TOEFL 통합 작문

📖 읽기 지문

The use of biofuels, particularly ethanol derived from corn, has been championed as a key solution to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and dependence on fossil fuels. Proponents argue that biofuels are carbon-neutral because the CO2 emitted when they are burned is offset by the CO2 absorbed by the crops during growth. Three main reasons support this view. First, biofuels reduce net carbon emissions compared to gasoline. Studies show that ethanol from corn can cut lifecycle emissions by up to 30% relative to petroleum. Second, biofuels promote energy security by diversifying fuel sources and reducing reliance on oil imports. Countries like the United States can produce ethanol domestically, lessening vulnerability to geopolitical instability. Third, biofuel production stimulates rural economies. Increased demand for corn boosts farmers' incomes and creates jobs in agriculture and processing facilities, revitalizing rural communities.

🎧 듣기 강의

While the reading touts the benefits of corn-based ethanol, the lecture counters each point with critical evidence. First, the claim of carbon reduction is misleading. The lecture points out that when indirect land-use changes are considered, ethanol may actually emit more CO2 than gasoline. For instance, converting forests or grasslands to corn fields releases stored carbon, and the use of nitrogen fertilizers produces nitrous oxide, a potent greenhouse gas. A 2008 study in Science found that corn ethanol’s lifecycle emissions can be 30% higher than gasoline's when these factors are included. Second, regarding energy security, the lecture argues that ethanol production requires significant fossil fuel inputs for farming, processing, and transport. Moreover, producing ethanol from corn competes with food supply, forcing imports of other crops, which can offset any energy independence gains. Third, the economic benefit to rural areas is overstated. The lecture notes that government subsidies, not market demand, drive much of the corn ethanol industry. Without subsidies, many plants would be unprofitable. Additionally, the shift to corn monoculture can degrade soil quality and increase water pollution, harming long-term agricultural productivity and thus rural economies.