Re: [Biofuel] Fwd: Ethanol is a killer
I shall repeat this at every opportunity. The operative phrase here is, if every vehicle in the United States ran on fuel made primarily from ethanol instead of pure gasoline. Emissions effects are a function of vehicle use patterns. Small-scale ethanol is viable at radically reduced vehicle use levels; petrol isn't. As for the alternatives, battery-electric, plug-in-hybrid and hydrogen-fuel cell vehicles, the first might make sense in the case of a pedestrian-controlled hand-cart for small-scale urban deliveries. It's a milk float, good old home-brew technology. The best electric vehicles are still those that are mains-supplied, like trams (i.e. trolleys/streetcars). The other alternatives might well have economies-of-scale and organizational viability implications that would require making the problem a lot worse in order to make it a little bit better. That is, they might require even greater concentrations of economic-technological power, protected by even more draconian technological disempowerment of you and me, than we've already got. -Dawie - Original Message From: Kirk McLoren [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Wednesday, 18 April, 2007 5:46:31 PM Subject: [Biofuel] Fwd: Ethanol is a killer Ethanol is a killer Study: Ethanol Vehicles Pose A Significant Risk To Human Health Health http://www.playfuls.com/news_006682_Study_Ethanol_Vehicles_Pose_A_Significant_Risk_To_Human_Health.html Avatar02:14 PM, April 18th 2007 by Alex Radulescu Ethanol is widely touted as an eco-friendly, clean-burning fuel. But if every vehicle in the United States ran on fuel made primarily from ethanol instead of pure gasoline, the number of respiratory-related deaths and hospitalizations would likely increase, according to a new study by Stanford University atmospheric scientist Mark Z. Jacobson. His findings are published in the April 18 online edition of the journal Environmental Science Technology (EST). ''Ethanol is being promoted as a clean and renewable fuel that will reduce global warming and air pollution,'' said Jacobson, associate professor of civil and environmental engineering. ''But our results show that a high blend of ethanol poses an equal or greater risk to public health than gasoline, which already causes significant health damage.'' Gasoline vs. ethanol For the study, Jacobson used a sophisticated computer model to simulate air quality in the year 2020, when ethanol-fueled vehicles are expected to be widely available in the United States. ''The chemicals that come out of a tailpipe are affected by a variety of factors, including chemical reactions, temperatures, sunlight, clouds, wind and precipitation,'' he explained. ''In addition, overall health effects depend on exposure to these airborne chemicals, which varies from region to region. Ours is the first ethanol study that takes into account population distribution and the complex environmental interactions.'' In the experiment, Jacobson ran a series of computer tests simulating atmospheric conditions throughout the United States in 2020, with a special focus on Los Angeles. ''Since Los Angeles has historically been the most polluted airshed in the U.S., the testbed for nearly all U.S. air pollution regulation and home to about 6 percent of the U.S. population, it is also ideal for a more detailed study,'' he wrote. Jacobson programmed the computer to run air quality simulations comparing two future scenarios: A vehicle fleet (that is, all cars, trucks, motorcycles, etc., in the United States) fueled by gasoline, versus A fleet powered by E85, a popular blend of 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent gasoline. The results of the computer simulations were striking. ''We found that E85 vehicles reduce atmospheric levels of two carcinogens, benzene and butadiene, but increase two others-formaldehyde and acetaldehyde,'' Jacobson said. ''As a result, cancer rates for E85 are likely to be similar to those for gasoline. However, in some parts of the country, E85 significantly increased ozone, a prime ingredient of smog.'' Inhaling ozone-even at low levels-can decrease lung capacity, inflame lung tissue, worsen asthma and impair the body's immune system, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. The World Health Organization estimates that 800,000 people die each year from ozone and other chemicals in smog. ''In our study, E85 increased ozone-related mortalities in the United States by about 200 deaths per year compared to gasoline, with about 120 of those deaths occurring in Los Angeles,'' Jacobson said. ''These mortality rates represent an increase of about 4 percent in the U.S. and 9 percent in Los Angeles above the projected ozone-related death rates for gasoline-fueled vehicles in 2020.'' The study showed that ozone increases in Los Angeles and the northeastern United States will be partially offset by decreases in the southeast. ''However, we found that nationwide, E85 is likely to
Re: [Biofuel] Fwd: Ethanol is a killer
Hey Dawie; Ever checked out the scene about aldehyde formation from biodiesel? Combustion is just not good. But some fuels are better than others. Joe Dawie Coetzee wrote: I shall repeat this at every opportunity. The operative phrase here is, if every vehicle in the United States ran on fuel made primarily from ethanol instead of pure gasoline. Emissions effects are a function of vehicle use patterns. Small-scale ethanol is viable at radically reduced vehicle use levels; petrol isn't. As for the alternatives, battery-electric, plug-in-hybrid and hydrogen-fuel cell vehicles, the first might make sense in the case of a pedestrian-controlled hand-cart for small-scale urban deliveries. It's a milk float, good old home-brew technology. The best electric vehicles are still those that are mains-supplied, like trams (i.e. trolleys/streetcars). The other alternatives might well have economies-of-scale and organizational viability implications that would require making the problem a lot worse in order to make it a little bit better. That is, they might require even greater concentrations of economic-technological power, protected by even more draconian technological disempowerment of you and me, than we've already got. -Dawie - Original Message From: Kirk McLoren [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Wednesday, 18 April, 2007 5:46:31 PM Subject: [Biofuel] Fwd: Ethanol is a killer Ethanol is a killer Study: Ethanol Vehicles Pose A Significant Risk To Human Health Health http://www.playfuls.com/news_006682_Study_Ethanol_Vehicles_Pose_A_Significant_Risk_To_Human_Health.html Avatar02:14 PM, April 18th 2007 by Alex Radulescu Ethanol is widely touted as an eco-friendly, clean-burning fuel. But if every vehicle in the United States ran on fuel made primarily from ethanol instead of pure gasoline, the number of respiratory-related deaths and hospitalizations would likely increase, according to a new study by Stanford University atmospheric scientist Mark Z. Jacobson. His findings are published in the April 18 online edition of the journal Environmental Science Technology (EST). ''Ethanol is being promoted as a clean and renewable fuel that will reduce global warming and air pollution,'' said Jacobson, associate professor of civil and environmental engineering. ''But our results show that a high blend of ethanol poses an equal or greater risk to public health than gasoline, which already causes significant health damage.'' Gasoline vs. ethanol For the study, Jacobson used a sophisticated computer model to simulate air quality in the year 2020, when ethanol-fueled vehicles are expected to be widely available in the United States. ''The chemicals that come out of a tailpipe are affected by a variety of factors, including chemical reactions, temperatures, sunlight, clouds, wind and precipitation,'' he explained. ''In addition, overall health effects depend on exposure to these airborne chemicals, which varies from region to region. Ours is the first ethanol study that takes into account population distribution and the complex environmental interactions.'' In the experiment, Jacobson ran a series of computer tests simulating atmospheric conditions throughout the United States in 2020, with a special focus on Los Angeles. ''Since Los Angeles has historically been the most polluted airshed in the U.S., the testbed for nearly all U.S. air pollution regulation and home to about 6 percent of the U.S. population, it is also ideal for a more detailed study,'' he wrote. Jacobson programmed the computer to run air quality simulations comparing two future scenarios: A vehicle fleet (that is, all cars, trucks, motorcycles, etc., in the United States) fueled by gasoline, versus A fleet powered by E85, a popular blend of 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent gasoline. The results of the computer simulations were striking. ''We found that E85 vehicles reduce atmospheric levels of two carcinogens, benzene and butadiene, but increase two others-formaldehyde and acetaldehyde,'' Jacobson said. ''As a result, cancer rates for E85 are likely to be similar to those for gasoline. However, in some parts of the country, E85 significantly increased ozone, a prime ingredient of smog.'' Inhaling ozone-even at low levels-can decrease lung capacity, inflame lung tissue, worsen asthma and impair the body's immune system, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. The World Health Organization estimates that 800,000 people die each year from ozone and other chemicals in smog. ''In our study, E85 increased ozone-related mortalities in the United States by about 200 deaths per year compared to gasoline, with about 120 of those
Re: [Biofuel] Fwd: Ethanol is a killer
All I'm saying is, it depends on the total volume of all vehicle emissions out there. If that were low enough, any sort of fuel would have to be a lot more awful than anything currently or potentially available before it's a real problem. In other words, what's a little aldehyde? provided it's not a lot of aldehyde. -D - Original Message From: Joe Street [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Thursday, 19 April, 2007 3:47:44 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Fwd: Ethanol is a killer Hey Dawie; Ever checked out the scene about aldehyde formation from biodiesel? Combustion is just not good. But some fuels are better than others. Joe Dawie Coetzee wrote: I shall repeat this at every opportunity. The operative phrase here is, if every vehicle in the United States ran on fuel made primarily from ethanol instead of pure gasoline. Emissions effects are a function of vehicle use patterns. Small-scale ethanol is viable at radically reduced vehicle use levels; petrol isn't. As for the alternatives, battery-electric, plug-in-hybrid and hydrogen-fuel cell vehicles, the first might make sense in the case of a pedestrian-controlled hand-cart for small-scale urban deliveries. It's a milk float, good old home-brew technology. The best electric vehicles are still those that are mains-supplied, like trams (i.e. trolleys/streetcars). The other alternatives might well have economies-of-scale and organizational viability implications that would require making the problem a lot worse in order to make it a little bit better. That is, they might require even greater concentrations of economic-technological power, protected by even more draconian technological disempowerment of you and me, than we've already got. -Dawie - Original Message From: Kirk McLoren [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Wednesday, 18 April, 2007 5:46:31 PM Subject: [Biofuel] Fwd: Ethanol is a killer Ethanol is a killer Study: Ethanol Vehicles Pose A Significant Risk To Human Health Health http://www.playfuls.com/news_006682_Study_Ethanol_Vehicles_Pose_A_Significant_Risk_To_Human_Health.html Avatar02:14 PM, April 18th 2007 by Alex Radulescu Ethanol is widely touted as an eco-friendly, clean-burning fuel. But if every vehicle in the United States ran on fuel made primarily from ethanol instead of pure gasoline, the number of respiratory-related deaths and hospitalizations would likely increase, according to a new study by Stanford University atmospheric scientist Mark Z. Jacobson. His findings are published in the April 18 online edition of the journal Environmental Science Technology (EST). ''Ethanol is being promoted as a clean and renewable fuel that will reduce global warming and air pollution,'' said Jacobson, associate professor of civil and environmental engineering. ''But our results show that a high blend of ethanol poses an equal or greater risk to public health than gasoline, which already causes significant health damage.'' Gasoline vs. ethanol For the study, Jacobson used a sophisticated computer model to simulate air quality in the year 2020, when ethanol-fueled vehicles are expected to be widely available in the United States. ''The chemicals that come out of a tailpipe are affected by a variety of factors, including chemical reactions, temperatures, sunlight, clouds, wind and precipitation,'' he explained. ''In addition, overall health effects depend on exposure to these airborne chemicals, which varies from region to region. Ours is the first ethanol study that takes into account population distribution and the complex environmental interactions.'' In the experiment, Jacobson ran a series of computer tests simulating atmospheric conditions throughout the United States in 2020, with a special focus on Los Angeles. ''Since Los Angeles has historically been the most polluted airshed in the U.S., the testbed for nearly all U.S. air pollution regulation and home to about 6 percent of the U.S. population, it is also ideal for a more detailed study,'' he wrote. Jacobson programmed the computer to run air quality simulations comparing two future scenarios: A vehicle fleet (that is, all cars, trucks, motorcycles, etc., in the United States) fueled by gasoline, versus A fleet powered by E85, a popular blend of 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent gasoline. The results of the computer simulations were striking. ''We found that E85 vehicles reduce atmospheric levels of two carcinogens, benzene and butadiene, but increase two others-formaldehyde and acetaldehyde,'' Jacobson said. ''As a result, cancer rates for E85 are likely to be similar to those for gasoline. However, in some parts of the country, E85 significantly increased ozone, a prime ingredient of smog.'' Inhaling ozone-even at low levels-can decrease lung capacity, inflame lung tissue, worsen asthma and impair the body's immune system, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. The World
