He seems to be blithely ignoring a number of issues. First, "family farmer" my arse. Everyone know ADM, etc at the really winners with increased ethanol use. Reducing dependence on oil via corn ethanol, etc isn't clear cut either, for again, as we all know, it's not all that efficient with respect to how much energy goes into producing it compared to gasoline. Sorry if it's all been covered before; usually I'm too scared to venture into P&N, but this nonsense being spewed by the President is driving me nuts!
OMG teh corn will save us all!!!
- Thread starter oboeguy
- Start date
You forgot to mention that corn is also our most heavily subsidized crop. Ethanol is fine and all, but like you said, corn is a terrible source for it.
Ethanol is\will be heavily subsidized and the blind idiots out there who pay 2 bucks a gallon for E85 wont know the difference.
I am not sold on this alternative energy yet.
I am not sold on this alternative energy yet.
The rhetoric makes me ill... "when our farms our doing well our country is doing well" or some such thing, followed by the automatic applause from the audience. After all, who doesn't love a farmer? :roll: Really, do we need that sort of pandering?
I need to educate myself on the process of making ethanol. Is it something that can be made via excess energy in our eletric grid? Or are we burning coal or oil to make this stuff?
Corn, yeast and sugar will make it. I don't know if that's a viable mass production technique, but it's the way we've made alcohol for thousands of years.
Originally posted by: Strk
Isn't that how you make whiskey?
It's how you make alcohol. Whiskey is a beverage with a certain alcohol percentage and flavor added by the solid matter used in the fermentation process. Of course, whiskey is aged, but if you're just trying to make ethanol the process could be much faster.
In reference to alternate sources of energy:
Did anyone see the documentary on HBO this past weekend? "Too Hot NOT To Handle"? It was an hour long deal on global warming. Did you know that it would take two one-hundred squared mile solar panel sites, one for the west, one for the east, to to power the entire country? That was one of the interesting facts it gave, but in general it was a VERY good documentary. I'm sure they will repeat it, keep an eye out.
Did anyone see the documentary on HBO this past weekend? "Too Hot NOT To Handle"? It was an hour long deal on global warming. Did you know that it would take two one-hundred squared mile solar panel sites, one for the west, one for the east, to to power the entire country? That was one of the interesting facts it gave, but in general it was a VERY good documentary. I'm sure they will repeat it, keep an eye out.
K1052
Elite Member
- Aug 21, 2003
- 51,880
- 44,709
- 136
...of very expensive photovoltaic cells. At this point they cells are too fragile and costly to rely on for large scale commercial electrical generation. Not to mention the fact that we would still require baseline power plants when the sun goes down.
You also forget to mention the South America is producing cheap Ethanol right now. We will import this, as we do every other fuel.
K1052
Elite Member
- Aug 21, 2003
- 51,880
- 44,709
- 136
Originally posted by: RichardE
You also forget to mention the South America is producing cheap Ethanol right now. We will import this, as we do every other fuel.
Central and large parts of South America have the benefit of being within 20 degrees of the equator and having much more lax environmental regulation than the US
We can economically produce ethanol from domestic crops/feedstocks, we just need to move away from corn and soy to do it.
Using conventional crops to generate sugar might not even be the best idea. I would venture a guess we can use genetic engineering to alter something like sugarcane or beets to maximize the amount of sugar it produces. If sugar is the only goal (which it is, if we're going to make ethanol out of it) then I am sure we can do at least 10X as good as native corn.
zephyrprime
Diamond Member
- Feb 18, 2001
- 7,512
- 2
- 81
With corn prices being as high as they are, even without the subsidy ethanol would be cheaper than gas. This wasn't true a few years ago but gues what? Gas prices have more than doubled.
I think biodiesel is fundamentally better though. It takes a lot less energy to make.
I think biodiesel is fundamentally better though. It takes a lot less energy to make.
Sugar is an even better source of ethanol, but we don't grow much sugar in the U.S. Of course, we could always deal with that little island suburb off the coast of Miami. Maybe we could start growing it at Guantanmo and making the "detainees" earn their keep by working the fields.
Since your scared we will go easy on you and yes this has been covered lots here.
I guess you main question is is it economically viable? yes it is. you get more energy than put into it in Brazils case cause they use sugar about 7 energy units out for every 1 in our crops corn/ Canola etc aren't nearly as effecient but roughly 2 to 1 with todays methods no where near the 100 to 1 oil gives you hence the problem.
The industry is subsidized but so has oil been and you have to remember the oil industry has 100 yr head start and once going it will be profitable on its own.
But look at it this way do you buy Arabs solid silver cars or do you feed the money back to the American producer? Seems a easy question to me to answer.
I guess you main question is is it economically viable? yes it is. you get more energy than put into it in Brazils case cause they use sugar about 7 energy units out for every 1 in our crops corn/ Canola etc aren't nearly as effecient but roughly 2 to 1 with todays methods no where near the 100 to 1 oil gives you hence the problem.
The industry is subsidized but so has oil been and you have to remember the oil industry has 100 yr head start and once going it will be profitable on its own.
But look at it this way do you buy Arabs solid silver cars or do you feed the money back to the American producer? Seems a easy question to me to answer.
techs
Lifer
- Sep 26, 2000
- 28,559
- 4
- 0
It takes energy to make ethanol. For example fuel for tractors to harvest and transport the crops, feritlizer made from oil, etc.
For corn which produces a relatively small amount of ethanol by weight of the crop I have seen estimates that say it takes a gallon of oil to produce a gallon of ethanol.
For sugar cane which has a high sugar content and is very efficient at making ethanol you get a much better yield so making ethanol takes far less oil per gallon of ethanol.
What is true is that corn is NOT a good source of raw material for making ethanol.
If we went to large scale ethanol production we would need to replace corn with another crop. Bush is talking sawgrass. However, I think there are probably better sources than sawgrass.
The BIG problem is the huge expense of converting corn growing equipment like tractors to be able to handle a new crop.
Which is why "big corn" is lobbying for subsidies for ethanol, so they don't have to pay for the conversion.
There are lots of other ways to produce ethanol. The one you described can only be performed in a batch or semi-batch (at best) process, and is therefore unsuitable for the level of production that would be required. Ethanol used in drinks is produced only by biological means because that is the law. The government imposed this law because synthetic means of production carry with them the possibility of additional products, such as methanol.
Now, there is a dilemma. If we produce synthetic ethanol for fuel purposes, will idiots think "$2.00 for a gallon of Everclear!" and start drinking it? If so, they'll probably end up in the hospital because it won't have nearly the same composition as biologically-produced ethanol. However, I suggest we let this form of natural selection play out and take our chances - allow synthetic production of ethanol for fuel purposes. This would greatly reduce the cost and allow continuous processes to be implemented (as opposed to the current batch processes used in brewing). I'm not saying ethanol is the future of energy, but if we are going to head down that road, this is really the way to do it.
CaptnKirk
Lifer
- Jul 25, 2002
- 10,053
- 0
- 71
Denatured alcohol/ethanol is still synthesized using biological processes. It's only later that additional products are added to render it undrinkable. This is due simply to financial reasons.
I've read about artificially produced ethanol, but don't know much about it. I know a lot about yeast though, so just giving my input. I did mention corn and sugar because it didn't occur to me that corn has that much in it.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter