From Wikipedia:
It is disputed whether corn ethanol as an automotive fuel results in a net energy gain or loss. As reported in "The Energy Balance of Corn Ethanol: an Update," the energy returned on energy invested (EROEI) for ethanol made from corn in the U.S. is 1.34 (it yields 34% more energy than it takes to produce it). Input energy includes natural gas based fertilizers, farm equipment, transformation from corn or other materials, and transportation. However, other researchers report that the production of ethanol consumes more energy than it yields. In comparison, sugar cane ethanol EROEI is at around 8 (it yields 8 joules for each joule used to produce it).[citation needed] Recent research suggests that cellulosic crops such as switchgrass provide a much better net energy production than corn, producing over five times as much energy as the total used to produce the crop and convert it to fuel. If this research is confirmed, cellulosic crops will most likely displace corn as the main fuel crop for producing bioethanol.
Michael Grunwald reports that one person could be fed 365 days "on the corn needed to fill an ethanol-fueled SUV". He further reports that though "hyped as an eco-friendly fuel, ethanol increases global warming, destroys forests and inflates food prices." Environmentalists, livestock farmers, and opponents of subsidies say that increased ethanol production won't meet energy goals and may damage the environment, while at the same time causing worldwide food prices to soar. Some of the controversial subsidies in the past have included more than $10 billion to Archer-Daniels-Midland since 1980. Critics also speculate that as ethanol is more widely used, changing irrigation practices could greatly increase pressure on water resources. In October 2007, 28 environmental groups decried the Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS), a legislative effort intended to increase ethanol production, and said that the measure will "lead to substantial environmental damage and a system of biofuels production that will not benefit family farmers...will not promote sustainable agriculture and will not mitigate global climate change."
Recent articles have also blamed subsidized ethanol production for the nearly 200% increase in milk prices since 2004, although that is disputed by some. Ethanol production uses the starch portion of corn, but the leftover protein can be used to create a high-nutrient, low-cost animal feed.
In 2007 the United Nations' independent expert on the right to food, called for a five-year moratorium on biofuel production from food crops, to allow time for development of non-food sources. He called recent increases in food costs because of fuel production, such as the quadrupling of world corn price in one year, a growing "catastrophe" for the poor. In February 2007, riots occurred in Mexico because of the skyrocketing price of tortillas. Ethanol has been credited as the reason for this increase in food prices. The demand for corn has had a rippling effect on many corn-based products, like tortillas. The effects of ethanol and the increasing cost of food have also been felt in Pakistan, Indonesia, and Egypt.
Oil has historically had a much higher EROEI than corn produced ethanol, according to some. However, oil must be refined into gasoline before it can be used for automobile fuel. Refining, as well as exploration and drilling, consumes energy. The difference between the energy in the fuel (output energy) and the energy needed to produce it (input energy) is often expressed as a percent of the input energy and called net energy gain (or loss). Several studies released in 2002 estimated that the net energy gain for corn ethanol is between 21 and 34 percent. The net energy loss for MTBE is about 33 percent. When added to gasoline, ethanol can replace MTBE as an anti-knock agent without poisoning drinking water as MTBE does. In Brazil, where the broadest and longest ethanol producing experiment took place, improvements in agricultural practices and ethanol production improvements led to an increase in ethanol net energy gain from 300% to over 800% in recent years. Consuming known oil reserves is increasing oil exploration and drilling energy consumption which is reducing oil EROEI (and energy balance) further.
Opponents claim that corn ethanol production does not result in a net energy gain or that the consequences of large scale ethanol production to the food industry and environment offset any potential gains from ethanol. It has been estimated that "if every bushel of U.S. corn, wheat, rice and soybean were used to produce ethanol, it would only cover about 4% of U.S. energy needs on a net basis." Many of the issues raised could likely be fixed by techniques now in development that produce ethanol from agricultural waste, such as paper waste, switchgrass, and other materials, but EIA Forecasts Significant Shortfall in Cellulosic Biofuel Production Compared to Target Set by Renewable Fuel Standard.
Proponents cite the potential gains to the U.S. economy both from domestic fuel production and increased demand for corn. Optimistic calculations project that the United States is capable of producing enough ethanol to completely replace gasoline consumption.[citation needed] In comparison, Brazil's ethanol consumption today covers more than 50% of all energy used by vehicles in that country.
In the United States, preferential regulatory and tax treatment of ethanol automotive fuels introduces complexities beyond its energy economics alone. North American automakers have in 2006 and 2007 promoted a blend of 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline, marketed as E85, and their flex-fuel vehicles, e.g. GM's "Live Green, Go Yellow" campaign. The apparent motivation is the nature of U.S. Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, which give an effective 54% fuel efficiency bonus to vehicles capable of running on 85% alcohol blends over vehicles not adapted to run on 85% alcohol blends. In addition to this auto manufacturer-driven impetus for 85% alcohol blends, the United States Environmental Protection Agency had authority to mandate that minimum proportions of oxygenates be added to automotive gasoline on regional and seasonal bases from 1992 until 2006 in an attempt to reduce air pollution, in particular ground-level ozone and smog. In the United States, incidents of methyl tert(iary)-butyl ether (MTBE) groundwater contamination have been recorded in the majority of the 50 states, and the State of California's ban on the use of MTBE as a gasoline additive has further driven the more widespread use of ethanol as the most common fuel oxygenate.
A February 7, 2008 Associated Press article stated, "The widespread use of ethanol from corn could result in nearly twice the greenhouse gas emissions as the gasoline it would replace because of expected land-use changes, researchers concluded Thursday. The study challenges the rush to biofuels as a response to global warming."
One acre of land can yield about 7,110 pounds (3,225 kg) of corn, which can be processed into 328 gallons (1240.61 liters) of ethanol. That is about 26.1 pounds (11.84 kg) of corn per gallon.