The Free Press, Mankato, MN

News Ticker

Editorials

July 23, 2007

Our View -- Corn boom has flip side

Here in corn country there has been much for farmers to cheer about.

As the demand for corn has risen, particularly because of increased ethanol production, prices have risen dramatically, to the $4 per bushel range.

Along with the increased demand has also come dramatically increased production thanks to genetically engineered seed, improved hybridization, more potent herbicides and better management of cropland through the use of GPS systems and refined soil testing.

But here where corn is king, we suspect even many farmers have a nagging worry about the sustainability and wisdom of the corn boom.

Concern is justified.

The dramatic increase in corn-to-ethanol plants is raising a number of concerns, including the huge amounts of water required by the plants, and the growing amount of corn needed to supply the plants.

The amount of corn used by the ethanol industry has been doubling each year in recent years and many forecasters say the Upper Midwest is about saturated in the number of ethanol plants its corn production can support.

While that increased demand has provided nice profits for farmers it has also driven up the price of food, from cereal to chicken.

While the move to renewable energy like corn-based ethanol is clearly one piece of the nation’s energy puzzle, it is becoming obvious to most that it isn’t the only answer and that it brings its own set of challenges.

Creating a better balance in the biofuels industry would be to everyone’s advantage.

A new study by The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences argues that there is environmental benefits of soybean-based biodiesel over corn-ethanol.

Ethanol provides 25 percent more energy a gallon than is required for its production, while soybean biodiesel generates 93 percent more energy. The study, done by researchers at the University of Minnesota and elsewhere, also found that ethanol, in its production and consumption, reduces greenhouse gas emissions by 12 percent, compared with fossil fuels. Biodiesel, they said, reduces such emissions 41 percent.

Also promising are a variety of cellulosic ethanol products from things like switchgrass grown on marginal land.

But no matter how big the biofuels industry becomes, it’s unlikely to replace a lot of petroleum.

That doesn’t mean the search for new and better biofuels should be curtailed. Instead, research should be accelerated into finding the most efficient way to turn plant material into fuels.

But the rush to ethanol and the increased planting of corn should give us all pause.

Corn, a big user of fertilizer, is also a major contributor to the pollution of waterways. From algae blooms in local lakes, to excess sediment collecting in Lake Pepin to the Dead Zone in the Gulf of Mexico, corn production is a major contributor.

That’s not a condemnation of farming, but it is a reality of modern agriculture. Protecting the environment and considering the economic impact of increased food costs must be a big part of the discussion during the march toward more corn production.

Text Only | Photo Reprints
Editorials