Seeking Newer Ways of Ethanol Preparation

NYT News Service ^ | February 21, 2006 | Matthew L Wald

[kellynla]

The endless fields of corn in the Midwest can be distilled into endless gallons of ethanol, a clean-burning, high-octane fuel that could end any worldwide oil shortage and reduce emissions that cause global warming.

There is only one catch: Turning corn into ethanol takes energy. For every gallon that an ethanol manufacturing plant produces, it uses the equivalent of almost two-fifths of a gallon of fuel (usually natural gas), and that does not count the fuel needed to make fertilizer for the corn, run the farm machinery, or truck the ethanol to market.

The use of all that fossil fuel to make ethanol substantially reduces its value as an alternative source of energy. Ethanol production is expected to hit 5 billion gallons this year, equal to more than three percent of gasoline supplies, and more ethanol distilleries are being built. But if ethanol is to realize its potential, its proponents recognize that they will have to develop new ways to make it. "In this industry, you can't take a parochial view of your business," said William A Lee, general manager of Chippewa Valley Ethanol, in Benson, Minn., United States and former chairman of the Renewable Fuels Association, an ethanol trade group.

[hgro]

This is just one more myth from the petroleum industry. The production of ethanol produces products other than ethanol which all of the "experts" that generate these articles knocking ethanol choose to ignore.

Look up the recent article from U.C. Berkeley that confirmed the practicality of ethanol production from corn.

[thackney]

Brazil also uses ~40% more diesel as fuel than gasoline and ethanol combined. Without a doubt, the ethanol is a strong contributor.

Brazil - Sugar - Ethanol Update – February 2006

There's no obvious reason that ethanol couldn't replace 100% of US imports for transportation fuels.

Actually there is. Do the math for the land required to match the US importation of fuel. Ethanol can and should be used to help. But the US will need to do what Brazil has also done, increase the production of their petroleum resources.

[hgro]

In a process called partial oxidation, the steam breaks apart the plant's carbohydrates into two gases: elemental hydrogen and carbon monoxide. Both burn nicely as a substitute for natural gas.

Wald needs to take a chemistry course.

[Mr. Lucky]

The substance of your article seems to contradict the purpose for which you assert it. Brazil has obtained independence from foreign oil just as the article (now several years old) predicted it would.

[thackney]

It states that they are still importing oil, as have other sources posted. It also states they are expanding their crude oil production. Ethanol has certainly helped Brazil and can help us. But it alone has not caused Brazil to become petroleum independent. Nor will ethanol replace all current US petroleum imports. I do not mean to suggest that ethanol is not useful; it certainly is. But to claim it will replace all foreign oil is to be ignorant of the facts. I do believe the US could become energy independent, but it will take additional sources like ANWR, OCS, nuclear, coal and oil shale.

[edsheppa]

Do the math for the land required to match the US importation of fuel.

I have. According to this,

Switchgrass has the potential to produce the biomass required for production of up to 1000 gallons of ethanol per acre.

US consumption of gasoline is about 146,000,000,000 gallons per year. That is energy equivalent to around 200,000,000,000 gallons of ethanol. We currently import about 60% of our oil so let's say we import 120,000,000,000 gallons of gasoline. That can be produced from 120,000,000 acres of switch grass.

According to this, there were 434,000,000 acres of cropland in the US in 2002. So, increasing land under cultivation by about a fourth would replace our gasoline imports. That is a big undertaking but it's not obviously undoable.

I don't disagree that domestic oil production should be increased. I do disagree though that it is a reasonable long term strategy.

[FreePaul]

...some studies claim that switchgrass is not a viable alternative, requiring 45 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced...

You neglected to include this from the article you cited. Doesn't make switchgrass look very attractive.

[Mr. Lucky]

Brazil anticipates no oil imports this year and expects its exports of ethanol to net it $1.6 Billion (up from $500 Million last year) by the year 2010.

I don't know how to post articles, but you can find an article about this in the January 12, 2006, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette on-line.

[edsheppa]

I didn't notice that but I also I don't believe it. Fundamentally we're talking about solar power. It is clearly possible to do so with a net energy benefit or there would be no life on earth. The difference here is that we're turning the light into transportation fuel.

Note that is says "some studies." I have noticed an unhealthy hyperskepticism about ethanol (and many other things).

[thackney]

The assumption was to make the US energy independent by replacing all oil imports with ethanol, not a fraction of it. We currently import ~13,420,000 BPD of crude oil and refined products.

US Weekly Imports, 4 wk avg, EIA

This equals 4.898 Billion Barrels of Oil and Products.
This equals 205.8 Billion gallons of Oil and Products.

72.6% of this is crude oil. Crude oil cannot be converted directly to gasoline losses. But we do use the other products left after refining in this country.

For the purpose of this rough calculation, I suggest discarding the 7.6 gallons of "other products" shown in this chart. I believe making the US energy independent would require replacing most of that as well, but I am trying to be conservative in the calculation.

This brings us to 178.7 billion barrels of fuel that needs to be replaced with ethanol. Using your conversion that requires 244.8 billion barrels of ethanol.

There is quite a lot of debate on how much energy is used to make the ethanol. But the more generous figures seem to be 2/5 of the energy produced is needed. To include that we are now at 342.7 billion gallons of fuel required to make us energy independent.

I notice the article you linked used the potential to produce. Let us use that figure anyways. Now we need 342.7 million acres of land. Just where are you going to get that?

From you link where you got 434,000,000 acres of cropland, you should read further, only 302,700,000 acres are actually harvested cropland. Some of that has other uses such as pastures.

So now we need to more than double the entire amount of cropland in the United States. I believe it would be actually a good bit more than that. It will take a lot of facilities to do the conversions. Cropland takes some support infrastructure that also consumes some land. I believe you would also need to replace part of the "other products" to make us energy independent.

We cannot get the government to let us use 2,000 acres in one of the most barren wastelands on this continent to drill for oil in one of the densest concentrations of oil left on this planet. I have watched many, many acres of farmland turn into subdivisions and other developments across many states for the last few decades. I do not see ethanol alone making the US energy independent. And I do not see how this could possible keep up with continued growth.

[edsheppa]

OK, I accept your analysis as being more realistic (but I also think that it is worst case - e.g. biotech will decrease the conversion cost which needn't come entirely from ethanol anyway) and having to double cropland makes it harder. But even so, 340 million acres is a little less than 15% of the land area of the United States. I suspect between the US and Canada we could come up with that amount of farmland. It's always fun to put the greenies between a rock and a hard place.

BTW, I don't think energy independence should be the goal. Rather we should aim for energy security. It is perfectly reasonable to import ethanol from Brazil or Australia for example. Nor do I think we have to replace 100% of our oil imports to be secure.

One other point. I think the correct long-term strategy should be to replace oil with electricity as much as possible. Nukes are the solution.

[fallujah-nuker]

Ethanol can be distilled using electricity. It makes no sense now as so much of our electric power is produced using coal and oil but would if nuclear power could be employed.

You could probably use the waste steam and still generate electricity in a co-generation plant. There's a lot of potential energy going up the cooling towers right now.

[fallujah-nuker]

this conversation is beneath me... if you can't or won't realize the "cost" of American lives lost in wars for foreign oil then there is little hope for you. Class dismissed!

I'm surprised that he didn't accuse you of being in the employ of ADM! Thanks for posting this thread.

[mysterio]

If innovation could make ethanol an option, that would be great. I'm tired of seeing our energy dollars going to those who would see our nation destroyed.

Plus, my grandmother farms corn. And she's a really great grandmother.

[kellynla]

glad to do it
if you check; I posted several articles today and yesterday that I found on ethanol

[thackney]

But even so, 340 million acres is a little less than 15% of the land area of the United States. I suspect between the US and Canada we could come up with that amount of farmland.

But it is a lot more than 15% of the usuable land for this crop. Switchgrass will do well in many places, but I don't think Alaska, Hawaii, the Colorado and West Virginia mountains or Nevada and Arizona desert is going to be a productive place to grow. Do you honestly believe that we have the equivalent of ALL the land of Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa and Kansas available and not currently being used? And now you want to count Canada's land as available as well.

Come on, be realistic. Ethanol from biomass is something the US needs to expand. There are lots of sources to be used that are wasted today. But it is not going to come close to replacing our gasoline imports. It will reduce it. But we need more than this.

[thackney]

I want you to consider a couple other items for ethanol production. This is an annual batch system for producing fuel. There will be some places where crops can be harvested earlier or later, but basically an annual production. That ethanol has to be stored then distributed through the year. If the required storage for 80% of the yearly usage, that is a storage facility more than 11 times larger than the entire strategic petroleum reserve.

Also consider weather. What would happen to the United States if a majority of our transportation fuel depended on crops, then we had repeat of the 1934 through 1936 droughts?

[edsheppa]

And now you want to count Canada's land as available as well. Come on, be realistic.

Yes, of course. As I said, it doesn't really matter if the ethanol is imported. And yes, I think it's hard but could be done if it makes economic sense, that is if the ethanol is competitive with gasoline.

[FreePaul]

If we dedicate all of our farm land to ethanol production I guess we can always import our food. Then we can argue about why we can't grow our own food.

[Trust but Verify]

BS. Ethanol is not going to reduce our comsumption of oil, and it is not going to save anyone any money. They are trying to shove that crap down our throats here in Wisconsin and there will be hell to pay if the mandate passes the state senate! Have you seen the price of ethanol lately? It's going for over $2.75/gallon! It costs more than unleaded gasoline. This is all about the ethanol lobby and I'm sick and tired of our government selling us out to lobbyists.