Holding Brazil up as an example of oil independence for America ignores reality
Open Access Article Originally Published: October 03, 2006
Since the beginning of the present boom of corn ethanol production in the United States, Brazilian success with its ethanol from sugar cane has been cited as an example of how the USA could get free from its oil imports (mainly from the Middle East) by substituting ethanol for gasoline. This would be corn ethanol.
Well, I'm an organic sugar cane farmer and ethanol expert in Brazil. And I think it is my duty to tell my American readers and friends that this comparison is not so simple or straightforward. This would be, indeed, comparing mangoes and apples.
There are two points to consider: First, the immense difference between the two economies and their respective rates of consumption. And, second, the yield and ERoEI differences (net energy, or Energy Returned on Energy Invested) between tropical sugar cane and temperate corn. Let's first consider Table 1.
TABLE 1 – Size and consumption differences
| ITEM | BRAZIL | UNITED STATES | UNIT |
| Population | 184 | 300 | Million inhabitants |
| Total fleet of vehicles | 28 | 230 | Million vehicles |
| Vehicles per inhabitant | 0.15 | 0.77 | Vehicles/inhabitant |
| Gasoline consumption | 4.0 (thanks to ethanol) | 140 | Billion gallons/year |
| Gasoline production | 5.24 (exports exceeding) | 119.5 (needs imports) | Billion barrels/year |
| Oil consumption | 1.8 | 21 | Million bbl/day |
| Oil production | 1.84 | 8.6 | Million bbl/day |
| Oil imports | 0 (imports 2% as diesel) | 12.4 | Million bbl/day |
| Ethanol consumption | 4.00 | 5.86 (fuel) | Billion gallons/yr |
| Ethanol production | 4.80 | 4.85 | Billion gallons/yr |
| Ethanol exports | 0.80 | 0 | Billion gallons/yr |
| Gasoline replaced | 50% | < 4%(by ethanol) | |
Having a population that is 61% of the USA's population, Brazil has a fleet of vehicles that is only 12% of the total American fleet. And a gasoline consumption that is only 2.9% (yes, this is really less than 3%!) of USA's gasoline consumption.
This very large difference arises from seven factors:
First, being the richest country in the world, the USA has a number of cars that far exceeds the total number of licensed drivers, with almost 0.8 vehicles per person. Brazil, a much more modest country, has only 20% of that impressive rate.
Second, the average American vehicle is larger, heavier and less efficient (21 miles/gallon), with a large number of SUV's and light trucks being preferred by families. The average car produced in Brazil (at 17 factories) is smaller, with predominant European and Asian influence in car design, a large number of cars being compact and obtaining 40 miles/gallon (gasoline).
Third, by the end of 2006 ethanol will supply 50% of all otherwise needed gasoline. Without fuel ethanol, Brazil would need now 8 billion gallons/year of gasoline, still a bargain when compared to the USA's 140 billion gallons/year.
GO TO NEXT PAGE >>
|
| Times Article Viewed: 6110 |
|
|
|
Reader Comments
A valid email address and confirmation is required before your comment can be posted. Comments not confirmed within
24 hours are automatically deleted.
14 comments so far...
04-Oct-2006
34204
| |
"ethanol for energy independence" !!!
That's a lame strawman. The real question is should ethanol be pursued as part of the solution? YES.
Posted by: dursun sakarya
|
|
04-Oct-2006
34206
| |
I'm surprised by the information. This was very informative and a good read! I guess this is all the reason why we should go electric. We have enough knowledge and materials to build windmills/turbines and solar plants similar to the one sempra energy is involved with. We could electrically independent. In any case, USA can be as independent as Brazil, we just have to do it differently...not ethanol as the way, but some other way (electric).
Posted by: Bob the Builder
|
|
04-Oct-2006
34216
| |
While the article doesn't address cellulosic ethanol or more valid crops, it does point out that ethanol will only replace a small amount of fuel. Lifestyle changes are needed to eliminate our use of oil. Rapeseed might be used for ethanol, but using corn is not going to provide us with much ethnaol in the future.
Posted by: Steve Erlsten
|
|
05-Oct-2006
34242
| |
The US is not the whole world. There is much
fallow land worldwide, that could be used
for energy crops. Corn is more valueable as alcohol, than as just corn. You have to start
somewhere.
Posted by: Menwith M
|
|
05-Oct-2006
34253
| |
Your last comment was rather chilling. Once again the US may export its problems rather than dealing with them. Many peoples of the world are starving and the number of people is increasing. Using food to power cars is madness and will just increase the price of food
Posted by: ew hillyard
|
|
05-Oct-2006
34256
| |
Brilliant ! Clear, concise, informative : an article written without emotion, such as this one by Milton Maciel, can lead to enlightened progress : and we need more of both. Brazil evidently won't need wind, wave, PV and geo-thermal sources of energy, for transportation at least, as many of the rest of us will. Great - good for them ! So can we learn the lesson, and stop shouting the odds in the USA and Europe for one source as though it is the only solution to our problem ? We must get on with as many locally-suitable sources as we can : they will all have a part to play. Thank you for your contribution, EV World !
Posted by: Eric J. Friend
|
|
05-Oct-2006
34258
| |
Ever time somebody writes that "we have to change our lifestyle", I am left wondering what kind of changes they have in mind. One might imagine simply trimming away the fat from our wasteful practices -- such as driving smaller and more efficient, but fully functional, cars instead of bloated SUVs. At the other extreme, it could mean everybody has to walk or ride bicycles or use public transportation. I think the further down that path you go, the more resistance you'll run into.
The first option should be obvious, the second should be unnecessary, and the real outcome will probably be somewhere in-between. If we apply our technology and industry well, we should be able to get by with relatively modest and easily accepted "lifestyle" changes. In other words. . . Our goal should be to avoid a great upheaval to our society, not force it to happen.
Posted by: Tony Belding
|
|
05-Oct-2006
34282
| |
Well the nice thing about Ethanol is that it can literally be made from anything that rots, like garbage. I don't understand the use of perfectly good corn when farm and food waste would achieve the same end. But the point shouldn't be to have Ethanol replace all gasoline. It should only be added to gasoline only to the point that it is economically feasible. And the feasability is partly determined by the availability of cheap surplus crops and garbage that can be used. Ethanol should only be part of the picture. Other parts should be biodiesel, using fuels more efficiently and better urban planning. There's no reason why the problem can't be tackled with numerous smaller solutions that each reduce oil dependence by a degree.
Posted by: peter stern
|
|
06-Oct-2006
34312
| |
I meant the latter, but don't take it out of context. IF we are going to eliminate our use of oil (which we're not going to do) we will have to stop driving so much (or switch to electric-powered vehicles). Downsizing to 80 mpg vehicles won't eliminate our need to burn oil.
Posted by: Steve Erlsten
|
|
06-Oct-2006
34314
| |
Do people that have a moral objection to using
corn as motor fuel, also object to using corn
for space heatng? Keep in mind that corn for
space heating is much cheaper than fuel oil from
the Midddle East.
Posted by: Menwith M
|
|
06-Oct-2006
34315
| |
Keep in mind that most corn isn't used as human food. It goes through an inefficient process being turned into pork, eggs, chicken, and beef. 78% of the US corn crop goes into meat factories:
http://www.decaturdaily.com/decaturdaily/news/060918/ethanol.shtml
Posted by: Steve Erlsten
|
|
10-Oct-2006
34508
| |
I saw an article that if we use deserts to make solar energy power like covering an acre with photovoltaic panels it can make several more times energy to the factor of thousands over trying to use an acre of arable land to produce the same energy. We need battery technology for storage etc to evolve. As our lifestyle becomes more mobile I would feel this is where we are going anyway so all we have to do is wait for it to happen as market forces are demanding it. It wont be a shot from the dark but an existing use technology that breaks through.
Posted by: franco parreira
|
|
03-Oct-2006
34179
| |
Important things to keep in mind for sure. Some people think that technology and the market economy will magically find a solution to replace oil when it becomes too expensive, but these points serve to remind us that our lifestyle may be in for an adjustment, more than what we put in our vehicles.
Posted by: rob neff
|
|
04-Oct-2006
34202
| |
This shows that there is not one answer to the problem, we need to develope multiple forms of Alternative energy.
Posted by: David Anderson
|
|
