Biodiesel comes in and trumps them all!
On 6/9/06, Cameron Childress <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So: > > 1) Reports comparing Ethanol production efficiency to Petrol are > Apples vs Oranges. > 2) Even those reports are conflicting, depending on who you listen to. > 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. > > Winner - Ethanol! > > -Cameron > > On 6/9/06, Gruss Gott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > THE NUMBERS GUY > > By CARL BIALIK > > Digging Into the Ethanol Debate > > June 9, 2006 > > > > President Bush announced in his State of the Union address in January > > that he backed funding for research into producing ethanol from corn > > and other farm products, with the goal of making a viable fuel > > alternative to gasoline for automobiles. Since then, Congress has > > wrangled over how to implement the idea. > > > > Critics, meanwhile, have blasted the viability of ethanol. A central > > argument is that corn-based ethanol, the most-common form today, is > > literally a waste of energy. Detractors say that it takes more fuel to > > make ethanol -- growing the corn, bringing it to a processing plant > > and converting it to fuel -- than would be saved by using it. > > > > That criticism has received attention in articles in the Washington > > Post, the Louisville Courier-Journal and Cox News Service (all of > > which also included the pro-ethanol side). In April, Larry Kudlow said > > on his CNBC show, "So many experts believe it costs more energy to > > turn corn into ethanol-related gasoline than [is] actually produced." > > > > Two prominent researchers are chiefly responsible for the > > energy-efficiency claim: Cornell University's David Pimentel and Tad > > Patzek of the University of California, Berkeley. In a co-written > > paper published last year in Natural Resources Research, Profs. > > Pimentel and Patzek wrote, "Ethanol production using corn grain > > required 29% more fossil energy than the ethanol fuel produced." By > > comparison, production of gasoline or diesel uses about 20% more > > fossil energy than the fuels produce. (For automobiles, ethanol is > > generally blended with gasoline in either 90-10 or 85-15 proportions, > > but the studies focused on the energy content of the ethanol itself.) > > > > But the analysis stacks the deck against ethanol in a number of ways. > > Perhaps most important: The researchers attributed a wide array of > > energy costs to ethanol production, including the energy required to > > produce tractors used in cornfields and even all forms of energy > > consumed by workers for things such as food, transportation and police > > protection. Equivalent factors generally aren't included in comparable > > analyses of rival fuels like gasoline. Also, researchers didn't take > > into consideration the value of ethanol by-products, which can be used > > in cattle feed. > > > > What's more, the skeptical analysis was based on all technology in use > > at the time, including old plants. Ethanol has become a hot business > > and a target of venture capitalists. There is reason to believe that > > ethanol production is only going to become more efficient, possibly at > > a faster rate than the more-mature petroleum industry. The newest > > plants incorporate technology to streamline the process and save > > energy and money. Researchers are also looking at methods to get > > ethanol from sugar cane and switchgrass, which appear to be more > > energy-efficient than those for corn. "There are a lot of new > > technologies," said Hosein Shapouri, an agricultural economist for the > > U.S. Department of Agriculture. "It's going to continue to improve the > > yield, and also lower the energy." > > > > The Bush administration says ethanol is more energy efficient than the > > critics claim. Department of Energy spokesman Craig Stevens told me in > > an email, "Based on the vast majority of research and analysis, the > > department believes that the energy delivered by ethanol is greater > > than the fossil energy put into its production." > > > > Other researchers have disagreed with Profs. Pimentel and Patzek. > > Michael Wang, a vehicle fuel-system analyst at Argonne National > > Laboratories in Lemont, Ill., calculates numbers that are frequently > > cited for the efficiency of producing petroleum and diesel fuel. He > > said those numbers don't include the energy needed for labor and to > > produce the equipment -- in large part because there aren't reliable, > > up-to-date estimates for that energy -- and therefore, neither should > > the ethanol numbers. > > > > By his reckoning, it takes 0.74 BTU of fossil fuel to create 1 BTU of > > ethanol fuel, compared with a ratio of 1.23 BTUs to 1 BTU for gasoline > > -- that's 66% more than ethanol. (Dr. Wang's calculations are > > contained in a rather dense set of appendices to this report; the > > conclusions are presented in a more user-friendly format in this > > brochure.) > > > > Prof. Pimentel defended his work in an interview. "I don't see how you > > could or should eliminate the labor of the farmer," he said. "He eats, > > sleeps, uses the highways, depends on the police force, fireman, and > > so forth." > > > > Prof. Pimentel added that he's studied the issue for over 20 years, > > and has no bias against ethanol -- quite the contrary: "I'd really > > like to support ethanol being a viable solution for our liquid-fuel > > needs, because I am an agriculturalist and a biologist. But I'm a > > scientist first." > > > > His co-author on the study, Prof. Patzek, didn't respond to my > > requests for an interview. > > > > There remain major challenges for ethanol. Among them: The high price > > of natural gas may force some plants to switch to coal, harming their > > environmental profile; the fuel has yet to prove its market viability > > for cars without subsidies; and the costs to revamp fuel stations for > > ethanol blends is steep. > > > > When prompted by their students to investigate biofuels, Berkeley > > energy and resources professors Dan Kammen and Alex Farrell discovered > > the sharp disagreements among researchers. "It became pretty clear to > > us, as we were getting up to speed on ethanol, that there are a large > > number of divergent studies in literature, and it's not clear why they > > are divergent," Prof. Farrell told me. They attempted to reconcile > > disputing studies by comparing them side by side, tracing the numbers > > back to their original sources and converting everything to standard > > units. Their conclusion, published in Science in January, was largely > > in line with Dr. Wang's. (So was an analysis of published studies that > > appeared in March in Environmental Science & Technology, and funded in > > part by the environmental organization Natural Resources Defense > > Council.) > > > > It can be disorienting to discover that reputable researchers can so > > seriously disagree on a single number. In an article last month, the > > Toledo Blade counted studies, as if that might help settle things. The > > newspaper noted Prof. Pimentel's work, and added, "Five other > > researchers have done studies and agree. Thirteen other studies, > > including one paid for by the Department of Energy, show the > > opposite." > > > > A drawback of all the commonly cited numbers is that they generally > > rely on data from USDA surveys of farmers and ethanol producers. Such > > surveys are a few years old. That's not an unusual lag time for > > federal government surveys, but they don't capture the impact of new > > plants in the fast-evolving ethanol industry. > > > > Broin Cos., based in Sioux Falls, S.D., has pioneered a method to > > convert corn to ethanol at 90 degrees, rather than the previous 230 to > > 250 degrees, improving energy efficiency by 10% to 12%, according to > > co-founder and Chief Executive Jeff Broin. And E3 Biofuels LLC is > > finding ways to get more out of all parts of the corn, by building > > plants near dairy farms and feeding cows the byproducts of ethanol > > processing, then using energy from the animal waste to help power the > > plants. "Wastes are converted to valuable products, such as biogas and > > biofertilizers, which replace fossil fuels and their derivatives," > > David Hallberg, president and chief executive of Omaha-based E3, wrote > > me in an email. > > > > Vinod Khosla, a partner in the Menlo Park, Calif., venture-capital > > firm Khosla Ventures, has invested in several ethanol technologies and > > is an advocate for their promise. He said arguments against ethanol > > focus unjustly on older plants. "It's like saying, a power plant built > > in the '50s is very polluting, so all power plants are very > > polluting," Mr. Khosla told me. > > > > http://online.wsj.com/article/SB114970102238673892.html > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:208692 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
