Pitfalls of Ethanol Fuel

Please keep all comments and debates civil, no vulgarities, ECT...

While I think that ethanol has some very limited potential as a fuel it's far from practical at this time and is questionable if it could be with such high populations and automotive usage.

One of the follies of ethanol is that it produces a lot of smog emissions.

The major pitfall is that it takes a lot energy to take the raw materials of agriculture and convert them into a burnable ethanol. It's one of the problems with producing hydrogen also, unless you take a shortcut and produce hydrogen from petroleum, that doesn't take as much energy or cost as much; but it hardly weans us off of petroleum.

Not only does burning ethanol produced more smog than petroleum, since it requires so much energy to process ethanol, the energy source also probably produces masses amounts of emissions. So not only will be the burning the ethanol, we will probably increase our burning of coal and other fuel sources to process the ethanol. The one fuel but I know of that might be able to make the processing of ethanol economical would be nuclear. Unfortunately it would probably take decades to get approval and build the nuclear power plants, something I feel that we should start doing now. If we wait until we get desperate, that means we would rush things and that could be dangerous. Another problem with nuclear power is there it is so much bureaucracy that it can reduce its a cost effectiveness and in some cases safety.

Al Gore and his liberal fascists are creating global warming hysteria, instead of playing politically correct global warming games. We should be working with industry to keep us in oil until big business can get the infrastructure and technology for alternative energy sources.

Unfortunately Bush the weak Republican which I think his quasi liberal has partly given into the global warming hysteria by jumping feet first on the ethanol bandwagon. I think it was good to increase our production, however I'm not sure the rate of change and extent of change is wise. Because it is surging our food prices, increasing emissions, and could possibly be devastating to our farmland by depleting the soil in the long-term.

I don't know if it's practical or feasible; but from what I hear there are vast fields of methane ice that is thought to be able to renew itself faster than we are consuming energy at the moment. If we could find some way to harvest it and get it to the user economically, I think it would be a good alternative energy source. Though it would likely wreak havoc on the ocean life. However by using the source it may prevent a catastrophic sudden release of global warming gases that could cause an extinction event.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Glenn
• Beck
• alternate
• fuel
• energy
• independence
• gas
• gasoline
• gasohol
• alcohol

[snattler]

I just had a thought. You know that ethanol is produced by yeast fermenting sugars . It seems there is one other byproduct of this process . Hmmmm, what could it be. Oh yeah CO2, and a lot of it. Isn't that what some people believe to be a greenhouse gas?

[ChrisPCrunchy]

Australia also has mandated that an E10 product 10% Ethanole is available for sale at petrol (gas) stations here. We however use the waste from sugar cane (that would normally be burnt) to produce it. Any product containing organic hydrogen (Organic material that will burn) Can be reduced by destructive distillation to produce ethanol.Why use a food crop? Our politicians are far dumber than yours but as we have a population roughly one tenth that of the US we cant afford such folly to win votes.

[Schemefighter]

@IndyFan53

Methane is a global warming gas. Methane ice or methane gas is not something you spill into the soil. Perhaps I should use language that you might understand. Cow farts are largely methane gas. I'm tired on wasting my time on the dishonest moron like you. You can't even have an intelligent honest conversation. It's like trying to discuss the theory of relativity with a kindergartner.

[Schemefighter]

@IndyFan53

What the heck is wrong with you? Your reply has nothing to do with what I said. If you think your reply is relevant to what I said then you must not even have a high school level understanding of science. How come most of you ethanol supporters seem to be totally inept? You seem to be greedy ignorant shills just spewing simpleminded rhetoric. You don't seem to have a clue what you are talking about.

[Schemefighter]

@IndyFan53

So is Panda Ethanol the company you are shilling for? The company is trying to use the carbon credit con to get money from the government under the guise of helping the environment when in fact it is helping to deplete agricultural soil? The company that filed for bankruptcy protection? You still haven't answered my questions, instead you just spew more manure.

[Schemefighter]

@IndyFan53

It seems that you are more concerned with shilling for industry than actually doing what's good for the environment or our country.

[Schemefighter]

@IndyFan53

At the methodologies that you propose are likely to produce the very antithesis of the platitudes that you spew. By not letting the manure go back into the soil your depleting the soil which is unsustainable (nonrenewable). The methodologies that you propose sound less labor and energy-efficient. The methodology is it that you propose would make us more dependent on high priced petroleum based fertilizers.

[Schemefighter]

@IndyFan53

I would think it would be more environmentally friendly and more energy-efficient to use manure as fertilizer rather than fuel. Are you connected to some profiteering industry like EarthRenew which is exploiting the environment and the hysteria from the global warming movement and the oil crunch?

[Schemefighter]

@IndyFan53

As I said before the safety and environmental standards are higher in the US so it makes things more expensive but safer. IIRC unlike in other countries; In the US manure can't be used directly on food crops it has to be composted and aged to reduce the bad bacteria and viruses. In countries in South America and Asia they allow fresh manure to be used on food crops and sewage water is used for irrigation. Which is partly why those countries have much more health issues.

[Schemefighter]

@IndyFan53

So if you object to using the manure based fertilizer, then what do you suggest? Depleting the soil till it's no good for farming like they do in many parts of South America and other parts of the world? Do you know it was practices like that that caused the dust bowl and reduced our agricultural production? Or are you suggesting that we use more man-made petroleum fertilizers? That would seem less environmentally friendly and less energy-efficient.

[Schemefighter]

@IndyFan53

It's not known for sure what caused the E. coli outbreaks in the US. It is thought that the E. coli outbreaks in the US was from runoff water containing feces from a nearby cattle farm, or from dear or wild pigs that raided the crops.

[IndyFan53]

@Schemefighter It's not just for environmental reasons, it's to help America stop giving into the high prices of petroleum and to create buisness oppurtunities.