Maggie's Farm

We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Much Sorry with Delays
Birth, Death and All That Stuff in Between
How to Honor Labor Day, Every Day
My Yom Kippur Miracle (Repost from 2010)
Good intro to fly casting
Peach update, with pie
NYC update
Easy for you to say: To the elites on mass immigration
For NYC on 9/11, Sailors' Snug Harbor
Pickled Peaches
Water Shoes
Labor Costs in U.S.
Your "identity"
Good news about The Great Courses
Uses of Hot Pepper Jelly/Sauce, Chutneys, and Jams
A Saturday Drive to Litchfield County, CT
How to Pick a Kayak
Civilized: Fruit forks and knives
Loads of kayaking on Cape Cod
Psychology Experiments' Questionable Results

Categories


All categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

Open login screen

RSS Readers

Add to Google

Subscribe with Bloglines

Monday, January 14. 2008

The Ethanol Fallacy

From a piece in Popular Mechanics, Biofuel Hype in Washington:

It’s great that our politicians have discovered the need for new energy technologies. But it appears that Washington is determined to put its money—our money—on the wrong horse. Right now, researchers are studying a host of energy solutions, including hydrogen, high-mileage diesel, plug-in hybrids, radical reductions in vehicle weight and cellulosic ethanol (made from cornstalks, switchgrass or other nonfood crops). It is far too soon to say which of these holds the most promise. But, instead of promoting experimentation and competition to find the best solutions, politicians seem ready to declare ethanol the winner. As a result, our nation could wind up with the worst of both worlds: an “alternative” energy that is enormously expensive yet barely saves a gallon of oil.

Read the whole thing.

Posted by The Barrister in Politics at 13:00 | Comments (8) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

They have effectively banned diesel cars, prevented domestic oil exploration, and frozen the nuclear industry in place. What we are left with is feel-good nonsense like solar and ethonal.
#1 NJSoldier on 2008-01-14 16:11 (Reply)
Yes to the above. But one outstanding question about ethanol is whether this approach might eventually work:

http://www.motortrend.com/auto_shows/coverage/detroit/112_0801_general_motors_ethanol/
#2 Skookumchuk (Link) on 2008-01-14 16:40 (Reply)
Maybe cellulosic ethanol will work - Food based ethanol is about the dumbest idea ever.
#3 NJSoldier on 2008-01-14 18:15 (Reply)
Waiting for Rugus to chime in with a refutation, I mean a Rufus-futation. He does know what he is talking about. There's a debate on the subject, for sure.
#3.1 BD on 2008-01-14 18:41 (Reply)
I know two people who really do know what they are talking about on this issue, and it seems that it is cellulosic ethanol in some future efficient process or nothing. A major problem even for cellulosic is that the inputs, for example the transport costs, remain so high.
#3.1.1 Skookumchuk (Link) on 2008-01-14 19:00 (Reply)
BD
If most of us, myself included know little to nothing of the various benefits and drawbacks of the biofuel sources mentioned then how can we pronounce that Rufus knows what he's talking about? It would seem one needs to know a good deal about a subject before being able to state that another knows more and is the acknowledged last word on th subject.
#3.1.2 Habu on 2008-01-15 06:36 (Reply)
And relies on Latin America, a hotbed of really US-friendly reasonable totally democratic forward thinking nations in your own back yard. The futures bright..
#4 aDirtyMartini (Link) on 2008-01-14 19:01 (Reply)
At least "I" can "Read."

We're currently consuming 7.6 Billion Gallons of Domestically produced ethanol

http://ethanolrfa.org/industry/locations/

and 500 Million gallons of imported (Brazil) ethanol.

To accomplish this we are processing 2.6 billion bu of corn, of which a bit over 0.8 billin bu are returned to us in the form of Distillers Grains which leaves a net usage of 1.8 billion bu (out of a crop of 13 Billion Bushels.)

We Exported about 2.5 billion bushels to be used as livestock feed.

I don't have time to "fisk" the whole article right now, but it is a debacle of flawed, and misleading hyperbole backed up by out-dated, and occasionally totally inaccurate research.

In short: It's "Rubbish."

p.s. One quick point. A typical ethanol plant built in the last couple of years has a "functional" EROEI, as regards fossil fuel, of about 3:1, NOT 1.3:1
#5 rufus on 2008-01-15 13:49 (Reply)

Add Comment
(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)

By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email
addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications.

Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u],
[url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here.

Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (*word*), underscore are made via _word_.
E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.
CAPTCHA

BBCode format allowed
 
 
A Chris Southern Consulting website.