Ethanol Not A Total Loss
blamanj writes "It has been argued that using corn-derived ethanol as a fuel costs more in energy than what is produced. However, it is being reported that a new study that calculates the energies to include processing by-products reports a net gain in energy such that every BTU of existing liquid (fossil) fuels spent produces a 6 BTU return. While this doesn't address the environmental impact of large-scale farming, it's good news for Iowa farmers."
Using EtOH does a couple things, each of them are laudable, IMHO:
- Creates another market for Corn. By opening another market, we might reduce farm subsidies.
- Reduces dependence on foreign oil and reduces the need to use reserves.
- Reduces air pollution. Specifically it reduces ozone production. That's why EtOH is used as an oxygenator during the summer months.
- Finally, growing lots of corn improves the carbon equation. Instead of pumping up 50 million year old carbon that has been sequestered all this time, using ethanol helps make it more of a zero sum game. Ideally, you're growing (removing) the same amount of carbon from the atmosphere that you're burning as EtOH. At least that's the theory.
In short, EtOH isn't a magic bullet, but it's definitely part of the mix.My father is a blogger.
Ultimately, we're talking about solar energy here. A plant uses photosynthesis in pulling CO2 out of the air, releasing the O2 while constructing more useful molecules out of the carbon. We then use some energy of our own to process this plant and the solar-generated molecules into a form where we can release the energy.
So it's not surprising that if you leave out the sun, your equations will indicate that we're creating energy out of nothing.
I'm not saying that oil is GOOD, only that Ethanol is not the panacea many make it out to be, and it carries problems as severe as oil. The world needs a much different energy source, but that is a whole 'nother topic.