Re: [biofuel] Keith, If ya don't mind,
>I'd like to refute Dr. Pimental again. This time from my friends at >www.rooster.com No, I don't mind, why would I? - and even if I did, so what? :-) Here's the url: http://ww2.rooster.com:80/rooster_public/news/detail.jsp?id=4975&cid=3 &Title=Industry+Argues+That+Ethanol+Delivers Industry Argues That Ethanol Delivers Editors, Rooster News Network -- Tuesday, September 4, 2001 Thanks, I'll add it to our site with the others, here somewhere: http://journeytoforever.org/ethanol_energy.html Is ethanol energy-efficient? I also found this biodiesel story below at the Rooster site. Best Keith Addison Journey to Forever Handmade Projects Tokyo http://journeytoforever.org/ Distribution Grows for Biodiesel Editors, Rooster News Network -- Thursday, August 30, 2001 http://ww2.rooster.com:80/rooster_public/news/detail.jsp?NewsBy=Catego ry&cid=3&id=4951&Title=Distribution+Grows+for+Biodiesel An increasing number of midwestern diesel fuel distributors with a broad farmer customer base now give their customers the option of running their diesel tractors and equipment on soy- or biodiesel. The trend is significant because although biodiesel is available nationwide, it is mostly used by centrally fueled fleets, leaving geographically dispersed farmers less chance of getting blends of 2% or higher without their distributors taking the lead. Houseman Oil, a petroleum fuel distributor based in Estherville, IA, is selling B2, a blend of 2% biodiesel and 98% diesel, direct to farmers in the northwestern part of the state who ask for it. The company charges a few cents more per gallon for B2 than for No. 2 diesel. Growing demand "I know there's going to be a lot of demand for it because there's a lot more support for renewable fuels now," says owner Rick Houseman. "Farmers want to use the products they produce. A lot of farmers are more aware of biodiesel now than they were a few years ago." Houseman is just one of several distributors actively selling blends of 2% or higher to farmer customers. Ed Logan of Logan Agri-Service, Inc., now sells B10 to his customers in west-central Illinois for 5 cents more per gallon than diesel. And in Columbus, NE, Country Energy LLC is planning to offer B2, B5, B20 and B100 in conjunction with the Husker Cooperative there. "Maybe in a year or two, biodiesel will be available at every station that sells diesel in Nebraska," says Nebraska Soybean Board Chairman Norm Husa. "The potential for soy biodiesel is tremendous. If every diesel engine in the U.S. would burn a one percent blend of soy biodiesel, we would use up over 400 million bushels of soybeans each year." Equal or better performance Biodiesel can be used in any diesel engine, usually with no modifications to the engine necessary. It performs comparably to diesel, with similar cetane and Btu content. Proponents claim it is the safest of all fuels to use, handle and store. More than 100 major fleets use biodiesel, and the fuel has been proven successful in more than 40 million road miles and countless off-road and marine applications. Blends of B2 and higher have been shown to be highly effective in improving lubricity, the characteristic in diesel fuel necessary to keep diesel fuel injection systems properly lubricated. According to Stanadyne Automotive Corp, the largest fuel injection equipment manufacturer in the United States, B2 is a superior solution to today's poor lubricity fuel, and will become increasingly important as ultra-low sulfur diesel regulations are implemented. Moreover, biodiesel has been commercially proven as a lubricity enhancer in multifunctional additive packages currently being marketed as premium diesel fuels. These fuels typically contain less than one half of one percent biodiesel. Biodiesel is registered with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a fuel and fuel additive. It is the only alternative fuel to have passed the rigorous Health Effects testing requirements of the Clean Air Act. Results show biodiesel reduces carcinogenic air toxics by 75 to 90% compared to diesel. The results, submitted to the EPA in 2000, also show biodiesel is non-toxic, biodegradable and free of sulfur. "I encourage all farmers throughout the country to contact their fuel distributors and ask for biodiesel in at least a two percent blend," says Jack Hartman, president of the National Biodiesel Board and an Iowa soybean farmer. The National Biodiesel Board is funded in part by the United Soybean Board and state soybean board checkoff programs. Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[biofuel] Keith, If ya don't mind,
I'd like to refute Dr. Pimental again. This time from my friends at www.rooster.com Industry Argues That Ethanol Delivers Editors, Rooster News Network -- Tuesday, September 4, 2001 Last month, David Pimentel of Cornell University published a rather critical analysis of the viability (or lack there of) of ethanol production in the United States (see yesterday's story here on Rooster.com). He concludes that ethanol production is not a renewable energy source, does not enhance energy security, is not an economical fuel, and does not insure clean air. Those in the ethanol industry -- scientists, grain processors and several commodity groups -- have been quick to refute his studies with some research of their own. The National Corn Growers Association (NCGA) points to work done by Michael Graboski, professor of engineering at Colorado School of Mines. Following is Graboski's response to each of these claims made by Pimentel. A renewable resource Contrary to Pimentel's calculations, corn ethanol yields a very net positive energy balance, and has a positive impact on U.S. energy supplies. Researchers at Argonne National Laboratories found, based on 1997 agricultural data, that the energy in corn ethanol was 1.37 times the energy in fossil inputs (Btu in ethanol/Btu in inputs). Likewise USDA researchers found a net energy ratio of 1.24 based upon agricultural data collected in 1991 to 1995. In producing ethanol from corn, wastes and energy crops, low-grade fuels like coal and natural gas are effectively transformed into high- quality liquid transportation fuels. About 84% of the energy consumed in producing corn-based ethanol comes from coal and natural gas, while only 16% is petroleum based. Thus, corn ethanol represents a very efficient way of increasing U.S. gasoline and diesel supply. Because of increased supply, ethanol acts to depress the price of gasoline and fuel oil. Pimentel's analysis is based upon older data, and contains a number of inaccuracies. It does not properly account for the efficiency of much of the industrial processing related to ethanol. Pimentel's energy balance is based upon the performance of 1979 ethanol conversion facilities. According to USDA, fertilizer accounts for about 45% of the energy required to grow and harvest corn. Pimentel ignores publicly available information supplied by the U.S. fertilizer industry trade association regarding the energy efficiency of the U.S. fertilizer industry and instead assumes that it performs like a third-world industry in accordance with a UN FAO world average analysis. He thus assumes a pound of U.S. fertilizer nitrogen requires 33,500 Btu to produce today, while the U.S. industry actually used only 22,600 Btu in 1987, according to The Fertilizer Institute. Pimentel significantly overstates the energy requirement for corn production. He uses the national average yield of corn from both natural rainfall and irrigated areas, but assumes farming energy as if all corn in the U.S. is irrigated. In fact, only 15% of the crop is irrigated. Furthermore, in irrigated areas, the yield of corn may be 75% higher than areas dependent on natural rainfall. Pimentel argues that corn should be used for food, not energy. In fact, ethanol plants produce food and energy. In ethanol production, only starch is removed from the corn. The corn is converted to 1/3 each by mass of ethanol, food and carbon dioxide. All of the protein, fiber, corn oil and trace nutrients in the corn are recovered as high- quality products for human and animal consumption. Pimentel states that seven times more cropland are required to produce fuels for Americans than to feed Americans. The acreage for corn production has been essentially constant since 1980. Yet, because of increased yield due to better farming practices and technology, the corn crop has grown from 6.6 bil. bu. in 1980 to over 10 bil. bu. today. The increase in corn production greatly exceeds the U.S. population increase. Thus today, Americans are receiving both food and fuel from land formerly dedicated only to food. According to Pimentel, U.S. farming practices are not sustainable. Soil erosion and depletion of ground water result in an irreversible degradation of the environmental system in which corn is being produced. Yet, because of increased yield due to better farming practices and technology, the corn crop has grown from 6.6 bil. bu. in 1980 to over 10 bil. bu. today with no change in planted acreage. Energy secutity Pimentel speculates that essentially all of the U.S. would have to be planted in corn to satisfy U.S. liquid fuel demand sometime in the future. This is a totally unrealistic view of the role of corn-based agriculture in U.S. energy policy. In the long term, USDA analysts estimate that corn ethanol may be practically limited to about 6 bil. gal./year, or 4% of current liquid fuel use, consuming about 10% of the corn crop. Acc
