The study shows that the carbon intensity of ethanol fuel is as much as 24% higher than regular fossil fuel. | Pixabay
The study shows that the carbon intensity of ethanol fuel is as much as 24% higher than regular fossil fuel. | Pixabay
U.S. Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) continued to criticize ethanol fuels by espousing a recent study that asserts what’s supposed to be a sound alternative to fossil fuels is a huge contributor to global warming.
Reuters reported that the National Wildlife Federation and U.S. Department of Energy funded study published on Feb. 14 shows the carbon intensity of ethanol fuel is as much as 24% higher than regular fossil fuel.
“This new study once again dispels with the old myth that America’s ethanol experiment has been good for the environment,” Toomey said in a Tweet. “It's not too late to reform this harmful program that drives up gas and food prices.”
The study essentially counters previous U.S. Department of Agriculture research that touts ethanol and other biofuels as environment friendly.
“Corn ethanol is not a climate-friendly fuel,” University of Wisconsin-Madison Center for Sustainability and the Global Environment assistant professor Dr. Tyler Lark, the lead author of the study, told Reuters.
According to Reuters, the U.S. Renewable Fuel Standard of 2005 requires oil refiners in the country to cut down on their greenhouse gas emissions.
The study revealed that the mandate; resulted in increased corn cultivation and land usage, leading to the tilling of land meant for conservation.
The study added that this activity released carbon from the soil.
“The U.S. Renewable Fuel Standard is the world’s largest existing biofuel program, yet despite its prominence, there has been limited empirical assessment of the program’s environmental outcomes,” Lark and his team wrote. “Even without considering likely international land use effects, we find that the production of corn-based ethanol in the United States has failed to meet the policy’s own greenhouse gas emissions targets and negatively affected water quality, the area of land used for conservation, and other ecosystem processes. Our findings suggest that profound advances in technology and policy are still needed to achieve the intended environmental benefits of biofuel production and use.”
Alerts Sign-up