View Single Post
Old 10-01-2008, 03:16 AM   #1 (permalink)
Unforgiven
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Indiana
Posts: 131

Impala - '04 Chevrolet Impala base
90 day: 32.84 mpg (US)
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Ethanol-corn vs sawgrass

Taken from: http//:wholesalebiofuel.com

"When considering the total energy consumed by farm equipment, cultivation, planting, fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, and fungicides made from petroleum, irrigation systems, harvesting, transport of feedstock to processing plants, fermentation, distillation, drying, transport to fuel terminals and retail pumps, and lower ethanol fuel energy content, the net energy content value added and delivered to consumers is very small. And, the net benefit (all things considered) does little to reduce un-sustainable imported oil and fossil fuels required to produce the ethanol."

Now somewhere in my past, I did a little hard searching and was finding some information that disturbed me. Corn ethanol production is what the government is wanting America to subscribe in, yet facts from various articles I could find suggested that corn ethanol was 9 times more costly in terms of development and production than petroleum gasoline. Saw grass ethanol was only 3 times more costly, before factoring in that saw grass has the potential to be harvested more than once a year. Even with the subsidy that the government offers on corn production, it just does not make sense to me why corn ethanol production should lead when the information I had seen clearly, to me, suggests that saw grass ethanol production will be a much better value and process.

Any ideas folks?

PS- and a last tidbit... why does the government want to make such a big deal out of a fuel that you have to use more of in order to get where you are going? Using more of it simply means more waste of energy in the first place.

__________________

Last edited by Unforgiven; 10-01-2008 at 03:22 AM.. Reason: postscript thought
  Reply With Quote