What is Digg?132 Comments
- bengarland, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12Not to mention that Ethanol isn't "free". You have to have tractors to manage the fields. Fertilizers to provide nutrients for the corn. Electricity to run the processing plants. Trucks to transport the fuel around. Etc. What does this run on? Petroleum, for the most part. Or other non-renewable sources of energy.
Ever heard of the law of thermodynamics? TANSTAAFL
Not to mention that you're getting taxed twice with Ethanol. Once when your taxes pay for ridiculous farm subsidies that American corn farmers enjoy, and again at the pump when you pay the gas tax.
Sidenote: Farm subsidies are also why everything has "high fructose corn syrup" in it instead of plain old sugar (which the government taxes to make it even less competitive in the marketplace). Yes, as Americans we get to enjoy soft drinks that taste like crap. Ever had a coke south of the border? Much better. No corn syrup. Fruit juices in many other countries? Natural sweeteners, if any. No corn syrup. America is great in a lot of ways but our food industry is *****. - alphex, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12*sigh*
I don't have the numbers in front of me at work, but the fact of the matter is that there is NO way you can produce enough ethanol to replace the amount we need for gasoline. It's a oil from bio mass, and we literally don't have enough surface area to grow enough plants to do it. Oh, right, AND... it takes oil to process the ethanol in to a usable energy source.
Sorry, the technology works, but not on a large scale that will support our economy as OIL becomes more scarce, and more expensive. - brhad56, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I read about a new solution to solving polution, obesity, and reduce our dependency on oil. I think they called it a bicycle.
- mousky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5It takes a large amount of energy to create ethanol. Interesting how this one-sided article ignores that point? I also like how the article mentions ADM, a multi-national corporation that receives how much in agricultural subsidies? I take anything written in Fortune with grain of salt. Now if it was The Economist saying this, maybe.
- GoatHerderEd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4The fertilizer that they use to grow the ethanol comes from, what? Oh, crude oil.
- llbbl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I don't think Ethanol is the answer we are looking for.
Here is the Department of Energy's information on alternative fuels.
http://www.eere.energy.gov/afdc/altfuel/fuel_properties.html - modman, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Good job reading folks.
The article cites the EPA stating that ethanol is better than fossil fuels. it takes 20 cents to make a gallon of cellulose based ethanol now... 20 cents!!!!! that is super cheap. The energy argument is one from 2 decades ago.. they have cracked the process of production!!!! - TGZRyo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Check to see if your vehicle is E85 (Ethanol) Compatible. http://www.e85fuel.com/index.php
- Philoushka, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4"Gasoline will never become obsolete as long as I and others like myself wish to drive"
It's that kind of thinking that is running this country into the ground. Our unwillingness to budge and our selfishness will continue to destroy the earth. With attitudes like this, it will take a major disaster or 365-day-year of smog to change things. Civilized? Probably not. - Hookster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3You guys suck at reading,
This article was about how WASTE biomass can be used to produce ethanol, not just CORN, you idiots. Because of bio tech advances, we can now use enzymes to break down long chained carbohydrates locked in a plants cellulose, when before we we only able to ferment simple carbohydrates and sugars, such as those found in corn. Thus it doesn't need to effect the food supply, or rely on farmland at all.
Next time read more than the headline. - peregrine, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Bring back the horse.
Cheap, Reliable, and ecofriendly.
And if we needed to travel far we could use mag-lev trains. And use solar/wind energy to power the train. *sigh* if people could accept change. and politicians accept that we could replace highways with trains and save.
Maglev is the future. - jamesey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Right now, ethanol is not efficient. If you factor in the cost of labor, machinery for crops, and the production process, it's not going to make money.
- valkraider, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"Biodiesel? Burning perfectly good food for transportation purposes?"
Have you paid attention at all?
You don't use the "perfectly good food". You use the byproducts from making the "perfectly good food". Even biodiesel made from virgin Soybean oil - the soybean MEAL is used as a protein source and the OIL is the leftovers. But you can ALSO make biodiesel from WASTE vegitable oil. You can make Ethanol from WASTE biomass. You can make biodiesel from WASTE from meat processing and producing plants. You can make biodiesel from the WASTE from stockyards and dairies. You can make biodiesel AND ethanol from coal power plant emissions.
"I thought environmentalists were humanists, don't you think there's enough agricultural protectionism and waste already?"
Which is better than oil industry protectionism and waste?
I don't think anyone will start a war over turky processing plant waste and old corn stalks... - DASK, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2For those who say it's a net loss of energy... I beg to differ
(1) most of the energy involved in the final ethanol comes from the sun via photosynthesis.
(2) you do need tractors, processing, fertilizers, etc.
In the US, from corn, it roughly breaks even (not counting the sun), and is thus a wasteful and pointless way to spend tax money
From Brazil however, using mycanthus and surgarcane, the process is immensely more efficient and represents a massive energy gain over the societal inputs.
I don't have the numbers in front of me at the moment, but supplying all of society's needs would require conversion of roughly all the farmland in the world... not possible, but a potential driver of deforestation and biofuels will be a direct economic competitor for farmland in the future with implications for food production
As an aside, it is far far better to use biomass in the heating sector, where it can massively offset wasteful oil and electric heating. - steelknigt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Some of you guys need to get your facts straight. There is more than enough corn produced to replace ethanol with gasoline. And the production costs on it isn't high at all..... WHY DO U THINK ETHANOL FUEL IS CHEAPER NOW!!!! It's a matter of oil companies not wanting us to use ethanol and still use there oil. IF we actually make the switch to ethanol it will help out our economy greatly, the farmers right now are barely making it by the skin of there teeth. This would create a greater demand for their product and make us a stronger and independent nation.
- mousky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"And toaster, it's not about making gas obsolete, it's about reducing our dependency (and the inherent high prices) on gas."
Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your take on the energy situation), you need high gas prices to reduce dependency and to make alternative fuels economically attractive. Ethanol is highly subsidized in North America. If the price of oil falls, then oil (and gasoline) becomes more attractive as a source of energy. Europe and Japan have some of the highest gasoline prices in the world and also have some of the most fuel efficient vehicles, however, both continue to rely heavily on foreign oil. - 1337geek, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1god so many comments, yet no one seems to have read the entire article, i just did, because i have an attention span of about 5 minutes.
- maccalvin5, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050911/NEWS03/509110345/1005
From TFA:
"Iowa plants - which produce a third of the nation's ethanol supply - have sent syrup, batches of bad ethanol and sewage into streams. As the pollutants decomposed, the waters lost oxygen, threatening fish."
"The facilities emitted so much formaldehyde and toluene into the air that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency forced several large companies to install new equipment. Cargill Inc. on Sept. 1 agreed to spend $130 million to cut air pollution at ethanol and other processing plants in Iowa and 12 other states under an agreement with federal officials."
Tradeoffs abound!
Rely on the middle east?
Pollute everywhere?
Reduce energy consumption?
one of those probably just doesn't fit in... - donkeyk0ng, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1we need to have a more diverse selection of fuels, not just a single low emmision fuel. i think hawk is right. we need to decrease our dependency on gasoline, not find a replacement fuel. I think we'll have gas for a long time. We still burn coal don't we?
- robowash, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Great! A new reason to raze rain forests for cheap farm land!
- valkraider, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Biodiesel.
http://www.biodieselnow.com/ - mocha24, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1E85 is not an option for many cars on the road today, even just the new cars.
Typically, they are models used for fleet or commercial vehicles. I have a 2005 and my SUV is not on the list. Fat lot of good this does. - teh_toaster, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Gasoline will never become obsolete as long as I and others like myself wish to drive antique/classic cars. Good luck getting that 454 Stroker to run on corn and beans.
I do welcome the new fuels, hybrids, and alternative transportation methods but gasoline still has a promising future in my garage. - Hawk4, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1alphex makes good points. However, cheap fuel will always intrigue us.
And toaster, it's not about making gas obsolete, it's about reducing our dependency (and the inherent high prices) on gas. - valkraider, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Those of you bashing Ethanol are using old data.
Ethanol in the 70s and 80s was a net energy loss. And it was innefficient throughout the process.
That was then, this is now.
The processes have improved drastically. Ethanol now has a net energy gain, even taking into consideration the costs of growing the plants.
Think of Ethanol and Biodiesel as solar power in liquid form. We let the plants convert the solar energy into biomass, then we convert that to liquid fuel we can put in our tanks.
And the solution comes not from the growing of virgin feedstock for biofuels, but rather the solution is making biofuels out of the waste that we ALREADY have from other industries.
For example, they are building a plant in Oregon that will make Ethanol from biowaste that currently is thrown away - biowaste from the Lumber/paper industry, from the agricultural and ranching industry.
There are companies making biodiesel from *trash*. Including old tires, computers, whatever - as long as it has carbon in it. There are companies making biodiesel from the waste from the meat industry (chicken, pork, beef - they all have waste products that can be used).
There is the work at MIT on making biodiesel and ethanol from coal fired powerplant smokestacks.
All of the "hope" lies not in growing corn or soybeans just to make biofuels. The "hope" lies in using the byproducts from industry and our current lifestyles to make fuel.
So we need to shift our designs for vehicles to allow for this. Sell more clean diesel vehicles which can burn biodiesel. Like Volkswagen TDI, Jeep Liberty CRD, Dodge Sprinter, Mercades E class... Make more Ethanol compatible vehicles, and make them more efficient.
In addition we need to shift our thinking, and start buying and using biofuels to help establish the biofuel industry. One reason they cost what they do is that they are only made in smallish scale, compared to the petroleum industry.
All of it is a small piece of the solution - not the whole solution itself.... - moracity, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This article actually does make a good argumement for ethanol and I don't think it ignores the cons of ethanol at all. I think the main point is that the price of oil will continue to go up as demand increases and supply decreases . Eventually, the cost of oil will match the total cost of ethanol production/distribution. At that point, cost will no longer matter. There is no question that this time will come.
It seems that the smart thing to do would be to invest now in more efficient ethanol production instead of trying to improve oil refining. The idea to eliminate oil from our mindset. Fuel based on grown crops will also finally lead to the elimination of these insane farm subsidy-welfare programs. This is supposed to be a country of innovation, it's time to take the lead and leave oil in the past and move into the future. Let the rest of the world fight over the scraps of oil that are left. - beasty_dave_Mk2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1lol @ hydrocarbons
This article should be renamed; "When oil company's, car manufacturers and the parent company's who own the media are threatened by zero emission vehicles and need to drum up support for the internal combustion engine"
Problem, reaction, solution anyone. lol
no digg. - BritOverseas, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"One thing all these Ethanol geniasses forgot to take into account is that there are not enough corn fields in North America to make a fraction of the fuel that North America consumes.
Ethanol is a red herring. Hype. BS. Not A Solution. Etc."
Well grow something with a higher calorific rating then genius, and, read the rest of the posts/article and you will see that they have refined the process to make fuel out of waste materials that get burnt or go into landfills. - nightwing2000, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The article seems to be hyping cellulose processing - which, if it really works, has the promise of really boosting alternative energy prouction. However, there's not a lot of detail, other than the enzyme technology for breaking down cellulose hasn't been perfected for large-scale plants.
Also remember, that a lot of small fuel-cell technology research (i.e. for laptops, cell phones), and not just for cars, is based on feeding the devices something like alcohol; a process strips out the hydrogen for use in the feul cell. Again, anything that encourages the availabily of alcohol is good for oil-independence.
Processing cellulose means all that waste material - branches, scrap and bark from logging operations, stalks and husks from wheat fields - will find a better home in a processing plant. Right now, burning stubble has become so common on the northern praries.
I agree, gasoline will never fully disappear. however, once alcohol-based vehicles, fuel-cell hybrids, ec. are common - I'll line up with everyone else to chuckle as that 454 goes by belching out fumes from $35/gallon gasoline. You can still live using kerosene lamps and candles, but most people choose not to. - Corrosionx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1BTW I'm making a list of stupid environmentalist, socialist and statist comments I've seen lately on here. For nerds you guys are pretty dumb.
- senfo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I was interested up until I read this:
"It takes about 30% more ethanol than gasoline to drive a mile, and the stuff is more corrosive, but building a car that's E85-ready adds only about $200 to the cost."
That paragraph is actually a major turn-off, in my opinion. First of all, it better be at least 30% cheaper because 30% more fuel consumption is pretty bad. And what's the deal with it being more corrosive? Is it more corrosive inside of my vehicles fuel system? If so, how much more and is there something manufacturers can do to make parts that are able to stand up to the corrosive properties of ethanol?
Until these two caveats are addressed and corrected, I believe ethanol will not be taken as seriously as it could. And you can say I'm aiding in the destruction of the environment or enabling terrorism by funding the terrorists, but I simply cannot afford higher fuel costs and I certainly can't afford to buy a new vehicle (or parts) because the fuel I use is corroding it to death. - valkraider, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"As for biodiesel, what we have in America - say for instance what is on sale at the pump in Oregon - offends Volkswagon. They disagree with the American classification of biodiesel."
What? I have been using biodiesel in my 2002 Volkswagen TDI since 2002 - from those pumps in Oregon - and have 60,000 problem free miles on it. It doesn't disagree at all.
You need to do more research. Check out Fred's TDI club: http://www.tdiclub.com
The main issue is that Volkswagen does not warrant Biodiesel use at more than 5% in the USA. But the truth is that Volkswagen, nor any car manufacturer, does not warrant *ANY* fuel issues. If you use bad fuel - in any way - warranty will not cover it.
In the USA we do not have a very rigid biodiesel standard. (Practically none). So you run the risk of getting bad fuel - if you do not know the supplier. In Europe, they have more rigid biodiesel standards which help insure a more uniform quality across all suppliers.
But between my two vehicles (A VW TDI and a Jeep Liberty CRD), I have almost 70,000 miles using biodiesel. In the summer I use B99 and in the winter B20. Currently (as of last year) our supplier is making their fuel from recycled waste cooking oil. They are working on, as demand increases, using local grown Canola as a feedstock as well (higher yeilds than Soy and grows better in Oregon, and is used as a rotation crop for other crops which are *already* grown). - DASK, on 10/12/2007, -0/+120 cents a gallon is close to some of the theoretical numbers coming out of brazil now, although I haven't seen any official ones that low...lots of academic/industial research on that though, should be easy to verify. American corn numbers won't be anywhere near that until they switch to non-corn crops for the bulk, and use their tailings effectively.
- cptshamrock, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1There is a solution to oil its called nuclear energy to generate hydrogen at incredible efficiency and things that previously ran on oil run on fuel cells. Also the nuclear plant can be used to be generate electricity and guess what no greenhouse gases are produced. And contrary to popular thought the physical size and disposal of nuclear waste is miniscule compared to how much energy it produced.
- FishyJoe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The reason why you wouldn't use anything besides sugar cane is because there is a very low energy yield. You can't just use scrap because the energy yield is so low you wind up burning more energy to create the fuel than the fuel itself.
Brazil is cutting down it's rain forests to create ethanol. The best way to guarantee the destruction of all rain forests is to switch to a ethanol energy system. - master_of_fm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Isn't ethanol...beer?
Awesome, 200 proof alcohol by the gallon! Beer driven cars! Beer powered cell phones!
Drench your laptop in beer!" - lollerskates
one for you, 10 for the car, 2 for you 10 for the car.
even better
"hey you cant leave the bar with that!!!", "oh it's not for me, it's for my car", "well carry on then" - Stealer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Alcohol is cheaper than gasoline !!! maybe not in US but here in Brazil it is !!!
- nonchallant0819, on 03/27/2008, -0/+0This is a great story... found this one through http://www.google.com
___________________________________
http://www.TopNotchCarpentry.com - Abx0r, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0once Gas is gone, if Ethanol replaces it, it will just be exactly as expensive because of ***** Oil companies that have switched to monopolizing the next fuel with insanely high prices.
- jo42, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0One thing all these Ethanol geniasses forgot to take into account is that there are not enough corn fields in North America to make a fraction of the fuel that North America consumes.
Ethanol is a red herring. Hype. BS. Not A Solution. Etc. - mrbro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@cptshamrock
go tell that to North Korea/Iran/Cuba/evil-country-of-the-week - nonchallant0819, on 03/27/2008, -0/+0This is a great story... found this one through http://www.google.com
___________________________________
http://www.TopNotchCarpentry.com - NathanFord, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Hey, here's what I'm framing my alt-fuel decision by: check out my digg to Chuck Klosterman's (author of Sex, Drugs and Cocoa Puffs) article about why he SUPPORTS Ethanol. He's also got a synopsis on the current (*****) economics of the modern farmer on the page. Here's the link straight to it: www.esquire.com/ESQ0506KLOSTERMAN_66 (The article was originally published in Esquire Magazine.)
- nonchallant0819, on 03/27/2008, -0/+0This is a great story... found this one through http://www.google.com
___________________________________
http://www.TopNotchCarpentry.com - splitsixty, on 10/12/2007, -0/+01 word: Natural Gas
- mike_p, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I'm reading the comments... and a lot of people have not read the link at all... RTFA!!!
It's not about replacing gasoline with ethanol... It's about reducing our dependency on fossil fuels in general. It comes from a plant that's been harvested and makes for a completely wasteless process... everything is used! It's these solutions we will ultimately go after...
It's been a warm winter so far (says me... in NJ... on a 60 degree day [3rd warm day straight]) - cptshamrock, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@sabot theres enough nuclear energy on this planet to last long after we're off of earth or have become extinct
- kidlinux, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Hey alphex, why don't you read the article. They specifically mention the argument you gave, and why *cellulosic* ethanol makes that argument null and void.
Cellulosic ethanol - which can be made from any part of a plant - not just corn but corn stalks for example. That means that ANY bio-waste product can be used. Think of the woodchips stripped from logs used to make paper and lumber, think about corn stalks from harvested corn, how about plain ol' grass, or the leaves you rake from your yard in the fall.
There is PLENTY of biomass available for making ethanol in the quantities they're talking about. It's just a matter of setting up the infrastructure to collect it.
Read the ***** article. - phill, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0If we just convert all our electricity to solar, then Gas would be much cheaper. If only someone could build a very cheap solar cell/panel then our gas problems would go away. The problem is greed.
- Namco, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0All right. A lot of discussion here. Some good, some knee-jerk and narrow-mided. I say put the E85 cars out there, put Ethanol-only cars out there, develop hydrogen fuel cells, improve hybrids, put everything out there and let the free market decide. The consumers will pick one and most likely the best and cheapest solution will win. The problem is that there is little choice and the public is so uninformed about the problem that we keep buying gasoline powered cars. The growing hybrid market is proof that the public can be make a decision in the right decision. Lets just start getting people informed.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 129 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is