Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

read that in iowa e-85 is the now thing

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
cpousnret Donating Member (213 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-22-06 04:51 AM
Original message
read that in iowa e-85 is the now thing
a small town of 3000 built a flexfuel plant,e-85 ethanol,the town grew to 15,000,they built a new school and everyone is employed.the town is booming.the way i`m told is that if we would institute e-85 fuel in 5 years we could cut our dependence on foreign fuel by half.whats nice about ethanol is it came be made from corn,soybean etc.anyone have any other info on this subject.thanks,peace
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Quakerfriend Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-22-06 04:59 AM
Response to Original message
1. Well the big AG business would just love this. This, of course
is why they are pushing it. I think that solar would be better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cpousnret Donating Member (213 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-22-06 05:02 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. agree
anything would be better.the sun is the son.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wakeme2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-22-06 05:11 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. I'm for looking all ALL alternatives
and using the best for each case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Massacure Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-22-06 08:17 AM
Response to Reply #1
10. Cars don't run on solar.
Because batteries do not have enugh energy density to store sufficient amounts of power. You need a liquid fuel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Strelnikov_ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-22-06 09:56 AM
Response to Reply #10
15. Electric Cars Are Fine. It's Americans Expectations That Are The Problem
A fleet of lightweight electric people movers, like the following concept, are feasible in even a fossil fuel depleted world. In this world, the high energy density liquid fuels would be dedicated to production/logistics.

The expectation that electric or bio-fuel sources will let us continue our easy motoring, fast food nirvina in 5,000 lb. living rooms on wheels is magical thinking.



http://evworld.com/view.cfm?section=article&storyid=104
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MervinFerd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-22-06 06:25 AM
Response to Original message
4. Be Skeptical. Be VERY skeptical.......
Corn, growing in rows requires a LOT of fertilizer and pesticides and herbicides and tractor fuel. Making ethanal from it uses more fuel.

SO, the net benefit is doubtful.

Fuel from biomass--massive prolific growth in a tropical climate--might be practical. But it will require a massive investment to replace a significant part of our oil consumption. And there will be environmental consequences.

Petroleum is essentially free fuel. There isn't a really good substitute.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bitchkitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-22-06 07:40 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. In a word: hemp n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Massacure Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-22-06 08:23 AM
Response to Reply #7
11. In a word, nope.
There are many better crops than hemp.

http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_yield.html

Rapeseed can be grown for nearly three times as much yield than hemp and five times as much as corn.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-22-06 10:03 AM
Response to Reply #11
16. in a word- algae
algae is BY FAR the best crop for biodiesel-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biodiesel

For a truly renewable source of oil, crops or other similar cultivatable sources would have to be considered. Plants utilize photosynthesis to convert solar energy into chemical energy. It is this chemical energy that biodiesel stores and is released when it is burned. Therefore plants can offer a sustainable oil source for biodiesel production. Different plants produce usable oil at different rates. Some studies have shown the following annual production:

* Soybean: 40 to 50 US gal/acre (35 to 45,000 L/km²)
* Rapeseed: 110 to 145 US gal/acre (100 to 130,000 L/km²)
* Mustard: 140 US gal/acre (130,000 L/km²)
* Jatropha: 175 US gal/acre (160,000 L/km²)
* Palm oil: 650 US gal/acre (580,000 L/km²) <6>
* Algae: 10,000 to 20,000 US gal/acre (9,000,000 to 18,000,000 L/km²)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Massacure Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-22-06 09:15 PM
Response to Reply #16
21. Yes. I do support algae use.
But I wanted to prove there was something that was already commercially developed that was better than hemp. Algae blows away the competition on paper, but we have yet to see it work on a large scale in the real world. I can't wait for someone to try though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU9598 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-22-06 07:48 AM
Response to Reply #4
9. That's an old, oil industry argument
Of course the only reason that the tractor producing the grain/corn uses fossil fuels is because that was the industry standard. With $3.00 gas hitting Iowa this weekend we are seeing a shift to E85 fuel in large tractors and trucks. Once that conversion takes place - and the market will make the conversion - then ethanol will become more efficient as fossil fuels become obsolite. That's surely something the oil industry is trying to stop.

Yes, Biomass will require a massive investment, just like the investment that brings us the discovery, transport, and refining of oil. That didn't happen overnight. Think of all the investment in the oil industry. Our next fuel source will not be cheap, but the market will bring it to us as oil becomes too expensive.

E85 is not more corrosive than any other fuel source, minus solar/electric. Can't respond any other way than to just deny that one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmowreader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-22-06 09:14 AM
Response to Reply #9
13. Hang on for a second. E85 is 15-percent gasoline, right?
How in HELL are you going to run that in a diesel?

I know farmers' "old trucks" run on gas. Their "new trucks" are diesels, and their heavy equipment definitely is. Put a fuel designed for gasoline engines in a diesel and it will take the heads off.

Biodiesel's good for diesel engines...which leads to the next question: if we're growing enough vegetable matter to fuel vehicles, where are we going to grow vegetable matter to eat?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rene Donating Member (758 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-22-06 06:39 AM
Response to Original message
5. I've read that Ethanyl is very corrosive.....to the tanks/pipes and engine
parts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-22-06 06:43 AM
Response to Original message
6. hemp for fuel via ethanol may be the only economical choice than also
decreases use of oil - it does not need the oil products used in corn growing.

But conservation via plug in hybrid cars and just better design of appliances will be the interm solution.

I wish the fuel cell folks all the luck they may need, but the infrastructure change take a lot of time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Massacure Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-22-06 08:23 AM
Response to Reply #6
12. See post #11.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-22-06 05:30 PM
Response to Reply #12
20. yield is NOT the criteria -based oil use to produce energy Hemp's best n/t
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Massacure Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-22-06 09:16 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. Huh? You make no sense.
Explain.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 07:03 PM
Response to Reply #22
24. I skiped a few words didn't I - criteria is the least oil used to produce
energy considering the total senario including oil used in transporting and the oil used in fertilizer and the volume that can be produced which includes being able to grow in poor soil.

I have seen total input - total output models for corn that indicate little oil is saved and models for sugar cane that indicate excellent oil savings - both models being verified in practice, and a model for Hemp that suggests it would be the best crop for use in the US.

I have not seen total input- total output models for rapeseed that indicate a net oil saving.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-22-06 10:11 PM
Response to Reply #6
23. one quality that hemp oil has-
that i'm not sure is true or not of all vegetable oils-

just about anything that can be made with petroleum derivitaves- plastics and such- can be also be synthesized from hemp oil.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
morningglory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-22-06 07:47 AM
Response to Original message
8. Then, how in heck will we have excuses to wage war and kill our
beautiful sons, if we don't need oil? Oh, yeah, we need oil in order to fuel our war machinery. That's the ticket! Need fuel for the tanks and hummers just in case WE are ever attacked. We wage war to get oil because we need oil in case of war. In *bush's world war is perpetual, like the national debt. I got it now. Excuse me for posting. Mod please delete. (sarcasm thingy)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Strelnikov_ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-22-06 09:40 AM
Response to Original message
14. Corn Ethanol Does Nothing To Reduce Fossil Fuel Dependence
Edited on Sat Apr-22-06 09:43 AM by loindelrio
the way it is currently implemented.

Most studies indicate an EPR (Energy Profit Ratio) of 1 for corn ethanol from an energy standpoint, and 1.3 to 1.8 for corn ethanol once the value of coproducts are credited. Considering that 2/3rd’s of the energy consumed in corn ethanol production is in conversion (ethanol plant), this indicates opportunities for utilizing co-generation or renewables (wind) for most of this process energy. This is why I view ethanol in general, and corn ethanol spoecifically, more as a valuable energy carrier than an energy source. Process corn for ethanol using an energy input from renewable energy, renewable energy is converted to a valuable liquid fuel, with most of the food value of the corn remaining for consumption.

Just east of Ames, IA an ethanol processing plant is being built. In the brief for the project they advertised how the new plant will use the same coal supply delivered to the Ames, IA municipal electric plant 4 mi. to the west, thus resulting in savings. Problem is, this plant will burn coal to produce a liquid fuel with an EPR of 1 (corn ethanol) when you could produce a liquid fuel with an EPR of 5 from the coal directly. Thus, from a greenhouse gas standpoint, this ethanol is worse than petroleum derived fuels.

Once the crises arrives, ’energy balance’ will be the prime consideration in evaluating process feasibility.

With co-generation, this plant could have been located such that waste heat from the coal fired electric plant could have been utilized by the ethanol process. In addition, the Ames power plant burns local garbage, therefore waste material from the ethanol process could be burned (resource recovered, as they call it).

Another alternate is wind. Most of the corn belt and the high plains (potential switchgrass growing region) are reasonably close to areas that have good to excellent wind energy potential, most of which is essentially stranded. A major wind farm was just completed around 50 mi. to the NW of the plant site.

Corn ethanol is not a 'solution' to the coming energy crises. But I do think, under the scenario presented above, a viable mitigation option. Wind energy and corn ethanol are proven, scalable processes. We have the corn, we have the wind, why not marry the two as a mitigation/powerdown option until cellulosic ethanol and other developmental energy options mature. To me, this makes a lot more sense than pouring energy and money into developing tar sands or pre-oil shale.

Refer to Table 6 of the following report for a breakdown of energy use for corn ethanol production.

The Energy Balance of Corn Ethanol: An Update / AER-813
United States Department of Agriculture - July 2002

http://www.transportation.anl.gov/pdfs/AF/265.pdf

Another consideration is that an energy system dependent on biofuels will be subject to crippling shortages during drought years. Can you imagine the effect of a ‘dust bowl’ series of years on a biofuel industry?

I believe that biofuels need to be exploited to their maximum practical extent. But any energy infrastructure system would have to address periods of reduced production of these fuels. One way to mitigate would be to build a ‘strategic coal stockpile’ with mothballed liquefaction capacity ready to be put on line in the event of a shortfall. Mothballed capacity and stockpiles are not a part of a Laissez-faire system.

In the coming world of energy scarcity, the current ‘free-market’ dynamic will be incapable of providing a relatively stable energy supply. We will need a diverse, redundant and integrated energy infrastructure that will require planning and coordination far beyond what ‘market signals’ (ie: price) can provide.

Once we have established a USEA (U.S. Energy Authority) that provides centralized high-level planning and funding for the energy infrastructure, we can begin basing infrastructure development on an energy balance basis. This would hopefully avoid the building of inefficient systems, such as the coal fired ethanol plant I cited above.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hayu_lol Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-22-06 10:41 AM
Response to Reply #14
17. e-85 may be a fine substitute for all those people living at sea level...
but is worth nothing to those of us who live at high altitudes in mountainous areas of the country. Ethenol produces less energy so engines burning this fuel produce less power. To cover the same distance, much more fuel is burned.

Add to this problem, the more frequent shop visits to service the engine, ethenol just isn't worth spit. More fuel is needed, not less.

Let the Iowans enjoy their e-85 corn-derived fuel. It does nothing for many of us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSdemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-22-06 10:56 AM
Response to Original message
18. The best way to reduce oil dependence: use less gas
Let's ratchet up fuel economy standards, eliminate the truck/SUV exceptions, and expand the gas guzzler tax.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orsino Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-22-06 11:07 AM
Response to Original message
19. And on the street, they're cutting heroin with powdered milk.
The addicts are still addicted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 01:13 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC