Ethanol is not "green"

[ElFenix]

article about fuel algae test runs

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: Throckmorton
http://www.abetterearth.org/bl...d.4380/news_detail.asp

That's incredible. Just to replace 14% of gasoline would require all the farm land in the US to be used for ethanol. Suddenly I feel very green about working in the oil industry.[/quote]

quick correction: as bolded in the article, it refers to all of the corn produced, not all of the available farm land. Both, however, are still ridiculous.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
article about fuel algae test runs

Awesome, this is the first update on the algae solution I've heard in a few years.

 

[So]

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: Dunbar
Which is why most politicians sell ethanol as "reducing our dependence on foreign oil." A claim which is only slightly more accurate than the claim of it being green. It also has unintended consequences like driving up corn prices which causes higher inflation in food prices. It's interesting that if we like ethanol why we don't free up trade with sugar producing conuntries since it is a much more efficient way to produce ethanol. But, ah, we gotta protect those American corn farmers...

i see nothing wrong with that at all. American bucks staying in America. its a win-win.

No, it's a win-lose. Farmers win jobs, everyone else loses money that could have been used for other things. Every job we save with protectionist measures costs us more than if the government paid their salary and allowed free trade.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Dunbar

Originally posted by: redly1
If ethanol from Switchgrass was something that could be mass produced at a cost similar to corn based ethanol, they would be doing it.

I love when ethanol supporters wax poetic about cheap, plentiful switchgrass ethanol. Something that even proponents admit will require at least 5-10 years of R&D to maybe become a reality. But who doesn't love a dreamer?

So what if it takes 5-10 years? Working toward a solution is better than sticking your head in the sand and ignoring the problem. Algae-based biodiesel has promise too, but will require more research to develop a suitable algae for production.

 

[So]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Dunbar

Originally posted by: redly1
If ethanol from Switchgrass was something that could be mass produced at a cost similar to corn based ethanol, they would be doing it.

I love when ethanol supporters wax poetic about cheap, plentiful switchgrass ethanol. Something that even proponents admit will require at least 5-10 years of R&D to maybe become a reality. But who doesn't love a dreamer?

So what if it takes 5-10 years? Working toward a solution is better than sticking your head in the sand and ignoring the problem. Algae-based biodiesel has promise too, but will require more research to develop a suitable algae for production.

If we can get the same ROI (in terms of energy) that we get from oil then it's worth it. If no, then we should pursue nuclear power and electric cars. There'll be enough oil for airplanes for the foreseeable future.

 

[ShockwaveVT]

the ethanol push got started more a result of there being a corn surplus than there being a demand for ethanol. The book "The Omnivore's Dilemma" has a good discussion about corn production in its section on industrial agriculture. You might be surprised what a large role corn plays in our food industry, and how little of it is grown for direct human consumption.

 

[Dunbar]

Originally posted by: mugs
So what if it takes 5-10 years? Working toward a solution is better than sticking your head in the sand and ignoring the problem. Algae-based biodiesel has promise too, but will require more research to develop a suitable algae for production.

What is the problem, how does ethanol fix it, and what is it going to cost consumers? Regarding cheap switchgrass ethanol (or algea biodiesel) I think it would great, but lets not count our chickens before they hatch. There are already powerful market incentives for anyone that can produce an alternative to gasoline at a lower price. Corn based ethanol, with its 51c/gal tax subsidy and federal mandates, has failed to do that.

 

[imported_Baloo]

Originally posted by: Throckmorton


That's incredible. Just to replace 14% of gasoline would require all the farm land in the US to be used for ethanol. Suddenly I feel very green about working in the oil industry.

You read that wrong. it says, "if all of the corn grown by American farmers were devoted to ethanol production", not if all farmland were devoted to corn.

In any case, 14% is a big enough number to make a notable dent. And there's plenty of idle agricultural land out there to increase corn production.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: redly1

Originally posted by: KB
Ethanol from corn is a bad idea unless we are solely using leftover corn not used in the food supply. Otherwise we are just adding to food costs.

Ethanol from switchgrass grown on unfarmed land is a better idea. Solar is perhaps the best idea though.

If ethanol from Switchgrass was something that could be mass produced at a cost similar to corn based ethanol, they would be doing it.

Farmers/agribusiness don't like change since they must learn something new and probably buy new equipment, hence the resistance to change.

Switchgrass and other crops that have vastly better ethanol yields are getting more and more attention as the fools errand that corn ethanol is gets exposed.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: Throckmorton
That's incredible. Just to replace 14% of gasoline would require all the farm land in the US to be used for ethanol. Suddenly I feel very green about working in the oil industry.

Wrong. To replace 14% of gasoline from ethanol made from corn would require the use of all corn currently grown. Since corn does not even remotely come close to taking up all of US farmland, your straw-man doesn't hold up.

And you're also laboring under the mistaken assumption that ethanol has to be made from corn. If we made ethanol from prairie grass or the remains of sugar cane like Brazil, we would see vastly more efficient ethanol production. Interestingly enough, the US has embarked upon just this course recently with further funding for investigation into the production of cellulosic ethanol. Using prairie grass to make cellulosic ethanol would not only yield a vastly more efficient production process, but would further allow farmers to use fields which would otherwise lie fallow during crop rotation and still allow the current amount of corn to be grown as a food product.

Of course, the ethanol detractors like to ignore that information. It's much less convenient for them.

ZV

 

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: Baloo

Originally posted by: Throckmorton


That's incredible. Just to replace 14% of gasoline would require all the farm land in the US to be used for ethanol. Suddenly I feel very green about working in the oil industry.

You read that wrong. it says, "if all of the corn grown by American farmers were devoted to ethanol production", not if all farmland were devoted to corn.

In any case, 14% is a big enough number to make a notable dent. And there's plenty of idle agricultural land out there to increase corn production.

I meant all the farm land used for corn. I just misstyped.

I'm not a farmer so I don't know.. How much idle agricultural land is there? Are you talking about previously farmed land or natural vegetation that farmers haven't cleared for agriculture?

 

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: Throckmorton
That's incredible. Just to replace 14% of gasoline would require all the farm land in the US to be used for ethanol. Suddenly I feel very green about working in the oil industry.

Wrong. To replace 14% of gasoline from ethanol made from corn would require the use of all corn currently grown. Since corn does not even remotely come close to taking up all of US farmland, your straw-man doesn't hold up.

And you're also laboring under the mistaken assumption that ethanol has to be made from corn. If we made ethanol from prairie grass or the remains of sugar cane like Brazil, we would see vastly more efficient ethanol production. Interestingly enough, the US has embarked upon just this course recently with further funding for investigation into the production of cellulosic ethanol. Using prairie grass to make cellulosic ethanol would not only yield a vastly more efficient production process, but would further allow farmers to use fields which would otherwise lie fallow during crop rotation and still allow the current amount of corn to be grown as a food product.

Of course, the ethanol detractors like to ignore that information. It's much less convenient for them.

ZV

Jeez, I misstyped. It should be obvious what I meant. Obviously you wouldn't grow corn on vinyards...

Is cellulosic ethanol even viable? What's the energy balance for that?

 

[cKGunslinger]

The Corn-growers lobby is a powerful one, indeed.

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: BouZouki
Some people are so ignorant.

"im saving the environment by buying a hybrid."

Yeah, you use less gas but think about the pollution the production plant makes to make the car and the disposal of the batteries afterwards.

Urr, correct me if I'm wrong but aren't all cars made in a production plant and require the disposal of batteries? Hybrid batteries may require more effort to dispose of but are there actual non-skewed numbers that realistically show that a hybrid doesn't use less total energy than a regular car?

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: So

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: Dunbar
Which is why most politicians sell ethanol as "reducing our dependence on foreign oil." A claim which is only slightly more accurate than the claim of it being green. It also has unintended consequences like driving up corn prices which causes higher inflation in food prices. It's interesting that if we like ethanol why we don't free up trade with sugar producing conuntries since it is a much more efficient way to produce ethanol. But, ah, we gotta protect those American corn farmers...

i see nothing wrong with that at all. American bucks staying in America. its a win-win.

No, it's a win-lose. Farmers win jobs, everyone else loses money that could have been used for other things. Every job we save with protectionist measures costs us more than if the government paid their salary and allowed free trade.

i see nothing wrong with keeping the dollars in the country and not sending it off to the middle east. haven't you heard the saying "a dollar spent 7 ways..."

 

[Modelworks]

Ethanol from corn is not cost effective right now.
However, ethanol and biodiesel from algae are and it takes no fields to grow it as areas of the ocean could be used.

Interesting trivia fact.
The first cars that ford produced ran off ehtanol, but gasoline was cheaper to produce.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: Throckmorton
Jeez, I misstyped. It should be obvious what I meant. Obviously you wouldn't grow corn on vinyards...

Is cellulosic ethanol even viable? What's the energy balance for that?

Vinyards aren't farmland. Your post clearly implied using all farmland (i.e. land currently used to grow wheat, rice, soybeans, etc) for corn. Several other people pointed out that flaw, so it clearly wasn't obvious what you meant.

The energy balance of corn-based ethanol is 1.34:1 assuming industry average efficiency in growing the corn. Using industry-best efficiency of growing corn yields an energy balance of just over 2:1.

The energy balance of cellulosic ethanol is 2.62:1.

Link

ZV

 

[So]

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: So

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: Dunbar
Which is why most politicians sell ethanol as "reducing our dependence on foreign oil." A claim which is only slightly more accurate than the claim of it being green. It also has unintended consequences like driving up corn prices which causes higher inflation in food prices. It's interesting that if we like ethanol why we don't free up trade with sugar producing conuntries since it is a much more efficient way to produce ethanol. But, ah, we gotta protect those American corn farmers...

i see nothing wrong with that at all. American bucks staying in America. its a win-win.

No, it's a win-lose. Farmers win jobs, everyone else loses money that could have been used for other things. Every job we save with protectionist measures costs us more than if the government paid their salary and allowed free trade.

i see nothing wrong with keeping the dollars in the country and not sending it off to the middle east. haven't you heard the saying "a dollar spent 7 ways..."

You do realize that the vast majority of those $$ never leave the US? They get stored in US banks (and loaned back out to Americans) and used to buy luxury goods from the US and Europe.

 

[Nerva]

the entire food vs fuel debate on ethanol is all media fluff. i have done an analysis on the feasibility of ethanol, based on corn growth and corn stock, there should be plenty of corn left over for food and ethanol.

 

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: BouZouki
Some people are so ignorant.

"im saving the environment by buying a hybrid."

Yeah, you use less gas but think about the pollution the production plant makes to make the car and the disposal of the batteries afterwards.

Urr, correct me if I'm wrong but aren't all cars made in a production plant and require the disposal of batteries? Hybrid batteries may require more effort to dispose of but are there actual non-skewed numbers that realistically show that a hybrid doesn't use less total energy than a regular car?

I think the claims that a hybrid car uses more energy are exaggerated. A lot of people are thinking of the paper by the student who said that a hybrid uses more energy than a full size SUV, which turned out to be based on false assumptions such as the lifetime of a Hummer H2 being 3x that of a Prius.

I don't know about battery disposal but AFAIK, they're recycled, and it doesn't take that much energy to create and recycle them.

 

[AgentJean]

Ethanol is a joke, butanol is a better route because you can use just about any form of bio-organic waste and a process developed in the 1920s to produce butanol. Butanol also has more engery than Ethanol and it is chemically simular to gasoline so any modern vechile with a computer controled oxygen sensor can use straight butanol without any modifications. Also Butanol is eaiser to transport, you can use the existing gasoline pipelines; Ethanol must be transported by truck;

 

[gnumantsc]

Ethanol is not green the only thing green about it is that it is lining someone's wallet with a lot of green. Ethanol is dangerous to the population due to the fact that it will cost more to feed your family. No one has looked at it this way before. If we are using a food to make gas don't you think that that particular food would cost us a lot more when demand will go up?

It is already showing up in corn products and in the news that flour and other necessities are going up because more of it is being used for fuel and not for human consumption. At least with oil, we cannot consume it as a food source so it is not that bad.

IF there was a car running on water don;t you think water would cost an arm and a leg? It would destroy the basic necessity of life.

Hybrid cars are great for city driving but it will cost you more on long highway trips as you have an electric motor and battery to lug. Great for taxis due to the stop and go city traffic but going far distances it is cheaper to get a regular car.

 

[Toastedlightly]

Originally posted by: AgentJean
Ethanol is a joke, butanol is a better route because you can use just about any form of bio-organic waste and a process developed in the 1920s to produce butanol. Butanol also has more engery than Ethanol and it is chemically simular to gasoline so any modern vechile with a computer controled oxygen sensor can use straight butanol without any modifications. Also Butanol is eaiser to transport, you can use the existing gasoline pipelines; Ethanol must be transported by truck;

Which process is used for butanol? Ethanol is made w/ organic mediums and is an easy process. Butanol is in no way chemically simmilar to gasoline (although moreso than ethanol). It is an alcohol compared to a hydrocarbon. Also, the A/F ratio (acording to Wiki) is 11.2 to 1. One would need a different O2 sensor to run it (not a bit deal if you ask me).

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: gnumantsc
IF there was a car running on water don;t you think water would cost an arm and a leg? It would destroy the basic necessity of life.

No...

Originally posted by: Citrix
i see nothing wrong with keeping the dollars in the country and not sending it off to the middle east. haven't you heard the saying "a dollar spent 7 ways..."

Except that the amount of energy (in the form of oil) that an American farm requires per acre of corn is ridiculous. Almost the same amount of money would end up going to the middle east anyway.