A report released October 10, 2007 from the National Research Council says that an increase in ethanol production from corn could “significantly impact water quality and availability” if new practices and techniques are not employed.
“The harm to water quality could be considerable, and water supply problems at the regional and local levels could also arise,” according to the report, which is titled Water Implications of Biofuels Production in the United States. It was written by a committee of the National Research Council that examined policy options and looked at new agricultural techniques and technologies that could help minimize the effects of biofuel production on water resources.
As oil prices have increased, corn ethanol production has expanded dramatically, and there is high interest in further expansion over the next decade, says the report. For example, in the 2007 State of the Union address, President Bush called for the production of 35 billion gallons of ethanol by 2017, which would equal about 15 percent of the U.S. liquid transportation fuels.
The National Research Council committee looked at how shifts in the nation’s agriculture to include more energy crops - and potentially more crops overall as population rises - could affect water management and long-term sustainability of biofuel production.
The committee found, for example, that the quality of groundwater, rivers, and coastal and offshore waters could be impacted by increased fertilizer and pesticide use for biofuels. It also noted that agricultural shifts to growing corn and expanding biofuel crops into regions with little agriculture - especially dry areas - could “change current irrigation practices and greatly increase pressure on water resources in many parts of the United States.” According to the report …
Water demands for drinking, industry, and such uses as hydropower, fish habitat, and recreation could compete with, and in some cases, constrain the use of water for biofuel crops in some regions. Consequently, growing biofuel crops requiring additional irrigation in areas with limited water supplies is a major concern.
As for non-corn ethanol (for example, ethanol made from switchgrass and native grasses), the report noted that there are “fundamental knowledge gaps” that prevent making reliable assessments about those crops’ impact on water resources.
What are the new technologies and techniques that could prevent ethanol production from impacting water quality and availability? While difficult to predict all future technologies, the report mentioned that, for example, genetically modified crops might use less water and/or fewer pesticides.
Read a news release from the National Research Council.
Find the full report.
yeah, ‘growing ethanol’ will use too much water. want to save water? stop eating meat. what does it take, the amount of water to displace a battleship, to bring 1 pound of beef to market?
Veggie,
I don’t know if we’ll get people to stop eating meat, but it’s true that agriculture accounts for something like 70% of fresh water use around the world.
Deborah
It is difficult to see policy makers continue to make decisions about alternative energies, with disregard to what scientists are reporting and a growing disconnect, it seems, from the whole concept of sustainable alternative energy resources. Research and studies as Deborah presented above, report that ethanol from corn products is not a sustainable alternative energy. Aside from environmental and economic implications, what about the fact that in producing ethanol from corn we are using fossil fuels to farm the corn products to make them into non fossil-based fuels, what have we changed?
“According to scientists in New York and California, it takes more energy to make ethanol than you get back in fuel savings. More precisely, says David Pimentel of Cornell University, it takes the equivalent of 1.29 gallons of gasoline to produce enough ethanol to replace one gallon of gasoline at the pump. Instead of making the nation more energy self-sufficient, ethanol production actually increases our need for oil and gas imports, Pimentel says.”
Excerpt taken from a 2005 San Diego Union-Tribune article displayed on California Senator, Diane Feinstein’s senante website. (http://feinstein.senate.gov/05speeches/ethanol-oped.htm)
Isn’t the whole point of studying alternative energy sources on a national level to find sustainable solutions?
I agree, Hope. Ethanol seemed like a good idea at first. But it is looking less and less appealing.
Ethanol from corn has never looked like a good idea for motor fuel per even simple analysis. For vodka and industrial alcohol (the normal usages) it is fine, and not a major usage for corn. Corn is food.
George Curtis
The key to solving this problem will require a large reduction in the amount of energy being consumed. That means the consumer has to live with less energy, which will require a shift in thinking. By looking into the past we know that humanity survived and thrived without the wholesale use of fossil fuels. A collapse of the current system is a mathematical certainty. We can change the way we think, this would require each one of us to look at the problem with complete honesty. To maintain a society based on petroleum energy or any deriviative is a path to suffering, both for man and nature. Using ethenol is not the solution, restructuring our society will take time, let us not waste our selves on dillusion.
Brian, I could not agree more.
Deborah