With gas prices at an all-time high and growing concern over the future availability of foreign oil, there has been a renewed interest in ethanol as a potential fuel source. But BusinessWeek columnist Ed Wallace says embracing ethanol is “not such a good idea.” He describes the history of ethanol in three “acts” that began with ‘Project Independence’ in 1974. Wallace describes ethanol as an “inefficient fuel” that “creates less energy than is required to make it.” Mr. Wallace’s column was first published late last week, and has since been updated with a “Note from the Author” responding to criticisms. See the full story here.
New car price quote
Zero obligation price quote from a trusted local dealer.
05/01, 11:37 AM
posted by:
pete
already a long discussion started
http://www.acurazine.com/forums/showthread.php?t=337931
good read
05/01, 11:48 AM
posted by:
Anonymous
“……but it’s too haaaaaard! You make me read toooo much! Where can I get a Yellow t-shirt?”
And he doesn’t even mention the cost to grow the corn to begin with. Congress is getting ready to hand farmers another $2Bil within ‘emergency’ spending for Iraq/Katrina – when farmers had one of the best years ever in 2005 … plus got a fat welfare check two years prior.
j i m
05/01, 1:12 PM
posted by:
peter
I’m sick of how Corn has taken over the ethanol idea. Ask the Swedes, who have a very high portion of E85 vehicles in their country, where ethanol comes from, and they won’t tell you that it comes from corn. If I understand correctly, they get their’s from cellulosic sources, which means repurposing waste from all the paper and other wood related industries in Sweden, not spending money to farm fuel itself.
The articles and editorials are right to a degree, Corn is not energy efficient, Corn does not make sense for America’s (and the world’s) fuel problems. Ethanol, however, is bigger than corn, and if America doesn’t figure out how to get past that, someone else will (who doesn’t have powerful agricultural lobbies).
05/01, 1:49 PM
posted by:
Jason
Why is there NO mention on “HEMPâ€??
05/01, 9:34 PM
posted by:
Robert Fleming
Mixing just 15-20% ethanol with existing gas supplies would ease fuel shortages, and maybe lower costs. Just about every gas vehicle will run on that mixture. Most new ideas/projects start out inefficient, then gain efficiency in time. We need to do just about anything we can to get off imported oil. We are at the mercy of those who hate us!
05/02, 12:37 AM
posted by:
JA
I have to question this articles validity. One point that stood out in my mind was where he talked about E85 costing more then regular gas at many midwest stations. I have yet to see a single station where that is true and I have traveled all over the midwest in the last few months. I think big oil may be into this guys pockets.
Ethanol may not be the answer to our problems but all signs point to atleast it being able to help the situation a bit until a more effective alternative can be found.
05/02, 1:34 AM
posted by:
e30e
I guess all those Brazilians driving alll ethanol ran vehicles are a “tragedy”
05/02, 9:25 AM
posted by:
corndog
The tragedy is that we have relied on CONSERVATION measures for 30 years, which, due to unintended consequences, have actually exacerbated our oil dependency. Bio-fuels represent REPLACEMENT policy, and it is in this direction our country should go.
I agree with the above poster who says that the nay-saying is dwelling too much on corn. Cellulosic ethanol, bio-diesel, and possibly even methanol and butanol could combine to fuel our future, but only if we DITCH conservation (CAFE) as policy. Flex-fuel vehicles of the future could, with few modifications, use ANY alcohol fuel. I vote that we put them out there as our national policy, and let the market sort out the winner.