ENERGY BALANCE: Does it take more fossil energy to produce ethanol than ethanol itself delivers? Expert views vary considerably, but if so, ethanol would not be renewable, and thus would not help counteract global warming.
cube wrote:You know it's kinda funny when I moved my pointer over the link and saw the phrase "hempfarm.org" in the status bar of my browser the article lost any hope of credibility. Most articles lose their credibility in the first paragraph but this one lost it without me having to even bother visiting the site. Now that's a record!
I'm sorry but I just can't make myself click on that link.
cube wrote:You know it's kinda funny when I moved my pointer over the link and saw the phrase "hempfarm.org" in the status bar of my browser the article lost any hope of credibility. Most articles lose their credibility in the first paragraph but this one lost it without me having to even bother visiting the site. Now that's a record!
I'm sorry but I just can't make myself click on that link.
Abstract
The fuel of the future, according to inventor Henry Ford and General Motors' scientist Charles F. Kettering, was ethyl alcohol made from farm products and cellulosic materials. Henry Ford's outright support culminated with the the Dearborn, Mich. "Chemurgy" conferences in the 1930s. Little is known about Kettering's interest in ethyl alcohol fuel and how it fit into G.M.'s long term strategy. Moreover, aside from the Chemurgy conferences and a brief period of commercial alcohol-gasoline sales in the Midwest during the 1930s, very little is known about the technological, economic and political context of alcohol fuels use. This paper examines that context, including the competition between lamp fuels in the 19th century; the scientific studies about alcohol as a fuel in the early 20th century; the development of "ethyl" leaded gasoline as a bridge to the "fuel of the future" in the 1920s; the worldwide use of alcohol - gasoline blends in the 1920s and 30s; and the eventual emergence of the farm "Chemurgy" movement and its support for alcohol fuel in the 1930s.
Jack wrote:ENERGY BALANCE: Does it take more fossil energy to produce ethanol than ethanol itself delivers? Expert views vary considerably, but if so, ethanol would not be renewable, and thus would not help counteract global warming.
Jack wrote:
Worse, the paper deals with the use of lead additives as opposed to ethanol. The fundamental issue - is ethanol a viable replacement for oil - is never addressed.
BiGG Idiot wrote:QUESTION: Is BiGG really an idiot?
BiGG wrote:You can learn about POSITIVE EROEI numbers for Ethanol on these links ......
American Society of Agricultural Engineers
We show that corn ethanol is energy efficient, as indicated by an energy output/input ratio of 1.34 and 1.53 under a best–case scenario.
Jack wrote:BiGG wrote:You can learn about POSITIVE EROEI numbers for Ethanol on these links ......
American Society of Agricultural Engineers
We show that corn ethanol is energy efficient, as indicated by an energy output/input ratio of 1.34 and 1.53 under a best–case scenario.
Key words: best-case scenario.
The lottery player wins every time - under a best-case scenario.
BiGG wrote:Jack wrote:BiGG wrote:You can learn about POSITIVE EROEI numbers for Ethanol on these links ......
American Society of Agricultural Engineers
We show that corn ethanol is energy efficient, as indicated by an energy output/input ratio of 1.34 and 1.53 under a best–case scenario.
Key words: best-case scenario.
The lottery player wins every time - under a best-case scenario.
Jesus Jack! The “high” number is the best case scenario, the low number is STILL positive EROEI! Read that article where you will learn a lot more on how great this is!
Wanna see where many oil advocates got all of their misinformation? Wanna see where EROEI arguments are ridiculous when talking about running things like your car? Wanna see a very old car that could run on gasoline, alcohol, or kerosene (kerosene is basically diesel fuel)? That car is a Ford Model T!
ArimoDave wrote:BasketballJones and Ludi have a point.
If it were profitable to make biofuels without government subsidies, then these processes would be widespread
and already competing for oil. Many of the alternatives BiGG has posted are sales pitches -- often companies which
are looking for investors. There really haven't been any profitable businesses that I am aware of which make biofuels.
If there are any, will they make a profit when there is no more oil to use to plant, fertilize, and harvest the crops?
This is the fundamental question that we are trying to get you, BiGG, to ask yourself before you post.
ArimoDave
BiGG wrote:The "oil" they will use to plant etc is the oil they will be growing themselves for starters ....
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests