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 (ES&T).
''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
increase the annual number of asthma-related emergency room visits by
770 and the number of respiratory-related hospitalizations by 990,''
Jacobson said. ''Los Angeles can expect 650 more hospitalizations in
2020, along with 1,200 additional asthma-related emergency visits.''
The deleterious health effects of E85 will be the same, whether the
ethanol is made from corn, switchgrass or other plant products,
Jacobson
noted. ''Today, there is a lot of investment in ethanol,'' he said.
''But we found that using E85 will cause at least as much health
damage
as gasoline, which already causes about 10,000 U.S. premature deaths
annually from ozone and particulate matter. The question is, if we're
not getting any health benefits, then why continue to promote ethanol
and other biofuels?
''There are alternatives, such as battery-electric, plug-in-hybrid and
hydrogen-fuel cell vehicles, whose energy can be derived from wind or
solar power,'' he added. ''These vehicles produce virtually no toxic
emissions or greenhouse gases and cause very little disruption to the
land-unlike ethanol made from corn or switchgrass, which will require
millions of acres of farmland to mass-produce. It would seem prudent,
therefore, to address climate, health and energy with technologies
that
have known benefits. ''
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell?
Check out new cars at Yahoo! Autos.
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=48245/*http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html;_ylc=X3oDMTE1YW1jcXJ2BF9TAzk3MTA3MDc2BHNlYwNtYWlsdGFncwRzbGsDbmV3LWNhcnM->
_______________________________________________
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/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Answers - Got a question? Someone out there knows the answer.
Try it now
<http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTEydmViNG02BF9TAzIxMTQ3MTcxOTAEc2VjA21haWwEc2xrA3RhZ2xpbmU>.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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/
