It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is ethanol really a good idea?

page: 2
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 28 2007 @ 10:17 PM
link   
I'll be doing a feedlot study this summer using distillers grain at various rates, 5 reps, so the by product( distillers grain) will be used in food production.

Grain sorghum is also used in making ethanol and can be fed too. Hopefully even the stocks, straw and other waste material can be used for ethanol production.

Roper




posted on Jan, 29 2007 @ 04:57 PM
link   
Exxon says get lost, there's no market in ethanol:


Bush's Ethanol Bid Is Ignored by Exxon in Bear Market Bloomberg

Exxon Mobil Corp., the world's largest publicly traded energy company, considers ethanol irrelevant as a solution to an addiction that forces the U.S. to import two-thirds of its oil. No ``viable, meaningful business proposition'' exists for Exxon in ethanol, Senior Vice President Stuart McGill told investors at a Jan. 17 conference arranged by Goldman Sachs Group Inc.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Looks like Bush was blowing heap big smoke on ethanol use in light of what the world's largest oil company has concluded.



posted on Jan, 29 2007 @ 10:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Regenmacher
Looks like Bush was blowing heap big smoke on ethanol use in light of what the world's largest oil company has concluded.


No. People are blowing smoke up Bush's butt and he has to give the good ole smile and say what the people want to hear. Ethanol blends in gasoline are replacing MTBE. Someone had the great idea that ethanol instead should be used as a fuel like the dragsters use on ESPN.



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 08:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Soitenly
No. People are blowing smoke up Bush's butt and he has to give the good ole smile and say what the people want to hear. Ethanol blends in gasoline are replacing MTBE. Someone had the great idea that ethanol instead should be used as a fuel like the dragsters use on ESPN.


No, he's a fraud and should be setting an example. Bush should have sense enough to tell it like it is and not make up or propagate bs, when he knows big oil has no such illusion.

MTBE contaminates ground water, so I see why they would have a need to replace it with something that is more bio-degradable.

Dragsters use nitromethane and methanol....



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 08:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Regenmacher

MTBE contaminates ground water, so I see why they would have a need to replace it with something that is more bio-degradable.


Correct. There should be no issue with 10-15% blends of ethanol to gasoline. When replacing MTBE, ethanol is acting as an oxygenate to boost octane ratings and reduce emmisions. This has been in practice for many years. My concern with the ethanol concept is E85 (85% ethanol to 15 percent gasoline).

Even on an economic basis it makes no sense and will fail IMO. Ethanol is already more expensive than gasoline. As demand increases, the price will rise. As demand for ethanol rises, demand on gasoline will fall and the price of gasoline will fall, and everyone will start buying gasoline again.

Admittedly simplistic ecomomic analysis, but basically sound I think.



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 08:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by khunmoon
When a food crop becomes interesting substituting fuel, demands for that crop will rise. There's no bio-mass that can't be turned into fuel.



there is already one drink producer that is marketing a new product
(as i heard on night radio news, 29 jan '06)

instead of using the standard sweetner from corn syrup,
they are ramping up the use of sugar cane as the sweetner instead.

i guess anticipating the rising price of corn as it becomes a biofuel component, which would in turn hurt their potential Profits.

just the announcement of ethanol & cellulose generated fuels is changing the business landscapes huh



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 09:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by darkbluesky
Even on an economic basis it makes no sense and will fail IMO. Ethanol is already more expensive than gasoline.


Can also add that we don't have enough ariable land and infrastucture isn't geared for wide spread ethanol use. Few companies will risk investing trillions into ethanol, if using fossil fuels is still more profitable and carries less financial risk.

I think we should work on efficiency in the present industry first. When we do find a better energy resource, there won't be much of a debate...everyone will jump on it like a pack of starving hyenas.


Ethanol And The Law Of Unintended Consequences



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 09:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Regenmacher

No, he's a fraud and should be setting an example. Bush should have sense enough to tell it like it is and not make up or propagate bs, when he knows big oil has no such illusion.

MTBE contaminates ground water, so I see why they would have a need to replace it with something that is more bio-degradable.

Dragsters use nitromethane and methanol....


What universe are you from? He is the president of the United States, not CEO of Exxon or GE, you know the difference, right? Good. That said, big oil is anything but an illusion.



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 09:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by darkbluesky As demand for ethanol rises, demand on gasoline will fall and the price of gasoline will fall, and everyone will start buying gasoline again.


What are you basing this on?

[edit on 30-1-2007 by Soitenly]



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 09:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Soitenly

Originally posted by darkbluesky As demand for ethanol rises, demand on gasoline will fall and the price of gasoline will fall, and everyone will start buying gasoline again.


What are basing this on?


economics 101



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 09:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by darkbluesky

Originally posted by Soitenly

Originally posted by darkbluesky As demand for ethanol rises, demand on gasoline will fall and the price of gasoline will fall, and everyone will start buying gasoline again.


What are basing this on?


economics 101


What about petrol economics? Do you think a price of crude will stay the same as gasoline demand goes down?



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 09:47 AM
link   
As I understand it, the price of crude oil is based on three major factors:

supply (easily controlled by OPEC and those who control OPEC) demand, and speculation. The increase from $38/bbl to $70/bbl from 2001 to 2006 was based almost entirely on speculation by commodity traders.

[edit on 1/30/2007 by darkbluesky]



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 10:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Roper
I'll be doing a feedlot study this summer using distillers grain at various rates, 5 reps, so the by product( distillers grain) will be used in food production.

Grain sorghum is also used in making ethanol and can be fed too. Hopefully even the stocks, straw and other waste material can be used for ethanol production.

Roper


Roper, Please be sure to come back and let us know the reults of the study. Thanks



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Soitenly
What universe are you from? He is the president of the United States, not CEO of Exxon or GE, you know the difference, right? Good. That said, big oil is anything but an illusion.


Read it again: Bush knows big oil has no such illusion about using ethanol. Thus Bush is a falsifier when he makes statements that have nothing to do with reality of the energy industry's plans. Some may claim Bush is an incompetent sociopathic nitwit, but considering he has worked in the oil patch and has shown a pattern of commiting fraud...then we can deduce he is most likely a deceiver and reprobate.



[edit on 30-1-2007 by Regenmacher]



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 06:21 PM
link   
And the saddest part, RM, is that this is what the American people voted for which tells me that it's what they want. A reprobate and deceiver for POTUS.


We're getting an ethanol plant in my area soon. If the material is grown locally and doesn't affect food supplies ANYWHERE, I would be for it. Cutting transportation, costs, creating jobs, and sold locally--all good stuff.

But call me Unamerican, I just can't see kids ANYWHERE going hungry for convenience, cost, or country.

My kid was in Mexico this month and many of them blogged about the tortilla prices that have tripled in the past year. Sounds to me like it was due to corn going to the states for these new ethanol plants. Shameful

Solve global hunger THEN burn the extra if you must. But you're only contributing to a higher atmospheric problem in the end.


Interesting plantmap

I'd really like to see the benefits FAR outweigh the detrimental effects before I give a pass on this one.

[edit on 30-1-2007 by psyopswatcher]



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 08:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Regenmacher

Originally posted by Soitenly
What universe are you from? He is the president of the United States, not CEO of Exxon or GE, you know the difference, right? Good. That said, big oil is anything but an illusion.


Read it again: Bush knows big oil has no such illusion about using ethanol. Thus Bush is a falsifier when he makes statements that have nothing to do with reality of the energy industry's plans. Some may claim Bush is an incompetent sociopathic nitwit, but considering he has worked in the oil patch and has shown a pattern of commiting fraud...then we can deduce he is most likely a deceiver and reprobate.

[edit on 30-1-2007 by Regenmacher]


So you feel violated for having believed Bush's stance on ethanol, big deal, but that does not make him incompetent nor a sociopathic nitwit. He is the guy who reads the NSA reports and commands the US military, of course he is not going to be honest, or in some cases, tell the truth. He has public to address and make certain they feel safe, that includes the nation's energy future. If people want to hear it, he will preach it, but in all honesty, go back and watch Bush talk about ethanol, you can see the man clearly does not give a rats ass about ethanol replacing gasoline.



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 09:35 PM
link   
Bush is jumping on the ethanol bandwagon because he needs a hoorah moment for his base (which are rapidly coming to their senses).

When was the last time a monopoly willingly gave up and capitulated power solely because it was the right thing to do? I don't expect any oil producers to, unless they're re-invested in the new technology and ready to take over there too.

Ain't capitalism grand?



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 10:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Soitenly
So you feel violated for having believed Bush's stance on ethanol, big deal, but that does not make him incompetent nor a sociopathic nitwit.


Violated?!


I've believed nothing Bush has said for years.
I pity the fool and those who elected him.



There's nothing here about believing him, so read it again:


Some may claim Bush is an incompetent sociopathic nitwit, but considering he has worked in the oil patch and has shown a pattern of commiting fraud...then we can deduce he is most likely a deceiver and reprobate.


Now, if we are to go by what many politicians and generals say, he's also a harebrained botcher (aka incompetent sociopathic nitwit) of the armed forces. Meanwhile back at the Crawford goat ranch, liars and frauds should never be leaders, either that or people will learn to embrace anarchy because no authority figure can be trusted.

What we need is someone who is concise, truthful, and credible in regards to the nation's energy needs, which is a far cry from what monkeyman has been vomiting up.

Maybe we should refine the corn coming out of DC....

[edit on 30-1-2007 by Regenmacher]



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 10:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Regenmacher
Meanwhile back at the Crawford goat ranch...


ahmm... excuse me, RM, but you give goats a bad name.



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 03:47 PM
link   
Ethanol can help, but not replace gas...

Few things I saw:

Gas vs. Ethanol specific energies
Yes, gas has more. However there are more factors involved in how much power a car makes other than the SE content of the fuel. Ethanol has an octane rating that's well above most racing fuels. This allows the car to run both leaner and with higher compression. This allows the energy being created to be used more effectively and therefore the efficency of ethanol vs. gasoline becomes VERY similar to what it was before.

Using more energy to make than it provides:
This is also true, however the difference is very small. The main focus of this point is to debate the 'clean' energy effect. It's very difficult to use this to compare if Ethanol is worthwhile as an auto fuel, because the production of petrolium isn't cheap one either, but we cant run cars on coal, oil, or nuclear power. Also, without taking the entire supply line into effect. From the time the oil and gas people setout to explore a well, to the time you ship the crude, covert it, etc, etc, etc... till it gets to the gas pump, you don't have a fair comparison. From a 'clean' aspect, you simply have to make the ethanol with a clean source. Solar, wind, water, nuclear.. these all produce 'clean' power.

Also, I saw someone say somthing about bactieria or something, to eat stuff, and make the Ethanol? Not to be rude, but you are aware of what Ethanol is, correct?


Food shortages: I can check, but again, I'm about 98% sure that ethanol is derived from the non-food parts of corn and so on, not the actual ears of corn themselves.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join