Corn: Food Plus Energy

Food versus energy is a fundamental debate now that humanity is rediscovering the potential of photosynthesis not only to nourish, but also to travel from home to work and from work to home. But like in every debate, there is no lack of sensationalist arguments, most of them bizarre, which capture the minds of the least informed.

I take up the issue because during the “Great Debate” held during the recent Alltech International Animal Health and Nutrition Industry Symposium in Lexington, Kentucky (United States), the issue of the use of ethanol from corn as fuel was put on the table. The three panelists came out swinging, but the mediator did not blow the whistle. Let’s see why.

The three panelists were the Briton, Tom Standage, business editor at The Economist and author of the book, “An Edible History of Humanity;” Ben Self, communications consultant to Barack Obama; and Hans Johr, corporate head of Nestle’s agriculture department. In short, these three are closely linked to the world of food production, which is obviously affected by the current high price of corn. Undoubtedly, this is a consequence of the massive use of this grain to substitute for gas.

Standage said simply that it appeared to him that using corn to produce ethanol was “a stupid idea.” His co-panelists agreed.

What idea is stupid? Let’s remember how high the price of petroleum was in the year 2000, months before the terrorist attacks on the Twin Towers and Pentagon: $20 a barrel. How much is it now? Over $100. In the United States, the citizens are addicted to oil (as former president George W. Bush might have put it*). In economic terms, this is called “inelastic demand.” Although the price increases, consumption does not decrease proportionally. How much would petroleum be worth without this alternative substitution? The replacement of gas with corn ethanol has already reached 10 percent. That’s one million barrels per day, $100 million per day, $40 billion per year.

Moving ahead, let’s suppose that it is “more ethical” to use corn for food than for energy. This bizarre argument appeals to the fact that controlling hunger in underdeveloped communities depends, for example, on corn tortillas. In general, primitive communities live off agriculture — which is no longer the most denigrated of human activities thanks to improvement in prices and the inversion of terms of exchange — having passed from the era of surpluses to the era of scarcity. This is thanks, among other things, to using photosynthesis to generate energy.

But there is much more to say. One third of corn is used for ethanol. The other two thirds are divided between being used for feed and industrial uses. These two thirds could also be debatable. For example, corn is used to make high-fructose corn syrup, the sweetener in colas, which are presently much at issue due to obesity problems. Or it is consumed in the feedlots, at hog farms, the cattle sheds, or by laying hens; in the meantime, doctors ask us to eat more vegetables. Is a Quarter Pounder with Cheese, French fries and a medium Coke more ethical than converting 10 percent of corn to gas? When we return home from work and rush out for two-for-one beers at happy hour, we should to remember that beer is made with barley and corn, as are whiskey, fois gras and salmon. Not to mention the coatings of the oil wells on which we will still depend for many years — until other clearly superior alternatives appear, like those we also saw at the Alltech symposium, such as cellulose from waste products and, above all, algae. Meanwhile, long live corn, food plus energy.