Still, thousands of people handle it on a daily
basis, with no extra special effort and no problems. About the
only problems I hear about is when methanol is mistaken for
ethanol. IIRC I read of 17 fatalities and 55 non-fatal cases
in 2002, involving methanol, which is better than ethanol's record of 693
deaths, directly from ethanol poisoning ( not to mention all the indirect
deaths and injury's from drunk driving ) in 2003.
OSHA Exposure limits:
Methanol 200 ppm
Gasoline 300 ppm
Benzene ( as a component of gasoline ) 1
ppm
Toluene ( as above ) 200 ppm
Xylene ( as above ) 100
ppm
As can be seen, methanol is about as safe as
gasoline, and in some cases, much safer than some of the components that
make up gasoline.
Greg H.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005
8:07
Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Cornell on
ethanol, biodiesel,& hydrogen energy efficiencies
Hi All,
I don't think ethanol will be a dinosaur in 20 years but would appreciate
why you think so if it is other than yields per hectare. Methanol has the
capacity to produce some nasty tailpipe emmission (as does ethanol but less
so) and is far more toxic to humans and animals than ethanol. Another
component of sustainability is safety. I would not wish to see methanol
filling stations. Most people have no concept how nasty it is. Yes, it can be
handled safely by those who understand the dangers but most folks don't have
that knowledge.
Tom Irwin
From: Appal Energy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To:
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Thu, 04 Aug 2005 10:35:58
-0300 Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Cornell on ethanol, biodiesel, &
hydrogen energy efficiencies
Still, all rather sad how
ethanol has become the predominate alternative fuel of choice for
gasoline applications when methanol yields far higher outputs per acre
with far fewer inputs.
At 75% of the energy content as ethanol, the
energy yield per acre (100 gallons per ton of dry biomass) outstrips
corn derived ethanol, even on a good day. The real crux of the matter
would be to choose crops of high seasonal yield, inclusive of those
suitable for pre- and post plantings of other crops in the same annular
cycle.
My book makes ethanol a dinosaur within 20 years.
Todd
Swearingen
Keith Addison wrote:
> Hello Bob,
Andrew > > Normally I'd agree with you Bob, but not in
Pimentel's case, that time > was long ago, and now Andrew's response
is not inappropriate. Pimentel > merits little better than scorn and
derision > >> Andrew, >> >> I know you said
it in jest, but the unfortunate effect of your >> sarcasm
regarding David Pimentel, one of the nations' outstanding >>
scientists, is to support the ignorant critics of good science who
>> argue that, "if I believe in a proposition, then anyone who
presents >> evidence that contradicts my belief is a malicious
fool and not to be >> believed". >> >> It is
true that a few pseudoscientists acting as industry shills >> will
(for a fee) produce a "scientific study" supporting any >>
industry-desired conclusion, but your implication that Pimentel is
>> such an Exxon shill is blatant slander, and I am ashamed to see
it on >> the Biofuels site. >> >> I assume that
you wish ethanol's EROEI (energy return over energy >> input) to
be positive, thus making it a useful energy source as we >>
approach the end of fossil fuels. So do I - and so would lots of
>> other folks. I'm sure also that David Pimentel shares that
wish. The >> difference between you and Pimentel is that as a
scientist, he says, >> "It's a great idea and I hope it's true,
but what if it isn't? So >> let's run the numbers and seek the
truth of the matter. If it turns >> out the EROEI is negative, we
would be commiting a cruel and >> expensive hoax on the nation to
propose ethanol as an energy solution." > > > Not so, sad
to say. Pimentel has long been aware that the data he uses > is
outdated and wrong, but he keeps using it anyway. Implying that >
he's an Exxon-et al shill is not blatant slander, the question has to
> be asked why he continues doing this, and asked of his publishers
too. > This is peer review? I think not. It certainly is not science.
It's > propaganda. > >> I am as disappointed as you
must be in his analysis showing a >> negative EROEI. And I look
forward to additional valid studies >> testing and challenging his
conclusion. > > > Those have been to hand for a long time,
more and more of them, > debunking every aspect of Pimentel's claims.
Pimentel takes no notice, > neither do his
publishers. > >> But to lampoon his work because you don't
like the color of - was it >> his socks? - is not a worthy act on
your part. > > > Well, I don't know, I suppose we can take
his socks about as seriously > as the rest of him. > >
Nothing new here - we've been discussing Pimentel's repeated and >
rather successful disinformation campaign since early 2001. As John >
said when he posted this latest bout, he does it every year. > >
Please see these recent messages, to put it in perspective: > >
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg52605.html >
Re: [Biofuel] Cornell on ethanol, biodiesel, & hydrogen energy
efficien > > http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg52756.html >
Re: [Biofuel] Cornell on ethanol, biodiesel, & hydrogen energy
efficienc > > Best wishes > >
Keith > > >> I'm sure you can do better. I hope you
will. >> >> In all sincerity and hoping that your future
jests will be more benign, >> >> Bob A. >> -----
Original Message ----- From: "Andrew Lowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To:
>> Sent: Monday, August 01, 2005
4:15 AM >> Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Cornell on ethanol,
biodiesel,& hydrogen >> energy
efficiencies >> >> >> Michael
wrote: >> >>> This press release below produced the AP
story that follows it. >>> >>> July 5,
2005 >>> Cornell ecologist's study finds that producing ethanol
and biodiesel >>> from corn and other crops is not worth the
energy >>> >>> By Susan S.
Lang >>> >>> >>> >>> Chris
Hallman/University Photography >>> >>> Ecologist
David Pimentel, shown here pumping gas, says that his >>>
analysis shows that producing ethanol uses more energy than the
>>> resulting fuel generates. Copyright © Cornell
University >>> >> [snip] >> >> Sorry
for the late reply on this one, but with dress sense like what >>
was shown in the picture how can anyone take this bloke seriously? I
ask >> you. Also with that posture and the look on his face, has
anyone checked >> for a pulse? It reminds me of an episode of "The
Goodies" where they >> where shown using the Russian Politburo as
glove puppets - aahhh I see >> it - if you squint at the part
between his left leg and the car I'm >> sure I see an arm with an
Exxon logo on it.......... ;) >> >> Yours in
jest, >> Andrew > > > >
_______________________________________________ > Biofuel mailing
list > Biofuel@sustainablelists.org >
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org > >
Biofuel at Journey to Forever: > http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html > >
Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 >
messages): > http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ > > >
_______________________________________________ Biofuel
mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org
Biofuel
at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Search the
combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
_______________________________________________ Biofuel mailing
list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org
Biofuel
at Journey to
Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Search the
combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000
messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
|