I was pleased to see this in the NY Times, but
Yes, it's good to see an article critical of corn
ethanol in one of the flagship papers of the
mainstream media.
But it doesn't mention a couple crucial issues:
1. Energy Return On Energy Invested (EROEI, aka EROI,
aka Net Energy, as addressed by
Honorable Forum:
Please see, patched in below, a 2007 March 31 post by Matthew Warren
that popped up when I sorted by subject (it was the only one that
did; perhaps that is a fortunate artifact of the fact that so few
elect to follow any sort of logical and consistent subject-line
discipline
Any basic animal feeds book from an undergraduate feeds and feeding
class will tell you the average energy value, carbohydrates, protein etc,
in these various food types. Corn grain is around 90% energy, soybean
something like 60%. Most of the grass hays are much lower.
On Sat, September 22,
I don't believe that the federal govt's push to use these products has
anything to do with economics, rather to do with homeland security issues.
Lets face it, the middle east is a hotbed for terrorism and by switching
to these fuels we make their product less profitable or desireable.
Still, we
--- Malcolm McCallum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I don't believe that the federal govt's push to use
these products has
anything to do with economics, rather to do with
homeland security issues.
More likely it's because many of the most influential
power brokers know that oil production will go
