Ozark
member
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 4012
Loc: out in the woods
|
|
I've decided that producing ethanol to replace gasoline as motor fuel in the U.S. is a scam. Some fat cats are making money off it, and promoting ethanol makes politicians look good - but it can't be a viable solution. Here's why:
(1) The energy gain with ethanol is very small. It produces about 1.1 units of energy when it burns for every 1 unit of energy it takes to make the stuff. That's too small a ratio, and making ethanol probably causes a net energy loss when you figure in some inefficiencies in production.
(2) Like I've said before, fermentation produces a HELLUVA bunch of CO2 gas as a by-product. I know from experience that just 5 gallons of fermenting beer will produce enough CO2 to drive the air out of a good-size room. If environmentalists are worried about "greenhouse gases", ethanol production will give 'em plenty to worry about.
(3) The clincher. We can't grow near enough corn or other food crops to make enough ethanol to make a difference. The proposed solution there is to break down cellulose into fermentables. That way, sawgrass, leaves, wood chips, and most any other plants could be turned into alcohol.
That's where the b.s. really shows in the ethanol argument. Those "fermentables" yeast eats are the same things we eat - starch and sugar, a.k.a. carbohydrates.
If cellulose could be efficiently broken down into fermentables, that would create an almost-infinite food supply - not for yeast, but for people. Everything from grass to logs could be used to make a nutritious tofu-like "stuff" that could be flavored up any way you want it. Nobody, worldwide, would ever go hungry again.
With all that in mind, it's pretty obvious to me that the idea of ethanol replacing a meaningful amount of gasoline fuel in the U.S. is just a politically-expedient scam.
Comments?
|
Liberty
member
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 5796
|
|
burn gasoline, it's cheaper
|
foots
the exterminator
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 5241
Loc: by my spiritual advisor, Wu
|
|
Quote:
Ozark said:
(3) The clincher. We can't grow near enough corn or other food crops to make enough ethanol to make a difference. The proposed solution there is to break down cellulose into fermentables. That way, sawgrass, leaves, wood chips, and most any other plants could be turned into alcohol.
That's where the b.s. really shows in the ethanol argument. Those "fermentables" yeast eats are the same things we eat - starch and sugar, a.k.a. carbohydrates.
If cellulose could be efficiently broken down into fermentables, that would create an almost-infinite food supply - not for yeast, but for people. Everything from grass to logs could be used to make a nutritious tofu-like "stuff" that could be flavored up any way you want it. Nobody, worldwide, would ever go hungry again.
Soylent Green...........it's not food, IT'S PEOPLE......IT'S PEOPLE. 
--------------------
I was born kicking, screaming, and covered in someone elses blood. I have no problem goin out the same way.
|
Paul San Antonio
member
Reged: 12/16/05
Posts: 190
Loc: Ladue, Mo.
|
|
I think Brazil uses nothing but Ethanol, they are completely independent of rag-head oil.
|
old lodge skins
member
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 381
Loc: Porche's Prairie, MO
|
|
The whole ethanol thing is just political BS.
Jack-asses can say, look we are helping the environment, the economy and the farmers, when in reality they are damaging all of them.
One thing that bothers me, in addition to what you have already stated is all of the ag folks who will soon lose their investments when people figure this out.
They are already seeing the price of the C2H5OH dropping while the cost of corn is up.
A few days ago I googled info on this subject and the energy ratio info (lies), that came from the industry folks themselves, were still pretty thin.
The worst case, like you have said, is a negative.
Some folks still seem to think that the bio-diesel idea might be economically viable.
I don't have a personal opinion on that one yet.
|
Hellbender
member
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 3416
Loc: Taney County
|
|
This is going to be debated heavily into the future.
The real problem with the "It produces about 1.1 units of energy when it burns for every 1 unit of energy it takes to make the stuff.", is where do you start and end the accounting? Do you include the portion of the defense budget dedicated to maintaining a supply? Do you include the subsidies? They count the fuel used to raise the crops as part of the formula, but if they use Bio diesel or Ethanol to produce it, where do you draw that line.
What about the security provided by a home grown energy supply?
If we had a secure domestic energy supply, and the most efficient military capable of shutting off oil distribution anywhere, who would be their Daddy then?
--------------------
A government survey has shown that 91% of illegal immigrants come to this country so that they can see their own doctor.
|
Ozark
member
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 4012
Loc: out in the woods
|
|
Quote:
maw said:
I think Brazil uses nothing but Ethanol, they are completely independent of rag-head oil.
Brazil is running a lot fewer cars than we are - and Brazil has Sugar Cane. That's a huge advantage for making ethanol.
Corn or any grain has to be "malted" and "mashed" first. The grain has to be sprouted to form starch, then the starch has to be treated to make sugar. Then - yeast ferments sugar into alcohol. If you can start out with sugar, like Brazil can, it saves many production steps.
So far as energy efficiency with corn ethanol - they're trying to build an ethanol plant here by Springfield. There's hardly any corn grown in this whole corner of the state, and the ground here is so poor it's not suitable for corn farming.
That means corn would have to be trucked to the plant from hundreds of miles away - and that would mean a net energy loss with any ethanol made there. That's doesn't solve any energy problems, it's just wasteful.
|
Hellbender
member
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 3416
Loc: Taney County
|
|
Quote:
That means corn would have to be trucked to the plant from hundreds of miles away - and that would mean a net energy loss with any ethanol made there. That's doesn't solve any energy problems, it's just wasteful.
You're making an assumption that there isn't enough corn locally, but neither you nor I know the exact amount grown in the area. One would think that they wouldn't build a plant where the raw materials were to expensive to obtain. There's also the issue of by products, animal feed, and there is an abundance of users in this area for that.
This might be pertinent.
http://www.westonaprice.org/motherlinda/cornsyrup.html
--------------------
A government survey has shown that 91% of illegal immigrants come to this country so that they can see their own doctor.
Edited by Hellbender (10/09/07 02:21 PM)
|
Hellbender
member
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 3416
Loc: Taney County
|
|
Here's an interesting accusation.
http://www.ethanol.org/news/index.php?newsid=23
I wonder how many Exxon stock holders might argue against Ethanol?
--------------------
A government survey has shown that 91% of illegal immigrants come to this country so that they can see their own doctor.
|
Liberty
member
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 5796
|
|
"One would think that they wouldn't build a plant where the raw materials were to expensive to obtain."--Hellbender
not when they are subsidized, they'll build wherever and whenever they can get their hands on the gubbamint dole
|
Liberty
member
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 5796
|
|
"I wonder how many Exxon stock holders might argue against Ethanol?"--Hellbender
I wonder why an American Coalition for Ethanol would expect someone to believe their B.S. anymore than the oil industry's B.S. seriously, how much is the PR campaigns factored into the price along with the subsidies?
|
Hellbender
member
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 3416
Loc: Taney County
|
|
Quote:
they'll build wherever and whenever they can get their hands on the gubbamint dole
So you think that in order to get subsidized, they had to build in Webster county? I doubt that.
Its probably that distribution access outweighed raw material transport.
--------------------
A government survey has shown that 91% of illegal immigrants come to this country so that they can see their own doctor.
|
Liberty
member
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 5796
|
|
yeah, you're probably right because operations that take government subsidy always operate under sound business practices
|
Ozark
member
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 4012
Loc: out in the woods
|
|
Quote:
Hellbender said:
I wonder how many Exxon stock holders might argue against Ethanol?
I'm not in love with Exxon, I'm just in love with what the stock has done for my retirement fund. I'm only going to hold the stock for another three years or so anyway, and I'm sure not worried about alternative fuels cutting into Exxon's profits during that time. It ain't gonna happen.
As much as anybody, I'd like to see the U.S. not have to depend on foreign countries for energy.
|
JJ McGuire
Reged: 06/01/06
Posts: 357
Loc: Chester Springs, PA
|
|
I'd rather buy sugar cane ethanol from Brazil than oil from OPEC.
--------------------
keeping it rural
Edited by JJ McGuire (10/10/07 09:54 AM)
|
hillbilly
member
Reged: 12/27/05
Posts: 490
Loc: Cedar County
|
|
Here's an interesting story about real world economy from the use of ethanol. Close to home too.
http://www.ky3.com/news/local/10345407.html
|
griffin
administrator
Reged: 12/13/05
Posts: 9625
Loc: the most dangerous city in Ame...
|
|
There was a brand new ethanol plant in Ord, Nebraska when we went to the popcorn festival this year. All of the stories in the papers up there revolved around the 40+ high paying jobs that the plant brought to the area.
There was not a single story regarding the economics/ecology of ethanol. In an area where new jobs are non-existent, the only economy they care about is the one that puts food on the table.
griffin
--------------------
"The Irish are one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." - Sigmund Freud
|
Hellbender
member
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 3416
Loc: Taney County
|
|
Quote:
the energy ratio info (lies), that came from the industry folks themselves, were still pretty thin.
Old Lodge, apparently your doctorate degree comes from the same place that most of us get ours, a search engine, so how is it you know these are lies?
Of course the petroleum industry, just because they have an enormous capital investment in gasoline refineries and in the raghead economies, would never be suspected of bending the truth through third parties. 
Me too JJ.
--------------------
A government survey has shown that 91% of illegal immigrants come to this country so that they can see their own doctor.
|
Liberty
member
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 5796
|
|
"Of course the petroleum industry, just because they have an enormous capital investment in gasoline refineries and in the raghead economies, would never be suspected of bending the truth through third parties."--Helliberal
there you go again, sounding like a Democrat, attacking the petroleum industry that has provided you energy for your entire life at a low cost. When do you start calling it big oil? 
|
Hellbender
member
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 3416
Loc: Taney County
|
|
Quote:
When do you start calling it big oil?
When do you realize I'm still kicking your ass sonny?
I don't know why I bother to explain everything to you, but I suppose someone has to keep you up to speed.
My first post was " This is going to be debated heavily into the future." and thats the truth. If you own stock in Exxon, like Ozark, you'll be apt to accept information that favors American refineries. If economy is your biggest concern, then again gasoline will probably prevail. If you really worry about our defense, and the big boost energy independence brings, you might opt for Ethanol. If you want a large part of the huge sums of money spent on vehicle fuel here everyday, to stay here, you might favor Ethanol. If you're stupid and lack any meaningful input, you'll probably fall back on Its a liberal conservative issue,but fortunately, except for a tiny number, most have more foresight.
If you were paying attention in the past, you would know that, ONE, I've said that American oil has the capital investment to make Ethanol available and they will be heavily involved in Ethanol, if and when it becomes more universally accepted..
Two, I favor Bio-diesel, even if Jap vehicles aren't prepared for it. Thats your loss and no skin off the asses of most on here.
--------------------
A government survey has shown that 91% of illegal immigrants come to this country so that they can see their own doctor.
Edited by Hellbender (10/10/07 12:52 PM)
|
Liberty
member
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 5796
|
|
ethanol is nothing more than a gubbamint boondoggle, plain and simple it is the very definition of a boondoggle, in addition, it is simply a wedge issue used to pick people off, and you have fallen for it hook, line and sinker.
|
Liberty
member
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 5796
|
|
it uses government subsidy and political support so that it can even be close to viable, which it is not.
I'm sorry, but government subsidy whether it be for a crack whore or a farmer is very much a liberal/conservative issue. A liberal will support government subsidy, a conservative won't. I don't support the government propping up failed ideas and telling everybody everything is roses, apparently you do.
Determining the value of the subsidy does not rest on the character of the person receiving it, HB, the value of a subsidy is always wrong based on the fact it is nothing more than a redistribution of wealth. That's called robbery in the real world. We're doing nothing but robbing a whole bunch of Peters to pay Paul because he happens to grow corn and can't make it since the grand pappys of his ilk long ago accepted the government dole instead of the free market.
|
Liberty
member
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 5796
|
|
kicking my ass...liberal please
|
old lodge skins
member
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 381
Loc: Porche's Prairie, MO
|
|
Hellbender, You're right, I am no scientist just a skeptical Missourian. I spent my life working in power plants, refineries, chemical plants, and auto plants etc. as a construction hand, foreman,for 25 years, and finally Supt. for the last 8 years. I got a pretty good idea of how things work.
I retired in the sticks and I have been watching this idea from several angles. There are a lot of folks in the area who thought that Ethanol was gonna be this big boost in Ag, and the other issues that have already been mentioned.
There were a few that were trying to tell the "truth" when the businessman/criminals were collecting the investment monies from the farmers around here.
When the anti-corn-ethanol folks say that energy to produce is below energy available from ethanol as a fuel, and the best that the pro-corn-ethanol folks can come up with is using one unit of energy to produce 1.34 energy unit worth of fuel, it doesn't take a forkin' doctorate to deduce that the truth is somewhere in between. Whaddaya think?
Also the best they have comeup with so far is still pretty poor 1 to 1.34. CTFO!
That is like the Arkies who were buying watermelons at home for a dollar, trucking them to K.C. and selling them for a dollar. They realized they weren't making any profit so they decided to buy a bigger truck. All they really needed was USDA to give them some money
In fairness ethanol might be a little more viable if there is a profitable use for the DDG. Tell us about that part, Ozark, I bet you know a lot more about that than I do.
Guess what, I don't believe that the climate change has much to do with human industry and I still feel like the steel shot deal was a scam too! (Just to give you an idea of the kind of person you are dealing with here}
Edited by old lodge skins (10/10/07 02:02 PM)
|
Liberty
member
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 5796
|
|
if the climate is changing, i.e. actually a trend that will last it has absolutely nothing to do with human industry at all.
I also have never, nor will ever buy into the idea that we are going to run out of fossil fuels. Our only energy problems are self-imposed by a failed political ideology that is attempting to take control and take away our freedoms. That's the rub. We are involved in oil extraction in the Middle East simply because we figure the islamofascist's oil is easier to get at than fighting environmental lawyers here at home, and we are probably right about that. And in case you think I believe we are in Iraq for oil, don't be a jackass with no reading comprehension.
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
