Is ethanol the 21st century version of the perpetual motion machine?

[NNN0LHI]

It takes more than one unit of energy to produce one unit of energy of ethanol doesn't it?

I notice there has been a big push on TV for ethanol since the Gulf mess.

But to a thinking person isn't it all BS?

Making ethanol uses more energy to make it than it produces doesn't it?

Where is the gain?

Don

[Cronus Protagonist]

1. I think the gain is that it's renewable

And it also has multiple possible sources.

[Riftaxe]

14. Yeah right, renewable.....

So the current mix is 10% ethanol, 90% gasoline. so for that 10% you are sacrificing agricultural land and expending more energy to produce it then it saves. Add in that mix that the only drive for it is to procure government subsidies and it sure starts sounding like a scam to me.

[Warren DeMontague]

2. And, in theory, you're not pulling fossilized carbon out of the ground to add to the cycle

The corn pulls CO2 out while growing, which is released as the ethanol burns. So it's more of a zero sum situation, in theory I guess.

[NNN0LHI]

5. A zero sum situation wouldn't be so bad but this is a net loss situation

It takes more energy to produce it than we can get out of it.

See the problem?

Don

[Warren DeMontague]

23. I do.

I've heard similar arguments about ethanol being a boondoggle. I'm just not sure what you end up with if you do the math vs. Oil from a well. I'm not sure if anyone does.

For sure, I don't think it's "the" solution.

[Ozymanithrax]

3. It may be possible to make it cheaply enough to change that...

Especially if we choose to make it out of stuff other than corn, a crop that requires oil to grow, or use waste products that are under utilized.
Making fuel out of Rice Straw, Wheat straw & Corn stalks
You can make this stuff out of lawn clippings or almost any plant matter.

[htuttle]

4. It depends on how you make it, what you make it from, and how much you expect to get

For example, ethanol can be created naturally in certain fruits and berries after they ripen (and ferment in the sun). You can't get much fuel out of that, however.

Big picture-wise, the raw energy input for ethanol (that ultimately we use for 'work') is the sun. So far, recovering that energy input is costing too much for the quantity of ethanol we need (ie., we want a lot of it). On the other hand, that same energy is easily obtainable in small quantities by digestive systems (if we eat the fuel feed stock instead of ferment it). If it's tasty, of course.

My point, rather than being merely irritating, is that it's not 'ethanol' that's inefficient. It's the way we go about making a LOT of it that's the problem.

[DJ13]

6. When the oil prices collapsed in early 09 ethanol lost its appeal

ADM has a lot invested in ethanol, and they cant sell it as easily when gas is below $3 per gallon.

[TheKentuckian]

7. it's dumb and we can't get rid of it or we'll be "hurting farmers"

Of course they could grow non-food stocks to make biofuels but all of that would be cheaper at the market and less certain to get subsidies.

It's a mess because the party needs Iowa for electoral math so we can't piss off the corn growers who now make more off corn growers even though it fucks with food supply and costs, I guess worldwide and other plants probably yield better.

Bahhhhhh

We can't actually do the simplest and most common sense stuff. This incarnation of a government doesn't work, we need at least a reboot.

[Oregone]

8. Its as ludicrous as the perpetual motion machine its meant to fuel

That being, human economic growth & production.

Superman won't be riding in on a Tesla either to save the dying globe, sorry.

Its just going to die. Oil, ethanol, "green" energy...doesn't fuckn matter anymore. Why? People just don't get it.

[Laelth]

9. Ethanol is a very, very bad idea.

Food or fuel. That is the choice. I choose food.

:dem:

-Laelth

[pscot]

10. They lose energy on each gallon, but

they make it up on the volume. And taxpayer grants.

[FBI_Un_Sub]

11. The fermentation rxn is EXOTHERMIC

but the distillation is energy intensive.

The engineering creativity is in capturing the exothermic heat of reaction of the fermentation step, and using it for the distillation.

I haven't re-reviewed the thermo since I read Pimentel's paper(s) and determined that they could be safely cavalierly dismissed.

BTW, in any economic analysis of EtOH, do not dismiss the external cost of projecting military power (and killing American GI's).

[NNN0LHI]

13. I live next to a corn field and can see growing and harvesting it is very energy intensive

Farmer is out there all the time spraying pesticides or plowing, or fertilizing. Then he has to get the stuff harvested and to market in a couple of months. All for one ear of corn per stalk.

And then after two seasons of growing corn that field is shot. Might get one more year of beans out of it but that's about it? Can't grow nothing but weeds there after that without a lot more energy intensive work. He has to spend a year working it so something will grow there again besides weeds.

The chemical runoff from these fields ends up in our drinking water.

Got to take all that into consideration too.

Don

[FBI_Un_Sub]

15. I have done my own fermenting

I have done my own fermenting --- beer, wine, and whiskey. The fermentation gives off heat, and the distillation needs heat. There is no reason to follow the high throughput (high temp and high pressure) paradigms of the chemical and petroleum industries. The pot of mash isn't going anywhere. Follow the paradigms of the food processing and pharma industry -- and let nature do its thing.


I have also been a "Casualty Affairs Officer" - walking up to the widow's or mom's house. And I have been to my share of military funerals. Therefore, I resolve all (reasonable and unreasonable) doubts in favor of renewables.

[NNN0LHI]

18. Even if after it gets in the pot it and does its own thing there are still problems

Still got to get it in the pot. And that is still an energy intensive proposition.

As for the sending our kids off to die to steal energy resources from someone else angle you keep using I don't fall for it.

It would be a lot cheaper to just buy it from the current owners of those energy resources and forget the gun play. We claim to be a civilized nation. We should act like one.

But instead we get TV ads demonizing other world leaders with propaganda that says they are the enemy and people proudly send their sons and daughters off to kill or be killed. Back to that civilized nation proposition.

Don

[dark forest]

12. I think

that there is a much BETTER use for ethanol than as fuel.

But, hey, that's just me.

[Juche]

16. Depends on the source

ethanol from non-corn sources like switchgrass or algae produces far more energy than it requires to maintain and process it.

[IDemo]

17. This was generally considered true a few years ago

David Pimentel, a Cornell University professor, came out with a study which showed ethanol with an energy equation of less than one.
There is a DOE graph out there somewhere displaying the results of numerous studies since done, and almost all show ethanol having
an EROEI (energy return on energy investment) greater than one, but perhaps not by enough to make it worthwhile. Especially when the
environmental impacts are factored in.

[Chemical Bill]

19. Pimentel often partners with Tad Patzek, from UC Berkley...

who is head of an oil industry funded group. That could explain his results.

Bill

[IDemo]

20. I couldn't recall Patzek's name, thanks

I think they factored in everything imaginable into the ethanol side of the equation, including the food calories needed to get agricultural workers to and from their trucks.

[Chemical Bill]

22. They added in the workers' lunches. n/t

[Chemical Bill]

21. I'm sorry, there's some misinformation here.

First, any study done by someone without oil industry connections concludes that ethanol gives off more energy than it takes to produce. The DOE says 66% more.

Second, the energy needed to produce ethanol comes from mostly domestic electricity. Ethanol returns 6 gallons for every one gallon of petroleum used. Thus the preference for ethanol over a "war for oil" is valid, as is reasoning that our trade balance and domestic economy are helped by ethanol.

Third, the corn currently used for ethanol is not food corn, it's feed corn from the cattle industry. the mash left from ethanol production can still be fed to cattle, so there is no reason to believe that ethanol takes food from people.

I hope this helps.

Bill

[William Z. Foster]

24. not to mention...

Burning up the topsoil is suicidal.

The most important energy need is for getting food to people. Burning food to get energy is some sort of symptom of a culture that has gone stark raving mad. If it all collapses, people could walk to the food (farms) in the worst case scenario. But if farms have been converted to fuel plantations to keep suburbia running, people will be able to drive but there won't be any food.

[NNN0LHI]

25. Tell me about it. The field behind me I bet has dropped 3 feet in 20 years due to erosion

When I moved in it was just about even with my property. Looks like a big bowl now. Which creates another energy intensive job. Every spring the farmer has to spend a week dragging out huge boulders that have become uncovered from the erosion.

Don