country:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/agr_g ... rn-exports

Sugar cane and sugar beet ethanol are different stories. But corn based ethanol in the United States is a direct tax on the global poor in the form of higher food prices. It would be different if we weren’t the primary exporter (exporting 4 times as much as the next exporting country).

Frankly I think the equation comes to this: Food based fuel = dead poor people.

How is this not the case?

[Tyler_JC]

turp182, that chart is scary.

The United States made up 61% of all corn exports in the world!

"The inefficiency and environmental damage becomes clearer if we imagine what would happen if all cars were fuelled by ethanol. The average car travelling 10,000 miles a year on pure ethanol would need about 852 gallons of the corn-based fuel. This would take 11 acres to grow - the same amount of cropland required to feed seven people for a year."
http://www.igreens.org.uk/ethanol_from_corn_.htm

26 pounds of corn produces 1 gallon of ethanol, give or take.

Converting all 46,000 thousand metric tons of US exports into fuel would yield only 3.9 billion gallons of ethanol.

But ethanol has a third less energy then gasoline.

So converting that 3.9 billion gallons of ethanol into comparable barrels of oil and we end up with....

Roughly 63 million barrels of gasoline.

That is maybe a one week supply. Feel free to call it 2.3% of American gasoline consumption. You may also call it 2 years of moderate economic growth (and therefore consumption growth)

Those 46,000 thousand metric tons of corn would have fed 180 million people for a year.

Is this actually considered a reasonable "solution"?

[turp182]

We are in complete agreement on ethanol. As a source of energy it's horrifying. And from an ethical perspective it's even worse, in my opinion.

Yet the "market" will decide our course of action (the decision has already been made...).

[I_Like_Plants]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ferrelgiraffe', 'I') was horribilified in college when one of my friends said he burns corn in his wood pellet stove. I asked how he could afford it? He said it is cheaper than wood pellets.

I was strongly negatively influenced that they were burning food. It was really a negative impression on me. I am a natural ethanol antagonist for just this reason. There is something wrong with this picture of depleting our soil by burning food. Much like growing large fields of corn then setting them on fire. The old saying "Waste not, want not" is going to come back to bite us.

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ferrelgiraffe', 'I') was horribilified in college when one of my friends said he burns corn in his wood pellet stove. I asked how he could afford it? He said it is cheaper than wood pellets.

I was strongly negatively influenced that they were burning food. It was really a negative impression on me. I am a natural ethanol antagonist for just this reason. There is something wrong with this picture of depleting our soil by burning food. Much like growing large fields of corn then setting them on fire. The old saying "Waste not, want not" is going to come back to bite us.

[farmingengineer]

I think the only way corn based ethanol will ever make economic sense without huge government subsidies would be to use 180 proof or less in modified farm equipment. You would thus eliminate the extra energy needed to get to 200 proof and the transportation getting it out of the area where the corn was grown. It seems the EROI is just to marginal to ever get beyond this scale.
Though I’m sure most large operations are using diesel (we had a gasoline tractor when I was growing up) so the question then becomes, can you do this economically getting 50 gallons of bio-diesel from soy bean as opposed to around 300 gallons per acre for corn?

Using food to make more food. One step up from manure I guess.

The thought of using our topsoil credit from mother nature to get the kids to soccer in suburbia makes me nauseous!

[PhebaAndThePilgrim]

Good day from Pheba, from the farm:
My husband and I raise Simmental beef cattle. We have calves in early spring, let their mamas raise them, let the mamas eat mostly grass (no corn), and then we wean the calves in the fall, usually mid October.
Our next step is to decide if we should keep the calves and feed them out for a month or two, or wean for two weeks and send to market.
This year was a no-brainer.
The big 3 food mfgs, ADM, Cargill (I forget the third) are buying up corn futures and driving the cost of corn through the roof.
A bushel of corn is 4.00. Last year the corn was less than 3.00.
We had to wean, then sell all of the calves.
People are just so stupid. Why people can't figure out that ethanol will not work is beyond me.
Ethanol is a net energy loser. Ethanol uses corn, and corn is an energy dense crop.
I highly reccomend a book; "The Omnivore's Dilemma". The book explains how corn (heavily subsidized) is overgrown, and put into every single food we consume.
I am allergic to corn so I know this.
A lot of farmers are selling cattle. The market for cattle is somewhat controlled by the big food mfgs. They keep reserve stock and can hold back from the market or increase stock to the market to control the market. But, I just wonder what is going to happen to the beef market in this country when this ethanol/corn nonsense really gets rolling.
Have a good evening,
Pheba.

[fluffy]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Phebagirl', ' ')People are just so stupid. Why people can't figure out that ethanol will not work is beyond me.

[whereagles]

Energy waste is a huge problem. Ethanol, like all attempts at a technofix for the oil crisis, is being used to feed more and more wastage. Instead of contributing for a solution, ethanol is itself becoming a part of the problem.

This leaves me VERY worried.

[frankthetank]

Why is pork so damn cheap? I bought some really nice looking pieces of pork (only type of meat i eat) for a buck a pound? Was there some outbreak i didn't hear about, can the farmers no longer afford to feed them, the season???