Is it still progress?

[tjts1]

Here's the real problem.

[Arctic Fox]

Nice. Now show us the cost of gasoline in a nice biased graphic like the one above.

[Frank Lee]

All the SOLID info I've seen indicates Patzek is waaaay off the mark.

[Duffman]

Ditto Frank,
When looking at these Ethanol studies you have to look at the results of a bunch of them, not cherry pick one that may have a bias towards either the pro OR con side.

[Ken Fry]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

All the SOLID info I've seen indicates Patzek is way off the mark.

Definitely! He shows 5.8 million kilowatt hours of sunlight input, which appears to be the only way he can come up with his 6:1 guess. That sunlight will fall on the hectare of land regardless of whether corn is growing on it: it is crazy to consider that an energy cost.

He shows CO2 thrown off from distillation but does not show the CO2 absorbed by the corn.

[Frank Lee]

tjts has been here for years and has had to have participated in ethanol discussions before. So others refuting nonsense like that posted above is not a new thing. His agenda is preventing him from considering all the data.

[tjts1]

Originally Posted by Arctic Fox

Nice. Now show us the cost of gasoline in a nice biased graphic like the one above.

Better yet you show us.

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

All the SOLID info I've seen indicates Patzek is waaaay off the mark.

Actually quite the opposite, if you had done any SOLID research on the matter. But if you have better data for us to analyse by all means post it here.

[Arctic Fox]

Originally Posted by tjts1

Better yet you show us.

I hope this can give you some idea of what I'm seeing.

Oil Spills and Disasters - Infoplease.com
The Real Cost of Oil: How much are we paying for a gallon of gas?
HUMAN RIGHTS AND ENVIRONMENT IN TABASCO







Kenya gasoline explosion kills more than 60 in Nairobi slum - Los Angeles Times
Gas explosion: Brooklyn Park man has life-threatening burns - Baltimore Sun

How's that?

[Ken Fry]

Originally Posted by tjts1

Actually quite the opposite, if you had done any SOLID research on the matter. But if you have better data for us to analyse by all means post it here.

Look over this page. These GREET figures are widely accepted, and are the result of years of research from many sources.

The GREET figures offer no support at all for the contention that producing a gallon of ethanol consumes 6 times the energy that it contains.

[Old Tele man]

...yes, it's still progress, but only if the definition of 'still' is assumed to be 'stagnant' (wink,wink)!