scholarly journals Carbon intensity of corn ethanol in the United States: state of the science

Author(s):  
Melissa J. Scully ◽  
Gregory A. Norris ◽  
Tania M. Alarcon Falconi ◽  
David L. MacIntosh
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. 118002
Author(s):  
Melissa J Scully ◽  
Gregory A Norris ◽  
Tania M Alarcon Falconi ◽  
David L MacIntosh

Abstract Spawn-Lee et al published a comment on our recent paper, ‘Carbon intensity of corn ethanol in the United States: state of the science.’ Their commentary is critical of our methodology and conclusions regarding greenhouse gas (GHG) life cycle analyses (LCAs) for corn starch ethanol and gives particular attention to the estimation of emissions from land use change (LUC). Several of the concerns stated by Spawn-Lee et al were raised in prior publications and are addressed in the recently published literature, thus, we respond to those points in brief and refer readers to those papers for more information. In response to their remaining concerns, we present detailed information in support of our approach for assessing LCAs of corn starch ethanol and our findings. Our original paper and the corroborating information provided here demonstrate that our methods are robust and our results are credible. Further, we hope this response contributes to constructive discussion and research on estimation of GHG emissions and LUC linked to corn starch ethanol.


Author(s):  
Andrew Schmitz ◽  
Charles B. Moss ◽  
Troy G. Schmitz

AbstractThe COVID-19 crisis created large economic losses for corn, ethanol, gasoline, and oil producers and refineries both in the United States and worldwide. We extend the theory used by Schmitz, A., C. B. Moss, and T. G. Schmitz. 2007. “Ethanol: No Free Lunch.” Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization 5 (2): 1–28 as a basis for empirical estimation of the effect of COVID-19. We estimate, within a welfare economic cost-benefit framework that, at a minimum, the producer cost in the United States for these four sectors totals $176.8 billion for 2020. For U.S. oil producers alone, the cost was $151 billion. When world oil is added, the costs are much higher, at $1055.8 billion. The total oil producer cost is $1.03 trillion, which is roughly 40 times the effect on U.S. corn, ethanol, and gasoline producers, and refineries. If the assumed unemployment effects from COVID-19 are taken into account, the total effect, including both producers and unemployed workers, is $212.2 billion, bringing the world total to $1266.9 billion.


2015 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 323-329 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth M. Haselwandter ◽  
Michael P. Corcoran ◽  
Sara C. Folta ◽  
Raymond Hyatt ◽  
Mark Fenton ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 31 (5) ◽  
pp. 103-125 ◽  
Author(s):  
David E Nye

Awareness of global warming has been widespread for two decades, yet the American political system has been slow to respond. This essay examines, first, political explanations for policy failure, focusing at the federal level and outlining both short-term partisan and structural explanations for the stalemate. The second section surveys previous energy regimes and the transitions between them, and policy failure is explained by the logic of Thomas Hughes’s ‘technological momentum’. The third section moves to an international perspective, using the Kaya Identity and its distinction between energy intensity and carbon intensity to understand in policy terms ‘technological fixes’ vs. low-carbon alternatives. The final section reframes US energy policy failure and asks: (1) Why, between 1980 and 1999, was America’s actual performance in slowing CO2emissions better than its politics would seem capable of delivering? (2) How and why has the United States since c. 2007 managed to reduce per capita CO2emissions?


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document