Brazil successfully figured out that fermenting ethanol directly from sugar cane juice is the most energy efficient way to get it. Of course that means cutting down lots of rain forest to get the land to grow the sugar cane, but that is OK because it was already being cut down to grow soy beans for China.
One reason we don't use sugar cane to make ethanol is because the US has an import tariff to keep the domestic price of sugar high to support those sugar cane farmers in Florida and sugar beet farmers in Michigan. Of course that contributes to depressing the world price of sugar which makes it cheaper for Brazil to use the sugar internally to make ethanol. It also means that US corn is diverted to making corn syrup sweetener to flavor our soft drinks. ________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tony Cooper Sent: Friday, 08 August, 2008 09:36 To: Martin Eby Cc: [email protected]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: NMC, NPC; E85 article I am jumping in and then out. Theoretically you may be correct, but from a practical perspective I disagree with your reasoning. While the methane is being created in either situation, it is only being captured and utilized in the production process of the ethanol. Removing fossil fuels from the production equation must be considered a plus. Utilizing resources that could be producing food is a big negative. I don't think ROI in ethanol as it is now enabled in the USA is sustainable. Brazil successfully figured out ethanol production long ago. Why are we not following their lead (if ethanol is truly the direction we wish to take)? Crawling back into the dark recesses of my hole now! Tony Martin Eby wrote: Jim, Don't get me wrong. I tend to be a very green person. (I save my old QuikTrip cups and take them into the store to use again when I get a soda.) I don't own any gas guzzling cars. I keep the A/C at 82 and the heat at 65 day and 55 night. At the same time, I have a MS in chemical engineering and believe I am more qualified than some (and much less qualified than others!) to separate fact from fancy regarding ethanol's energy balance. Moreoever, I was around for the first time ethanol made promises it couldn't keep back during the 70s oil shock. It was, in fact, a major research project of one of my professors. Regarding the link you provided.... Kudos to them for co-locating an ethanol plant with a stockyard. (But wow the smell would be even worse!). Grabbing the methane from the stockyards is a very green and possibly even becoming cost effective, but I don't think it is "good science" to subtract that energy from the corn ethanol energy calculation. While there are certain overall transportation/processing efficiencies, the fact remains that the methane production is completely independent of the ethanol production. Put another way, a) the manure would produce methane even if there were no ethanol co-products in the cattle feed and b) the methane -- however produced -- could be utilized for any heating/energy purpose. Hence it is no more appropriate to delete that energy from the balance than it is to delete other energies utilized in ethanol production such as electricity LPG, etc. M. These "scientists" are obviously not familiar with: www.e3biofuels.com Jim in Tucson E85 EVO ________________________________ Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read reviews on AOL Autos <http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut0005000 0000017> . ________________________________ _______________________________________________ Miatapower mailing list [email protected] http://list.miatapower.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/miatapower
_______________________________________________ Miatapower mailing list [email protected] http://list.miatapower.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/miatapower
