12-07-2008, 05:15 PM
JoeH wrote:
[quote=DevoBill]
That fraction is half.
You got a source for that? Or is it made up on the spot like most internet statistics?
Even at half, that removes a lot of feed from the market to feed cattle and other livestock.
What kind of link? A price list of feed?
It's a myth, because only half the resource by weight is used for the production of ethanol. The co-product or residue feed is one quarter the cost of feed corn or in some cases less. But for instance Dakota Bran Cake contains one hundred per cent of the energy value for one quarter the cost of corn. Dakota Bran Cake is one of the hundreds of by-product feeds that have better nutrition than feeding corn. The feeds that are dried down do add more cost to them but it's still such a better value than feeding corn. By using co-products the low quality varieties (high starch) can have their fat and protein levels increased by fermenting off half the starch. There by increasing the value of the feed. This is not rocket science, but it seems to never be reported correctly when you see ethanol blamed for the rising cost of food. I'm not in total support of ethanol because of the huge use of water during production. but that is something else.