Ethanol is definitely the word these days. It seems the majority can find no fault in it. However, there are people (including myself) who question whether or not ethanol is the "silver bullet" it's claimed to be, or if today's obsession is just "irrational exuberance", and not a viable cure for our dependence on foreign oil. Margot Gerritsen, assistant professor at Stanford University, interviews Professor Ted Patzek of Berkeley University about his opinions of ethanol and biofuels. Topics discussed include the effects of large scale production of biomass crops, energy consumption in the United States, and why ethanol's success in Brazil cannot be considered indicative of our future with ethanol. I believe with the majority of what he says, but must admit that I have not yet investigated the possibility of nuclear energy in depth.
Showing posts with label corn ethanol. Show all posts
Showing posts with label corn ethanol. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Patzek's Perspective...
Note: Please be patient as the podcast may take a little while to load. This podcast was recorded by Margot Gerritsen.
Ethanol is definitely the word these days. It seems the majority can find no fault in it. However, there are people (including myself) who question whether or not ethanol is the "silver bullet" it's claimed to be, or if today's obsession is just "irrational exuberance", and not a viable cure for our dependence on foreign oil. Margot Gerritsen, assistant professor at Stanford University, interviews Professor Ted Patzek of Berkeley University about his opinions of ethanol and biofuels. Topics discussed include the effects of large scale production of biomass crops, energy consumption in the United States, and why ethanol's success in Brazil cannot be considered indicative of our future with ethanol. I believe with the majority of what he says, but must admit that I have not yet investigated the possibility of nuclear energy in depth.
Ethanol is definitely the word these days. It seems the majority can find no fault in it. However, there are people (including myself) who question whether or not ethanol is the "silver bullet" it's claimed to be, or if today's obsession is just "irrational exuberance", and not a viable cure for our dependence on foreign oil. Margot Gerritsen, assistant professor at Stanford University, interviews Professor Ted Patzek of Berkeley University about his opinions of ethanol and biofuels. Topics discussed include the effects of large scale production of biomass crops, energy consumption in the United States, and why ethanol's success in Brazil cannot be considered indicative of our future with ethanol. I believe with the majority of what he says, but must admit that I have not yet investigated the possibility of nuclear energy in depth.
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
Production & Value
Ethanol is an "alternative" energy source. At least, that is what many people are saying. I, however, believe it takes at least as much, if not more, energy to produce ethanol as it provides, and if not, the effect on the environment is still unimproved. If it were truly "alternative", it would be completely independent of fossil fuels. We currently can't make ethanol with out using oil, or coal. How are the machines that plant and harvest the corn powered? How are the vehicles that transport the corn to production, and then distribute the ethanol, fueled? What about the milling process? 
So the question is: Do we really gain anything through the production and use of ethanol? Some think converting to ethanol is one of the best things we can do. David Lorenz and David Morris, authors of the report "How Much Energy Does It Take to Make a Gallon of Ethanol?", state in their report: "Our analysis again concludes that the production of ethanol from corn is a positive net energy generator. Indeed, the numbers look even more attractive now(1995) than they did in 1992. More energy is contained in the ethanol and the other by-products of corn processing than is used to grow the corn and convert it into ethanol and by-products. If corn farmers use state-of-the-art, energy efficient farming techniques and ethanol plants integrate state-of-the-art production processes, then the amount of energy contained in a gallon of ethanol and the other by-products is more than twice the energy used to grow the corn and convert it into ethanol." The key in that is using "state-of-the-art, energy efficient techniques". Ideally, that would be wonderful, but currently it is not a reality, and until people are willing to invest in making production more energy efficient, the net energy value can't be as great as Morris and Lorenz claim.
Others believe that while the net energy value may be positive (meaning ethanol is worth more energy than it takes to produce), it still doesn't help reduce the problem of greenhouse gas emissions. Increasing usage of corn ethanol would not lower environmental damages.
All things considered, corn ethanol isn't worth the time, energy, and money that could be put towards alternative energy research and applications.
So the question is: Do we really gain anything through the production and use of ethanol? Some think converting to ethanol is one of the best things we can do. David Lorenz and David Morris, authors of the report "How Much Energy Does It Take to Make a Gallon of Ethanol?", state in their report: "Our analysis again concludes that the production of ethanol from corn is a positive net energy generator. Indeed, the numbers look even more attractive now(1995) than they did in 1992. More energy is contained in the ethanol and the other by-products of corn processing than is used to grow the corn and convert it into ethanol and by-products. If corn farmers use state-of-the-art, energy efficient farming techniques and ethanol plants integrate state-of-the-art production processes, then the amount of energy contained in a gallon of ethanol and the other by-products is more than twice the energy used to grow the corn and convert it into ethanol." The key in that is using "state-of-the-art, energy efficient techniques". Ideally, that would be wonderful, but currently it is not a reality, and until people are willing to invest in making production more energy efficient, the net energy value can't be as great as Morris and Lorenz claim.
Others believe that while the net energy value may be positive (meaning ethanol is worth more energy than it takes to produce), it still doesn't help reduce the problem of greenhouse gas emissions. Increasing usage of corn ethanol would not lower environmental damages.
All things considered, corn ethanol isn't worth the time, energy, and money that could be put towards alternative energy research and applications.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
