Switchgrass:
Posted on 09/26/2005 1:44:36 PM PDT by cogitator
While it is difficult to see beyond the incalculable suffering caused by Hurricane Katrina, the impact on U.S. fuel supply is undeniable. For days, we watched the storm move toward Louisiana’s oil and natural gas operations. As feared, the storm disrupted a tenth of U.S. refining capacity and 25 percent of oil production. Now, analysts expect gas prices to squeeze to $4 per gallon. At this time, it is difficult to assess the price spike’s duration because the extent of structural damage is unknown. What is absolutely clear, however, is that too much reliance on a single energy source is a dangerous thing. As Katrina illustrated, supply interruptions are beyond our control, and without alternative options, there is no safety net to suppress price movements. Instead, we’re given pronounced volatility and an economy that is vulnerable to natural or man-made disruptions.
Unfortunately, threats to America’s oil interests extend far beyond the Gulf of Mexico. As a nation that imports roughly 60 percent of its oil, we spend untold amounts each year securing our foothold in oil-producing regions. Even so, unfettered access to foreign reserves is doubtful given the emergence of competitive economies such as China, India and the European Union.
There is nothing new here. The United States has watched these events unfold in a state of political paralysis. In July’s 1,724 page energy bill, for instance, Congress had the opportunity to decisively address runaway oil consumption. Astonishingly, it did nothing. In fact, it systematically voted down measures that would have signaled a meaningful shift in U.S. energy policy. In June, Sen. Maria Cantwell proposed an energy bill amendment requiring the United States to reduce its imported oil by 40 percent over 20 years. At 7.64 million barrels per day, the savings would be significant. Ultimately, her proposal was rejected. In its place, the Senate adopted a weaker provision requiring U.S. oil consumption to decline by 1 million barrels per day. In the end, even that was perceived as too risky. Now, in the wake of a natural disaster, the real risks have become obvious.
If Congress really wants to limit risk, it will break with conventional oil policy. This means diversifying our transportation fuels and improving vehicle performance. There are many possibilities. New breeds of ethanol, for example, could function as a supply cushion, absorbing the impacts of petroleum disruption. And because these fuels are harvested and refined domestically, they would strengthen the U.S. trade position. In fact, agricultural fuels could function as a potent economic development tool for struggling rural economies.
Nationally, rural poverty rates exceed urban poverty rates by 25 percent. A closer look, however, reveals that extreme poverty is concentrated in rural areas. Of the 500 poorest U.S. counties, more than 90 percent are rural. And of the 382 counties where poverty rates exceed 20 percent, 95 percent are rural. Developing the nation’s untapped rural energy can channel new revenue streams to farmers. The Oak Ridge National Laboratory estimates that harvesting and marketing switchgrass for ethanol production could provide $6 billion in annual net farming income. Selling corn stover and wheat straw for the same purpose could generate an additional $2 billion.
Even so, U.S. energy security can not rest on alternative fuels alone. It requires us to become less sensitive to supply interruptions by using less energy overall. Efficient vehicles like hybrids would go a long way toward limiting energy consumption. And like alternative fuels, efficient vehicles would benefit the U.S economy by giving workers a role in this growing market segment. The Apollo Alliance, a coalition of labor, environmental, community and business leaders, estimates that a meaningful commitment to efficient vehicles could secure more than 128,000 jobs for U.S. workers.
These fuels and technologies already exist—but are disadvantaged by petroleum’s century long dominance. The strong public interest behind a stable fuel supply justifies equally strong government intervention. While it is too late to protect ourselves from the present catastrophe, we can protect ourselves from future events.
Switchgrass:
Nonsense. So much petrochemical feedstock is used to produce the fertilizer to grow the grain and process it that there is a net loss overall.
Ethanol is just a boondogle and ripoff for Archer, Daniels, Midland and pork for grain state congresscrooks.
So9
The math and energy balance is considerably different for switchgrass. It doesn't need irrigation or fertilizer, and it's got a much higher energy content than corn. (That's why I posted the picture of it.)
'Because it is native, switchgrass is resistant to many pests and plant diseases, and it is capable of producing high yields with very low applications of fertilizer.' source.
Why would I possibly carpool or use mass transit? Those are two of the last things on earth that I would ever want to do.
The math and energy balance is considerably different for switchgrass. It doesn't need irrigation or fertilizer, and it's got a much higher energy content than corn. (That's why I posted the picture of it.)
OK, what do you intend to take out of production to free up the land to grow enough of it to be a significant contribution?
You are going to need tens of millions of acres.
So9
Nothing NEEDS irrigation or fertilizer. You can grow corn without irrigation or fertilizer. But, the addition of fertilizer produces yields that are greater than the cost of the fertilizer. Also, irrigation allows the ability to plant corn in places where one otherwise couldn't. It makes growing corn possible during a drought.
Actually, a lot of fertilizer is produced as a by-product of something else. Caprolactam production, for instance, fits this category.
I agree. That is exactly what my retired Amoco research-chemist neighbor told me. Short story...: It takes petroleum to produce ethanol.
Could someone ask Bill Moyers and his so if THEY carpool and use mass transit?
DRILL IN ANWAR
WINDMILLS OFF OF MASSACHUSETTS.
DRILL IN THE GULF.
I can think of all kinds of things other than carpooling and mass transit....why can't the Democrats.
Stop bussing school kids all over would save a considerable amount of fuel.
Drill in Nantucket.
Drill in Malibu.
Drill in Santa Monica.
Drill in the Upper East Side.
And drill like hell all over Hyanisport.
I posted this in another thread, but I felt that this is a good time to discuss alternative fuel sources.
Excerpt: "The key to producing enough ethanol is switchgrass," says Greene. Switchgrass shows great potential for improving yields, offers environmental benefits and can be grown in diverse areas across the country. Current average yields are five dry tons per acre. Crop experts have concluded standard breeding techniques, applied progressively and consistently, could more than double the yield of switchgrass. Yield improvements predicted by the report of 12.4 dry tons per acre are in keeping with results from breeding programs with crops such as corn and other grasses. The innovations discussed have a net effect of reducing the total land required to grow switchgrass to an estimated 114 million acres. Sufficient switchgrass could be grown on this acreage to produce 165 billion gallons of ethanol by 2050, which is equivalent to 108 billion gallons of gasoline. The next logical question is how do we integrate switchgrass production into our agricultural systems. The answer lies with the ability to produce animal protein from switchgrass. "If we have cost-effective agricultural policy, farmers will rethink what they plant," says Lynch "For example, we are using 70 million acres to grow soybeans for animal feed. You can grow more animal feed protein per acre with switchgrass. If there were a demand for biomass feedstocks to produce ethanol and other biofuels, farmers would be able to increase their profits by growing one crop producing two high value products."
Excerpt: "Most intriguing of all is switchgrass, a hardy North American plant that can be raised without irrigation and harvested with a low-labor process similar to mowing the lawn. In other words, it requires very little energy to bring to harvest compared with ethanol's traditional corn. According to Cornell's Pimentel, roughly 15 percent of the North American continent consists of land that is unsuitable for food farming but workable for switchgrass cultivation. Given the typical energy yield of switchgrass, a rough calculation indicates that if all that land were planted with switchgrass, we could replace every single gallon of gas consumed in the United States with a gallon of inexpensive, domestically produced, and more environmentally-friendly cellulosic ethanol."
There IS oil off the coasts of ALL those places, and the Liberal Eco-geeks will not allow it! How is it that these people don't ALLOW this....how do they have such POWER? More power than our Congress and our President???
We need to use the abundant coal resources we have.....and shale oil.
The Karrick process would be the near term answer to our need for oil. LTC...low temperature carbonization of coal would make us energy independent and allow us to make fuel with very little risk.
And we could diversify our energy with nuclear, wind and solar and be independent of problematic sources of energy.
got to have a drink before I read anything from TOM Paine
WRONG. If you think you can log onto a Conservative Website and sing the praises on a big govt imposed "solution" to a "problem" you are at the WRONG site. The solutions IS NOT more Govt. The whole PROBLEM is we have TOO MUCH Govt. Getting OFF oil is going to be a evolutionary, nor revolutionary process. As long as cheap oil is available, no alternatives are going to be cost effective. The solution is to pump it and BURN it so the Free Market prices oil out of the market while making alternatives price effective. Govt imposed Utopian "solutions" failed everywhere they have been imposed. This is EXACTLY the WRONG answer.
Hear, hear. We also need to dump government regs that prevent building Nuclear power plants and that stop us from drilling in this country. Down with the EPA. What a brainless idea THAT was, starting up an organization that could tell us how to use our own property!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.