Slashdot Mirror
Cellulosic Biofuel Finally Ready For the Road
wdebruij writes "After years of research, promises, and plenty of discussion here, biofuel from inedible greens such as switchgrass — and even from corn cobs — may finally be getting economically viable. Two enzyme producers, Novozyme and Genencor, have both announced that they can now produce fuel at prices competitive with current corn and petrol-based methods. This is particularly good news in the wake of another report that food-based biofuels could cause hunger."
Even in the 10% mixture we are currently seeing, ethanol in engines meant for gasoline is bad! It causes all manner of problems in the long term.
Running pure ethanol will simply require a complete change in the engine to work well. Has there been much discussion of that? I fear there hasn't been any.
Also, E85 is known to wreck havoc on engines. This is most likely why it is blended.
Yeah, but when I read the report, the guy writing it sounded like a nutter. Apparently, there are no good sides to biofuels at all. In my experience, every report on a controversial issue that finds 100% on one side is a lie. Doesn't matter if it's for or against it. If they have nothing good to say about it, then they were looking only for things to say bad, and thus they are wrong. The "report" seems to be one guy's opinion, backed up by fabricated numbers (experts call them estimates, but an estimate where you know what you want to find and make sure the numbers fit is no longer an estimate). And he even goes so far as to say it's as bad as oil for greenhouse gases. But he justifies that by indicating that biofuels will be made by clear-cutting rain forest and using the worst possible fertilizers. He makes the worst possible assumptions in all cases against biofuels. The report can't be held to indicate anything more than "done wrong, any good idea can fail." Other than mental masturbation to promote his personal beliefs using horrible assumptions and fabricated numbers, there's nothing of substance left.
But it makes a couple good quotes, and so I'm sure people will be referring to it. But it's hard to discuss his "findings" when they were so obviously concocted with a specific agenda in mind.
I've HATED Corn based ethanol for YEARS... Everyone would point to some country in South America (Brazil?) about how good Ethanol was and the amount of fuel created etc... But that was end of process SUGAR CANE! NOT a major food source!
Um, sugar is a major food source (counting caloric intake as "food"). And nobody likes corn-based ethanol except for the corn lobby and the politicians they pay off. It isn't like a revelation that using corn sucks. But switchgrass and such will never take off in the US when the Congress is paid for by big corporations. It isn't the environmentalists screwing everything up, as the conservative media asserts. It's Congress, on the orders of big business. And no, it doesn't matter which party controls what. It isn't a party issue. The only party issue is that when government fails, the conservatives blame the liberal voters. Who is actually in office makes precious little difference anymore.
This is the problem with the green lords... they don't think ahead of the unintended consequences!
You must be listening to some other Green Lords. The ones I hear want switchgrass, algae, corn husks, and organic waste converted to fuel. The ones that think a "report that food-based biofuels could cause hunger" is about people getting hungry when they smell the diesel car drive past burning old french fry oil, because using foodstuffs as a sole source of ethanol (and ethanol as the only biofuel) is incredibly stupid. But the actual Green Lords have a much smaller voice than what Rush asserts they are saying, and for some reason, when the two statements conflict, people believe the paid entertainer's purposeful mis-characterization over the actual words and/or clarifications from the Green Lords. When you fix that, you'll be well on the way to fixing the problem with the US.
Learn to love Alaska