Biofuels

As with any agricultural shift, there are pros and cons to be discussed with the increasing standard of biofuels in use. Biofuels are proven to be a cleaner source of power and as we have already learned, the agriculture industry (especially beef) is a big producer of CO2 and really needs to evaluate how it can reduce its carbon footprint. Biofuels would be a great way for the industry to do this and help contribute to the cause. Although the increase use of crops for biofuels will decrease the use of crops for food and many communities are not happy with this change. With less crop yield being put toward food the prices in the market are up higher than ever and many citizens who already spend 80% of their income on food are nervous of how they will be able to support their families. Although it seems like it should be the answer to climate change and all of our problems, biofuels will hurt the socioeconomic status of many countries and communities that can't really handle many more hardships.

The EU is not pleased with the results of first generation biofuels and have decided they need to make some policy changes to decrease the initial 10% use of biofuels in 2020 to 5%. They thought that the use of biofuels would greatly reduce CO2 emissions and help this planet but they were found to be no better than some fossil fuels. First generation biofuels will no longer be subsidized by the EU unless they can be proven to greatly reduce greenhouse gases. These changes have caused many proponents and environmentalists in a fuss. Biofuel proponents are unhappy because they see this as a sign that the EU cannot stick to what they say and that their policies do not hold water. The environmentalists are unhappy with this change because they see this as a mistake for the EU, they believe that there is a cleaner way to implement biofuels, the EU just hasn't worked hard enough at it. And all of this fuss over first generation biofuels throws shade at the use of second generation biofuels. Second generation biofuels could be a great improvement and take away some cons of the use of biofuels because they are not food crops so they wouldn't drive up the price of food like first generation biofuels have.  

Ethanol production is not hitting its highest note in the fuel industry right now, it is going through a bit of a drought that is causing many production plants to close and is leaving barrels of ethanol in storage. The fuel industry is not yet comfortable having more than 10% ethanol in their gasoline mix even though many cars have been approved of up to a 15% mix. This is really hurting the ethanol industry because they saw such a rapid growth in their ethanol usage and were greatly benefitting initially, that this drop has caused many layoffs and left only a few productions to stay open. The plant in Macon, Missouri has decided to renovate production plants to be more efficient and be more cost-effective. They are hoping to take big steps in the production of ethanol and see great results in the work they have put into their production.

The EPA has made a big statement in the ethanol industry by stating that a 10% mix is the new standard because that is all the more an average car absorbs. This has upset producers and environmentalists because it will hurt production and it is not improving the clean fuel initiative. Farmers are producing barrels of ethanol at low costs and are having great crop yields, so being told that their hard work is unwanted is upsetting and will alter the lives of those in the community. The environmentalists see ethanol as being a great improvement in reducing greenhouse gases and are upset that the EPA feels the need to hold back on such a great resource. The EPA is only doing what it is doing because cars can't use all the ethanol being put into them and it seems to be a waste. There are definitely two sides to every story and biofuels are really feeling the harsh truth with the many pros and cons they have to offer.