Biofuels. The Real Deal?

Road and Track ^ | June, 2008 | Dennis Simanaitis

[Uriah_lost]

I notice ol’ Patches didn’t want to take you on and even resubmitted data you had already shredded.
I’ve looked over his posting history and I’m guessing “Paultard”.

[count-your-change]

” Flex-fuel cars get a 20-percent tax break at purchase and an approximately $1500 rebate.”
So every body else gets to pay for cars they don’t own?

[Spirochete]

Ethanol fires harder to control than gasoline, require special foam

More altfuel disinformation but this one's a real hoot.

Ethanol is water soluble, unlike gasoline or diesel. Water extinguishes an ethanol fire. Water spreads gasoline fires.

[org.whodat]

Also, I was surprised by the introduction of a machine for making home-made ethanol.

Man we have been doing that forever down south, we call it a moonshine still.

[org.whodat]

That silly study, which is 99% bs, is what got this mess going. It was paid for and produced by lobbyists.

[Hoodat]

Patch, It takes 1.44 gallons of ethanol to have the energy equivalent of 1.00 gallons of gasoline. From this site, Table 1 will show that 81,000 BTUs of energy are required to manufacture a gallon of ethanol. Multiply this by 1.44 results in 116,770 BTUs to produce the ethanol equivalent of a gallon of gasoline.

Now, let'e examine gasoline. This site shows that a gallon of gasoline provides 115,ooo BTUs of energy. This means that it takes the energy equivalent of 1.015 gallons of gasoline to produce the ethanol equivalent of 1.000 gallons of gasoline. And this assumes that gasoline production is a zero-sum game, which it is not. It takes far, far less than 115,000 BTUs to produce a gallon of gasoline.

So, who's the liar now?

[TheRobb7]

Good post.

Bottom line for me?

Corn belongs on your dinner plate, not your gas tank.

[thackney]

Another way to look at the energy balance is to look at the fossil energy ratio.

Why use an energy ratio that only counts some of the energy inputs? Power generated by Nuclear or Hydro is still power that had cost and other uses. It is only an attempt to make something like ethanol look better than it actually is.

[niteowl77]

a vote buying boondoggle brought to you by the k street friends of juan mccain

Did McCain give compensated speeches for VeraSun Energy too? I must've missed that... I was busy stumbling across all of Barack Obama's old and new friends in Big Ethanol.

Mr. niteowl77

[aft_lizard]

I used that to respond to an earlier post to dispute his ration of 1 gallon of fuel used to 13 gallons of ethanol created, which is a pile of misinformation.

Now back to your point, what is it exactly? Are you saying they don’t use all of the energy input to come up with there ratio? With out seeing the study they used to come up with their final numbers I cannot say they did or did not.

[thackney]

Are you saying they don’t use all of the energy input to come up with there ratio?

Not when you are discussing fossil fuel ratio. By definition, it does not include inputs from items like electric power generated by nuclear, hydro or wind.

The department of energy produced their own brochure using data from Center for Transportation Research and Argonne National Laboratory.

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/pdfs/program/ethanol_brochure_color.pdf

They show the difference of total energy (left side below) ratio versus fossil fuel (center below) ratio.

When you look at the total energy needed to produce the fuel, the dept of energy claims it takes more to produce it than the fuel contains.

This brochure and other information is available at:

Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center,Ethanol Energy Balance
http://www.eere.energy.gov/afdc/ethanol/balance.html

[aft_lizard]

Then I fail to see your disagreement with me, at all. Your argument belongs with some one else.

[SunkenCiv]

[singing] Goin’ to surf city...

[thackney]

You made a post suggesting using fossil energy ratio to compare ethanol. I believe that such a ratio is rather incomplete. It is often used by pro-ethanol groups trying to make it look better than it actually is.

I didn't see it as an argument. Just a discussion why such a comparison has less meaning than total energy energy ratio.

Cheers.

[aft_lizard]

No I replied to a post that used a fossil fuel use to energy gained ratio, big difference. Especially considering the info I used was not my own words. And beyond that I am not posting pro-ethanol info, if you noticed my second post to that guy it painted an even more negative light than the first one, which was posted to dispel his 1 gallon of fossil fuel to 13 gallons of ethanol.

[thackney]

You made a post suggesting using fossil energy ratio to compare ethanol.

No I replied to a post that used a fossil fuel use to energy gained ratio, big difference.

From Post #12:

Another way to look at the energy balance is to look at the fossil energy ratio.

I was trying to discourage the use of such a ratio as I believe it is misleading.

Especially considering the info I used was not my own words.

You chose to copy and post those words. That was what I was addressing.

I am not posting pro-ethanol info

I have not ever claimed you were. But I believe comparisons of only fossil fuel and not total energy input are misleading and I don't believe either should be used.