New studies show that it takes less energy to grow cellulosic crops.
Tuesday, January 08, 2008
By Kevin Bullis
There's some more good news about cellulosic ethanol, a fuel derived from grasses and other nonfood sources. It's long been estimated that the amount of energy in such fuels will be much more than the energy required to make them--which is not the case with corn-grain-based ethanol. Now experimental results are in, and the ratio of energy produced to energy used is even better than expected. The renewable energy produced was 540 percent more than the nonrenewable energy used to make it. Previous studies estimated that the number would be more like 340 percent. The improvement comes, basically, from farmers using less energy than researchers thought they would to grow switchgrass, one of the proposed cellulosic sources.
The better ratio means that cellulosic ethanol could do more to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions than previously thought. That's particularly good news, since new legislation will require that some 21 billion gallons of fuel be made from such non-corn-grain sources. The trick now is to improve methods for converting switchgrass into ethanol--making the processes cheaper--and to get farmers to start growing switchgrass in large amounts.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Comments
Daniel from SA on 01/09/2008 at 4:32 AM
8
RD on 01/09/2008 at 12:58 PM
58
Scottar on 03/10/2008 at 9:53 PM
7
You are correct that more evidence is coming to light that climate change is not really driven by CO2 emissions. In fact one scientist showed that natural emission fudge uncertainties far overshadowed Anthropogenic CO2 emissions. And this scientist showed that the IPCC over- sensitized it's climate models to CO2's contribution and positive feedback elements in the climate system. I have read various other articles that support his findings:
http://www.dailytech.com/Researcher+Basic+Greenhouse+Equations+Totally+Wrong/article10973.htm
Researcher: Basic Greenhouse Equations "Totally Wrong"
Michael Asher (Blog) - March 6, 2008 11:02 AM
New derivation of equations governing the greenhouse effect reveals "runaway warming" impossible
Miklós Zágoni isn't just a physicist and environmental researcher. He is also a global warming activist and Hungary's most outspoken supporter of the Kyoto Protocol. Or was. That was until he learned the details of a new theory of the greenhouse effect, one that not only gave far more accurate climate predictions here on Earth, but Mars too. The theory was developed by another Hungarian scientist, Ferenc Miskolczi, an atmospheric physicist with 30 years of experience and a former researcher with NASA's Langley Research Center........... Go to website for more.
So what the government and research labs should be doing is developing more efficiency in energy usage as well as alternatives and quit worrying about the AGW CO2 factor. And they should allow more drilling for gas and oil as needed to keep the economy 'oiled' and energy prices reasonable until those alternatives can be properly developed and implemented. Rome wasn't built in a day and neither will the new energy economy.
From what I have read best possibilities are solar produced energy alternatives both at the consumer as well as large commercial installations, electrical and hybrid type technology, diesel ICE's, bio fuels from engineered microbes and algee sources. Lets not rule out carbon fuel cell technology to take advantage of the vast resources of coal. Wind is more of a bandaid then real power source, it would be better utilized for production of hydrogen or other liquid energy form. And there are better designs then the tower type that are less intrusive. 4th generation nuclear plants that require less enriched uranium and use helium as a coolant instead of water could also be utilized with advanced transmutation of the nuke waste into fuel and short lived waste isotopes.
When you remove the hysteria and fear mongering of the Envirocrats the energy scene becomes limitless, especially with technological innovation. It will be an ongoing diversified progression with no one winner, unless fusion becomes a viable reality.
DJTal on 01/09/2008 at 5:11 AM
116
killian on 01/09/2008 at 9:41 PM
55
(Wind is about 30,000 mi^2, more than CSP, but still much less than switchgrass, and about 95% of a wind farm can have a second use.)
NREL estimates the CSP potential in U.S. West rated "premium" or "excellent" at 1,642 TWh on 6,091 sq. mi. (they also have another 456 TWh in the "good" category). The NREL survey excludes a long list of places, including sensitive areas.
Oh, and by the way, there are only 1,137,504 mi^2 of "cropland pasture, grassland pasture and range, and forest land grazed" in the U.S. Are we going to use 60% of this land to fuel our cars? What about the species that depend upon that land?
Let's not destroy our prairies when a much saner alternative exists.
hachi on 01/10/2008 at 9:02 AM
29
killian on 01/10/2008 at 3:17 PM
55
DJTal on 01/12/2008 at 6:33 AM
116
killian on 01/18/2008 at 4:51 PM
55
DJTal on 01/20/2008 at 5:31 AM
116
killian on 01/21/2008 at 11:25 AM
55
Using 0.07/kWh, 300 Wh/mi, and 92% efficient grid, one gets 0.023/mi driving cost for BEVs. To match this driving cost, ethanol would have to have a cost of production of 0.54/gallon at 35 MPGge, and 0.92/gallon at 60 MPGge. How likely is this? I also expect the retail markup of regulated electricity to be less than that of ethanol.
Siphon on 04/01/2008 at 6:36 AM
112
Plugins can reduce automotive liquid fuel consumption up to about 80% fairly cost-effectively. Increased electric rail transportation could increase the electric portion considerably. However, this leaves little for airplaines, although high speed rail could drastically reduce shorter distance and intracontinental flights. Building the infrastructure takes a long time though.
And we still have to deal with ships.
Without algae, I'm afraid there's going to be liquid fuel problems. That leaves liquefying coal, which isn't an enticing proposition.
ronwagn on 02/20/2008 at 7:16 AM
10
I am amazed by the negativity of some comments. Is it that everyone has their favorite technology. I think we need them all, and let the natural winners evolve. Energy independence is the most important goal, to me.
killian on 04/22/2008 at 2:14 PM
55
You mention that energy independence is your primary interest. Mine is eliminating our greenhouse gas emissions. Argonne's estimate is that E85 from cellulosic ethanol is 64% lower emissions than gasoline. That's not good enough.
MakeSense on 01/10/2008 at 11:49 AM
79
Solar John on 01/13/2008 at 8:22 PM
13
sj
wasters on 06/22/2008 at 11:55 AM
3
Here is an idea that the Republicans, oil, tobacco companies will hate.
How about we plant sugar cane or sugar beets in the states of Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, Alabama and Louisiana. We encourage them to stop planting tobacco which is killing millions. Sugar cane or sugar beets are 7 times more efficient than corn in making ethanol.
You want proof that it works? Just google Brazil and find out for yourself. Now, you won’t be using a food product or even displacing a food product……
In 1798, Thomas Malthus predicted that population growth would be perennially held in “check” by inherent limits to food production. ... Energy can substitute for food in his theory but when the energy is the food……catastrophe will result.
Completely renewable and no one is hurt except for those purveyors of death the tobacco companies.
I would sure like to know the idiot who decided to use corn (a food product) and doomed ethanol to failure. Had to be an oilman!
Stop the tax subsidies to corn farmers and give them to sugar cane and sugar beet farmers, in the mean time eliminate import tariffs for ethanol. Allow the import of flex-cars made by our very own car company Chevy….
Come on all you Democrats in Congress are you going to give us more of the same or are you going to make a difference? Do something now to prove you are not just more of the same…… and I mean minions of the oil companies….
OH! This could all be done in one year……….No more dependence on foreign oil. What ever happened to common sense in America? You know, if we can’t straighten out a simple mess like this we deserve to fade away as a has been leading nation……
It is real simple folks; America has been sabotaged by special interests namely the oil companies including those from the Middle East who want to sell oil, oil, oil.
Cars are already to go, made by Chevy! They are called flex-cars and burn any combination of oil and ethanol.
wasters on 06/26/2008 at 1:17 PM
3
Ethanol made from sugar cane and sugar beets is 7 times more efficient than ethanol made from corn and won't affect the food supply. Sugar beets can be grown damn near everywhere while sugar cane can be grown in the southern states.
You have got to stop listening to the oil companies as they have screwed everything up for years now...... The oil companies own the White House and Congress. Who in the hell do you think choose ‘CORN’ to make ethanol out of which was doomed to failure even before they began. Who do you think put a tariff on imported ethanol?
Oil companies have no solutions but to drill more, true energy independence will not involve oil companies. You have got to stop listening to the oil companies as they have screwed everything up for years now......
The solution to energy independence is ethanol and E85 fuel which our cars can burn right now! It is renewable, Right Now!!!! If something comes up later fine but right now the answer is E85 ethanol.
Removing the tariff from imported ethanol would give us access to cheap ethanol.
You have got to stop listening to the oil companies as they have screwed everything up for years now......
The truth is available in Brazil; they have been using E85 for years now. Check it out for yourself….
Don’t you find it ironic that the White House and Congress along with the oil companies still want to send more and more of our cash over to the Middle East to support our sworn enemies, the terrorists? What the hell is that all about?
Ford and Chevy are taking a beating so why don't they use their heads and put E85 fuel pumps at their dealships and push that their cars will run on 85% ethanol.
wasters on 07/01/2008 at 1:06 PM
3
Start pushing sugar cane and sugar beet ethanol which is 7 times more efficient than 'corn' ethanol and it doesn't rob our food supplies.
It is time for you to face up to the truth; oil companies have screwed you worse than they have screwed us. You owe them nothing so start doing something to save your company. I’ll bet all those little FORDS that are all over Europe would sell like hot cakes right about now.