Jed wrote:
> Beene refers to "ag waste." As I have pointed out
> numerous times,
> most of the energy in agricultural plants is in the seeds,
> and we eat
> them. All plants concentrate energy in the seeds, and
> plants bred for
> food concentrate even more (making them vulnerable to
> natural enemies
> and competing plants -- weeds). We do not leave much energy
> behind in
> ag waste.
And as I have pointed out before, this simply can't be true, not even close, at
least not for corn, which is what we are discussing here. It is certainly true
there is a higher energy concentration in the seeds, but as far as the total
energy available from oxidation of the whole plant, this couldn't possibly be
right.
I don't know if you've ever driven a road through a field in Iowa, when the
"corn is as high as an elephant's eye", but it's easy to see that the dry
weight of the stalks, leaves, cobs, roots, etc. must be at least two orders of
magnitude greater than that of the kernels. This is virtually all cellulosic
and has an obviously lower energy concentration than the kernels, but the sheer
mass of this "ag waste" surely would yield far more energy than the parts used
for food.
What's worse is that this potentially valuable resource is simply burned where
it lies after the harvest. In any case, I'm for the end of corn-ethanol.
M.
