James, I see that you didn't read the article... On 6/12/06, James Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 1) Reports comparing Ethanol production efficiency to Petrol > > are Apples vs Oranges. > > Depends, if you are comparing the use of ethanol in an internal combustion > engine with the use of petrol in an internal combustion engine and the > relative procedures used to extract, refine and produce these two fules then > the comparison can be drawn very fairly.
They can be, but the point of the article is that the costs associated with "procedures used to extract, refine and produce" are counted in the Ethanol studies, but not in the Petrol ones. > > 2) Even those reports are conflicting, depending on who you listen to. > > This is true for almost any scientific discussion. Yes. Though eventually one viewpoint typically wins out over the other. > > 3) No matter what the reports say, the process of producing > > Ethanol is destined to become more efficient one way or > > another, while Petrol production is mature and unlikely to > > become more efficient. > > While this may be true, there is a certain amount of energy in the fuel. If > you require more energy to grow, harvest, transport and convert the corn > than the corn actually contains then no matter how efficient you make your > processes you are still loosing energy. If you'd read the article you would have seen that both Ethanol and Petrol production are currently net loss forms of energy. They BOTH require more energy to refine than they actually output when used. The argument is mainly which loses more... -Cameron ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:208785 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
