View Single Post
Old 10-01-2008, 10:49 PM   #17 (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
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duffman View Post
No it doesnt because because again it is an energy analysis.

If a farm uses 1000 gal of gasoline (or energy equivalent other processes) to produce ethanol, it doesnt produce 1300 gal of ethanol, it produces 1300x1.25=1625 gal of ethanol. What we are doing is taking a concentrated energy source and turning it into a lower concentrated energy source but more of it (as well as running it through the 1.3 energy multiplier).

If you are having a hard time wrapping your head around it then think of ethanol as gasoline with 25% water added so they now have the same volume and energy content. And since water is practically free there is no cost associated.

Actually, the relation you show here for gasoline to ethanol is impossible. We dont make ethanol from gasoline...
What I am trying to get across here is that in the making of ethanol, from step one, we use gasoline in the tractors that are used to plant the corn, then spray the corn with a round of herbacide (more fuel used) a round of pestacide (again, more fuel used) and sometimes another round of the same if the bugs are really bad. Then harvesting costs, transportation, then the fuel and electricity costs to process the feedstock corn into ethanol. One small side benefit I hear is that the corn byproduct can be dried and ground into feed for the cattle and still be useful. Processing the sawgrass is not as fuel intensive like I mentioned before.

Oh, and the bit about algae I had forgotten about, thanks for the reminder!
__________________
  Reply With Quote