|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: a_plutoniuma_plutonium
Date: Jul 14, 2006 08:20
> Eeyore wrote:
>>> But here in the USA with our petrol
>>> based farming, we spend about 1.5 gallons of petrol just to get 1
>>> gallon of ethanol.
>>
>> Thta is simply plain wrong.
>>
>> Graham
>
> Unfortunately not. Most studies show the EROEI for ethanol to
> hover around 1. Perhaps a little positive, perhaps a little negative.
> Ethanol is never going to amount to much, and it certainly will
> never come close to replacing oil as it now stands in our
> economy. Oil has an EROEI of between 10-100:1.
>
> Cellulistic ethanol is another loser, as the 'waste' is normally
> plant remains that would be used or plowed back into the field. ...
|
| Show full article (7.09Kb) |
|
| |
no comments
|
|
|
Author: EeyoreEeyore
Date: Jul 14, 2006 02:42
> Eeyore wrote:
>>> LongmuirG wrote:
>>>> Dirk Bruere went off the rails:
>>>>> And how do you cost in the subsidy oil gets through having to maintain a
> ...
|
| Show full article (1.47Kb) |
|
| |
no comments
|
|
|
Author: pomeradopomerado
Date: Jul 14, 2006 02:14
Eeyore wrote:
>> LongmuirG wrote:
>>> Dirk Bruere went off the rails:
>>>> And how do you cost in the subsidy oil gets through having to maintain a
>>>> huge military to ensure continuity of supply?
>>>
>>> Let's see -- Japan depends on imports for ~100% of its fossil fuels,
>>> including oil. Next time you see Japan's huge military flexing its
>>> muscles in an oil producing country, be sure to alert the New York
>>> Times; they like to report that kind of thing.
>>
>> Japan depends on our military to keep its oil imports flowing.
>
> Now do please exlain that gem of wisdom !
|
| Show full article (1.13Kb) |
|
no comments
|
|
|
Author: EeyoreEeyore
Date: Jul 13, 2006 17:49
> LongmuirG wrote:
>> Dirk Bruere went off the rails:
>>> And how do you cost in the subsidy oil gets through having to maintain a
>>> huge military to ensure continuity of supply?
>>
>> Let's see -- Japan depends on imports for ~100% of its fossil fuels,
>> including oil. Next time you see Japan's huge military flexing its
>> muscles in an oil producing country, be sure to alert the New York
>> Times; they like to report that kind of thing.
>
> Japan depends on our military to keep its oil imports flowing.
Now do please exlain that gem of wisdom !
Graham
|
| |
|
no comments
|
|
|
Author: EeyoreEeyore
Date: Jul 13, 2006 17:47
> So that my original statement that
> 1.5 gallons of gasoline/diesel produces only 1 gallon of ethanol can be
> seen more clearly.
You're just making this up as you go along you idiotic troll.
Graham
|
| |
|
no comments
|
|
|
Author: pomeradopomerado
Date: Jul 13, 2006 16:24
LongmuirG wrote:
> Dirk Bruere went off the rails:
>> And how do you cost in the subsidy oil gets through having to maintain a
>> huge military to ensure continuity of supply?
>
> Let's see -- Japan depends on imports for ~100% of its fossil fuels,
> including oil. Next time you see Japan's huge military flexing its
> muscles in an oil producing country, be sure to alert the New York
> Times; they like to report that kind of thing.
Japan depends on our military to keep its oil imports flowing.
|
| |
|
no comments
|
|
|
Author: a_plutoniuma_plutonium
Date: Jul 13, 2006 14:17
Dan Bloomquist wrote:
>
> The consensus is an EROEI of 1.3
Too many lobbyists and irrational people in this discussion.
Ethanol can be broken into 2 segments. The cost of energy of farming
the crops for ethanol production and the cost of energy at the Ethanol
Distillery to convert the crop into ethanol itself.
Trouble is I spent too much time considering only the farming costs and
spent little to no time in evaluating the Ethanol distilling or
refining costs.
So what is the cost of Natural Gas, most often used energy source to
refine ethanol in the USA MidWest. We can easily convert Natural Gas
quantity into gallons of gasoline or diesel. So, does anyone of these
Ethanol Plants in Iowa or South Dakota take up what? Take up so much
Natural Gas that every gallon of ethanol requires 1/2 gallon of
gasoline as a Natural Gas equivalent?
|
| Show full article (2.66Kb) |
|
1 Comment |
|
|
Author: OzOz
Date: Jul 13, 2006 00:42
>NOTE: Sci.chem, Sci-materials have a thread exploring the use of
>Thistles as sustainable energy production cropping.
I presume this is a joke.
--
Oz
This post is worth absolutely nothing and is probably fallacious.
|
| |
|
1 Comment |
|
|
Author: OzOz
Date: Jul 13, 2006 00:39
>Unfortunately not. Most studies show the EROEI for ethanol to
>hover around 1. Perhaps a little positive, perhaps a little negative.
>Ethanol is never going to amount to much, and it certainly will
>never come close to replacing oil as it now stands in our
>economy. Oil has an EROEI of between 10-100:1.
This is correct. However much energy is lost going from starch->ethanol.
Vegetable oils, however, are pretty well diesel-ready as crushed.
I posted (with zero comment, which is surprising) an analysis that
confirms a low return on energy invested for bioethanol (10-15%) vs a
very large return on oilseed rape oil (about 200%). Both still have
significant high-value feed residues for other uses.
>Cellulistic ethanol is another loser, as the 'waste' is normally
>plant remains that would be used or plowed back into the field.
>This essentially amounts to strip-mining the soil for a short
>term gain. All that biomass taken would have to be replaced in
>the form of lots of fertilizers.
|
| Show full article (2.75Kb) |
|
no comments
|
|
|
|
|
|
Author: ChemistrySetChemistrySet
Date: Jul 12, 2006 22:29
NOTE: Sci.chem, Sci-materials have a thread exploring the use of
Thistles as sustainable energy production cropping.
Now, every farmer knows that the Thistle -- in whatever form -- is the
bane of agriculture, a weed intrusive, difficult even painful to
eradicate. The Bible writes that thistles are cursed to agriculture
and that man would suffer eradicating them in order to grow cereals and
other crops -- a most anciently known fact. Here in Western Oregon the
thistles are so stubborn, tuborous, and sharp thorned, they are
monsters eradicated or taking over and so difficult then to root out.
Like the scientist dismissing coal miners as 'unskilled workers' are we
failing to consult the farmer on his own science & craft -- ready to
sow the most pernicious of weeds and to rob Peter to pay Paul?
Ask any farmer; are thistles vis-Ã -vis his staple crops a plausable
idea, and with air-borne seeds drifting for hundreds of miles and on?
I have never seen a man 'run out of town on a rail' or 'tarred and
feathered', have any of y'all? Perhaps some of these ideas had better
be vetted on Mr & Mrs Farmer before proceeding too far . . . !
CS
|
| |
|
no comments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
