OT kinda long corn question

I know this is "off topic", but there are so many people on here that know about different things. My questions involve the using of corn for ethanol. So many news reports are talking about how using corn for ethanol is going to be making people starve. How much of the corn that is being used for ethanol would have actually been consumed for food. I'm pretty sure that when I go to the store and buy a can of corn for supper, it will be sweet corn, not field corn. Now I know that corn is used for livestock feed, but isn't the by-product, dried distillers grain (DDG), of ethanol also used for feed? Is this DDG a lot poorer feed? Are corn flakes made from field corn? Is corn meal made from field corn? I know many, many products use corn syrup. So, is using corn for ethanol REALLY going to cut in to the food supply?

I always wondered why if ethanol is such a good deal, how come they don't use it as a fuel source to produce more ethanol? I imagine there would be no product left to sell. What is them claim? does it consume 5 parts of energy to produce 6 parts?

We farmers don't run a charity. No one will starve if they have the money to buy food.Where were the whiners when I was selling corn for eighty nine cents a bushel. It is and always has been a case of supply and demand.Don't mean to sound heartless,because I am not.Lots of people freezing in the winter months. Is it the duty of oil companies to lower the price of heating oil so everyone can stay warm? If our senseless politicians had allowed off shore drilling, we would not be in such a mess today. Had we had the foresight to have preserved all the prime farmland that went into houses and shopping centers,etc,we would not have been in such a mess that we are in today. I could go on and on about why we are where we are today.Farmers are just trying to make a living as we always have been. We are not the problem nor are we greedy as we are not the ones who are setting the price for corn. We are just being made the scapegoat in a highly emotionaly charged time.
40% of our corn is being used to make ethanol with about 30% of that being returned as feed for livestock.It makes great feed too. Corn flakes and corn meal are made from field corn as a lot of other products as well. Google corn uses and you will be amazed at how versatile a product it is.
Will corn usage for eth production cut into our food supply? Only if the users are not willing to outbid other users,which won't happen.
Tons of misinformation out there, but that happens when people use emotion instead the power of reasoning to make decisions.

Simple (true) answer is that you are wrong. Pimental study (google it) of ethanol has been proven wrong. Ethanol production has a positive energy balance.

The studies that showed a net energy loss in producing ethanol included the solar energy used to grow the corn plant, which, of course, is foolishness. Because of the laws of thermodynamics, there is always a net loss of total energy in producing anything- hence, farming would be impossible. The key is, the solar energy is there for free, and that's what ends up being the farmer's profit when he sells his product.

Pretty much no! Corn flakes, from Kelloggs"s, etc, are not made from field corn-that corn comes from a few dedicated suppliers. Corn used for ethanol would never be consumed for food-it would be used to feed livestock. Steers, hogs, other livestock, fed with that corn, would be consumed for food. By-product of ethanol production...distillers grains, ie- DDGS- not a poor feed- corn is 8.7% protein, DDGS is 25% protein, is fed to livestock...higher protein than corn, lower energy...but an excellent feed source. Corn syrup is made from field corn, just like ethanol is.

Furthermore-the Pimental study- often quoted to "Prove" a negative ethanol balance regarding energy...,(I read the entire study). Pimental, and the other researcher, (an entomologist- a bug professor) both employees of Shell Oil...went so far as to "determine" how much energy it took to mine the ore, to make the tractors, to grow the crops, to grow the corn... to make ethanol. Pimental"s study also assumed that all corn acres were irrigated. Read it! CAN YOU SAY "BIASED?"

Furthermore-the Pimental study- often quoted to "Prove" a negative ethanol balance regarding energy...,(I read the entire study). Pimental, and the other researcher, (an entomologist- a bug professor) both employees of Shell Oil...went so far as to "determine" how much energy it took to mine the ore, to make the tractors, to grow the crops, to grow the corn... to make ethanol. Pimental"s study also assumed that all corn acres were irrigated. Read it! CAN YOU SAY "BIASED?"

Pretty much yes. It is simple supply and demand issue with government intervention. As a wheat producer in North Dakota this is my perspective, in commidity agriculture government subsidy programs and tax policy determines what we grow. That is not a secret. Almost none of that corn grown for fuel would be find itself in the food supply. However when those acres are used for corn/ethanol production (because of subsidy payments or tax policy) they are not being used for cereal grains, beans or whatever, reducing those supplies, driving up food prices. So, there is a limited amount of ag land in the world, the more that is used to produce fuel (or fibers for that matter)the less food will be produced. I am not picking sides, and we need fuel and fibers, but to answer your question, ethnol production definately will cut into the food supply and increase prices..

I didn't say there was a negative energy balance. I just wonder what the net energy gain is and why they cant use their product for the energy it takes to make the ethanol. As long as fuel is mandated to be 10% ethanol, It could only make grain prices higher, a win for everyone except the consumer.

I have not heard a straight story, but have heard that 1/2 of corn produced in Iowa is going for ethanol.

Field corn is used for many products, from Ethanol to corn flakes ,starches and sugars. It is also used for animal feed

Sweet corn is canned corn.

The net energy balance is about 1.6. Positive, regarding energy required to make the product. Our 03 Dodge caravan drops 11% in mileage when using E85, vs regular gas. E85 is currently 55-60 cents cheaper than gas. If it is 40 cents under gas, we come out way ahead to use E85, so any consumer is way ahead with a Flex-fuel vehicle. Scott- the byproduct of corn made into ethanol is DDGS- an excellent high-protein cattle feed....so, unlike what the uninformed/ignorant US public thinks...corn going into ethanol is not used up, wasted, or thrown away...Distillers, just like mash from any distillery, for years, has always been recycled into good cattle feed. Now, researchers are working on diets for other classes of livestock. Hogs can efficiently use distillers in their diets at about a 15% rate. other single-stomach animals, like turkeys, chickens, maybe less, but the DDGS has value, so nothing in the corn goes to waste. Simply a matter of re-calculating diets according to the available feedstuffs.

Ive heard that Iowa grows enough corn to feed the world. And we as fat americans can stand to eat less corn syrup.

I still say making & using ethanol is like a dog chasing his tail. Google gogyropower.com for the answer. Watch the hand built motor produce 7000 times more out than externally put in. The rest comes from E=Mxcxc. My E-Mail is open for the bashing.

Um, I don't know. The energy in ethanol comes from the kernal of corn not the water it is mixed with. Therefor the energy moved to the ethanol is not available in the ddgs.

JMS/MN I am not sure where to start. I never said that those ethanol/corn fields were not productive, nor would there be any left overs, what you call DDGS. I grew up with 1000 beef cows. I know something about feeding them. I never said anything goes to waste.However if you are sending most of your corn crop off to be fuel what comes back for feed (DDGS) is only a small percent of what have would have gone to the livestock had it not been to the fuel plant first. My complaint is that without government subsidies and tax brakes there would be no one planting corn for the fuel . My operation is simple, I grow about 1100 acres of wheat, it is a part time job. Mostly I am a firefighter in California. I can not understand how, with modern equipment,growing and harvesting a crop takes more than 8 weeks a year. I have on farm storage for 6 years of production and can pay my all my bills from my job. With FSA marketing loans I can hold on to my wheat till I get the price I want. Feel free to insult the "uninformed/ignorant US public" but when they figure it out, all this all this USDA/FSA/NRCS payment stuff is over. If, without any subsidy, you can grow corn and sell it to a fuel plant more power to you.

What people like myself want to know is, why bother, when petroleum is our most efficient source of energy?

Phil, What about if our great grand kids decided that they would like to drive cars and stay warm?

Grow all the corn you want, for any purpose you want. Just don"t expect me and other taxpayers to subsidize your "independant" business venture. If you can"t make a profit on it without my money, tough, find another line of work.

They'll use oil also, unless they are fools and refuse to drill it.