Re: Corn? We don't need no stinking corn!

[Tony Brummett <brummett@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 7/24/08, Don Dulmage <big-d@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>  It takes more energy to make ethonal etc etc is a myth propegated by the
> uniformed. [...]  Dont you realize the
> news media are not technical people but just liberal parrots.Wouldnt know a
> BTU from an SUV, none of them.

Don, I respect your automotive and mechanical knowledge, and really
appreciate every post you make on the list here, but dismissing a
report like this because of the "liberal media" really does everyone a
disservice.

> And hwow about middle east oil.

First off, the US only gets about 1/4 of its oil from the middle east:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/company_level_imports/current/import.html

And I don't think that those ships aren't as wasteful as you think.
The wikipedia page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_tanker) says 2 to
3 cents of the cost of a gallon of gas goes to transportation of the
crude oil by tanker ship.

> Comparing a barrel of Crude oil to a barrel of ethonal is foolishness. Ethnal is ready
> to use. Crude oil is not.

Using your example, a barrel of oil in the ground in the middle east
isn't comparable to a field of corn stalks as the combine rolls in,
it's more like silos of corn seed at the Pioneer factory before
planting season.  "Ready to use" also handwaves over a lot of details
about growing the corn (planting, fertilizer, land use) or getting the
ethanol to your local gas station (not compatible with pipelines).
That said, the guy in the video also handwaves over a lot of details
like how you get the water to the desert, or the fuel out.

The fact is, there isn't a consensus about what the energy
cost/benefit ratio is for corn ethanol.  In the few minutes I could
spend looking this afternoon, I saw everything from 0.5 (costs 2 gal
to get 1 back) to 1.3 (costs 1 to get 1.3).  It all depends on who's
making the report and what statistics they include in their
calculation.

It does seem that using corn is just about the least efficient way to
make fuel.  These algae systems or cellulose conversion look like
they're a lot more efficient, they just need more engineering effort
to scale it up.  Besides, in the long run, using your food as a raw
material to make fuel is just a bad idea.

It's a pretty safe bet to say that the way you gas up your car today
is going to be a lot different than what it's going to be in 20 years.

-- Tony  brummett@xxxxxxxxx


----
Please address private mail -- mail of interest to only one person -- directly to that person.  I.e., send parts/car transactions and negotiations as well as other personal messages only to the intended recipient, not to the Clubhouse public address. This practice will protect your privacy, reduce the total volume of mail and fine tune the content signal to Mopar topic.  Thanks!

'62 to '65 Mopar Clubhouse Discussion Guidelines:
http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.org/mletiq.html.