FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups 
 ProfileProfile   PreferencesPreferences   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Forum index » Science and Technology » Chem
takes 1.5 gallons gasoline to produce 1 gallon ethanol in modern agriculture
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 20 [289 Posts] View previous topic :: View next topic
Goto page:  Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, ..., 18, 19, 20 Next
Author Message
Dean Hoffman
science forum beginner


Joined: 12 Jan 2006
Posts: 11

PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 2:47 am    Post subject: Re: takes 1.5 gallons gasoline to produce 1 gallon ethanol in modern agriculture Reply with quote

In article <e751p2$3ct$1@pcls4.std.com>,
moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) wrote:

Quote:
a_plutonium@hotmail.com writes:

To run a Science Research Experiment on how much petrol is used to
obtain the data of 1.5 to 1 in disfavor of ethanol is not a experiment
that is inaccessible to the common person. A simple set up can be done.
Use a rototiller as a tractor, use a mower as a combine. Now, rototill
and mow a long stretch of ground, say perhaps 50 meters. Measure how
many cups of gasoline is needed to till 50 meters, how many to mow 50
meters. Fertilize the 50 meters and measure how many cups of fertilizer
...

A better method is to use real life data on how much it actually costs
farmers to grow corn. A good part of that cost will be the cost of oil,
either directly (diesel for tractors) or indirectly (energy cost to make
fertilizer, pesticides etc.). It doesn't matter what form the oil is,
each gallon used will show up as maybe $2.50 in costs (assuming untaxed
diesel).

The USDA keeps track of all sorts of things:
http://tinyurl.com/nxyjm

Dean

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
Back to top
Herman Family
science forum Guru Wannabe


Joined: 14 Jun 2005
Posts: 173

PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 4:26 am    Post subject: Re: takes 1.5 gallons gasoline to produce 1 gallon ethanol in modern agriculture Reply with quote

"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
news:e751p2$3ct$1@pcls4.std.com...
Quote:
a_plutonium@hotmail.com writes:

To run a Science Research Experiment on how much petrol is used to
obtain the data of 1.5 to 1 in disfavor of ethanol is not a experiment
that is inaccessible to the common person. A simple set up can be done.
Use a rototiller as a tractor, use a mower as a combine. Now, rototill
and mow a long stretch of ground, say perhaps 50 meters. Measure how
many cups of gasoline is needed to till 50 meters, how many to mow 50
meters. Fertilize the 50 meters and measure how many cups of fertilizer
...

A better method is to use real life data on how much it actually costs
farmers to grow corn. A good part of that cost will be the cost of oil,
either directly (diesel for tractors) or indirectly (energy cost to make
fertilizer, pesticides etc.). It doesn't matter what form the oil is,
each gallon used will show up as maybe $2.50 in costs (assuming untaxed
diesel).

Now I don't have any way of finding out how much the farmer's cost is, so
how about the next best thing. How much do farmers sell corn for? Now
that price is readily available, just check the commodities market. A
quick check shows corn currently fetches 261.25 cents per bushel. Now
farmers aren't going to sell below their costs, or at least not for long,
else they soon become ex-farmers. So their cost is going to be less than
$2.6125 per bushel. Even if we assume 100% of their cost is oil in some
form (the labor, land, capital costs of tractors etc. is somehow free) the
cost is about 1 gallon to produce a bushel of corn. It can't be more
unless they somehow get diesel for way below market rate. Because labor,
land and tractors aren't free, it really must be less than a gallon.

This doesn't include the energy to ferment and distill the corn.
Fermenting isn't much more than adding water and yeast and waiting.
Distillation takes energy but because of the low temps needed, it can use
waste heat from some other process, but let's ignore that for now. Can
anyone take it from here? How many gallons of ethanol can be produced
from that $2.61 bushel of corn (somewhat more than a cubic foot) ? How
much energy does it take to distill a gallon of alcohol from fermented
corn mash in an energy efficient process?


Of course, if you really want to get into this, you might check on using
sugar beets or sugar cane as your carbohydrate source. They may be a lot
more efficient to grow. Check a little further and find that the global
sugar market price is a good deal under the US sugar price.

Just a thought, but grabbing growing a little industrial hemp, then using
the oil for biodiesel, the fiber for paper, and the starches for fuel might
do quite nicely.

Michael
Back to top
Dan Bloomquist
science forum addict


Joined: 05 May 2005
Posts: 94

PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 5:43 am    Post subject: Re: takes 1.5 gallons gasoline to produce 1 gallon ethanol in modern agriculture Reply with quote

Herman Family wrote:

Quote:

Of course, if you really want to get into this, you might check on using
sugar beets or sugar cane as your carbohydrate source...

If you really care, crunch the crop fuel number and quit pretending...

--
"We need an energy policy that encourages consumption"
George W. Bush.

"Conservation may be a sign of personal virtue, but it is not a
sufficient basis for a sound, comprehensive energy policy."
Vice President Dick Cheney
Back to top
a_plutonium@hotmail.com
science forum Guru


Joined: 11 Sep 2005
Posts: 1063

PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 6:07 am    Post subject: Re: takes 1.5 gallons gasoline to produce 1 gallon ethanol in modern agriculture Reply with quote

Frank wrote:
Quote:
Phil wrote:
I was under the impression EtOH raises octane rating by forming EtO*
radicals during burning? But to a lesser extent than ether

I took my comment from what appeared to be an erudite letter to C&E
News some time back. The farm interests got the oxygenate requirement
legislated in and the oil companies found MTBE satisfied the letter of
the law and gave a better octane use. With methanol and isobutylene as
building blocks, the additive is cheaper than ethanol. It did also not
have the blending and phase separation problems of ethanol.
Unfortunately they did not know that 1 ppb made water taste bad and
storage tanks do leak.

I know little to nothing about ethanol as an octane booster. But this
is a subject that needs research. I feel that ethanol has become
prominent by the back-door-alley and does not deserve its present
prominence. Who needs a higher octane fuel when the price of gasoline
is so very high. For the common motorists, it is a pathetic joke to
pull into a gas station and have a choice of regular octane and higher
octanes. For race car drivers a high octane is sensible but not for the
common motorists.

So once MTBE was removed then ethanol replaced it. But if our past
history had been only one grade of gasoline for motorists and knowing
that it costs 1.5 gallons of gasoline to produce 1 gallon of ethanol,
then this ethanol craze would have never flourished.

Quote:

Later this am, Tim Russert had 3 oil company executives on. When
Brazil was discussed, it was mentioned that their fuel needs are only
3% of US's. Guess we all need stills in our back yards.

Perhaps having ethanol production is a good insurance policy for
countries like Brazil or China or India where there is little domestic
resource of oil. So that farmers there can farm the old horse and buggy
style and produce ethanol as a fuel with no cost of gasoline/diesel.


Quote:

Cost benefit studies I've heard mentioned, back Archy. They were
frowned upon by the farm interests as being sponsored by oil interests.
Now, would farmers honestly sponsor such a study? When I worked in
textile fibers, I saw a cost/benefit study of cotton vs. polyester. It
accounted for the entire life cycle of both products. Any good
chemical engineering group could do this for ethanol.

As a chemist, what annoys me are the ethanol and environmental
interests that just put a strangle hold on the petroleum industry
making something like 65 grades of gasoline throughout the country.
When I was in R&D, it was common knowledge that the most efficient/cost
effective product was one that was made continually, around the clock.
Oil companies say they can satisfy pollution requirements without
jumping through all the legislative hoops put before them.

Frank

Interesting comment Frank. So the cost supports my claim of 1.5 to 1.
So much of USA farming is subsiidized and the price of corn is about
the same price as diesel/gasoline approx $2.70 per gallon or per
bushel. So the same cost. So, now, if the farmers were not to get any
federal subsidies whatsoever, then most farmers would go bankrupt
provided that it costs them more to produce a bushel of corn than the
price of $2.70. So if my ratio of 1.5 to 1 is true and accurate would
indicate that farmers would spend about 1.5 X $2.70 in petrol to get 1
bushel of corn. Which is $4.05. Now I wonder if the entire market
forces and the legislation of Farm subsides matches or comes close to
that figure. Are farmers who sell corn at $2.70 a bushel given about
$1.35 in subsidy? If true, what a pretty agreement with economics,
subsidy legislation and science of agriculture.

But Frank, I was wondering if I can penetrate the theoretical issue of
this ratio 1.5 to 1 from making a shift from solid state to liquid
state. Gasoline and diesel are in the liquid state. Corn or grains are
solid. It is known that the chemistry of gasoline and diesel packs more
energy than does ethanol. So now in the cornfield of say 100 hectares
of corn. It is easy to compute what the approximate liquid content of
corn oil that such a field would harvest. And we thence can approximate
how many tank fulls of diesel or gasoline were used to farm that 100
hectares. So my ratio of 1.5 to 1, when researched as to making the
corn not the solid but the oil. Does this shift from solid help the
theoretical question? How many tankfuls does a farmer use in his
machinery to harvest 100 hectares? And what is the volume of corn oil
that 100 hectares yields? I do not know if this shift into liquid makes
the problem easier.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
Back to top
Pooh Bear
science forum addict


Joined: 17 Apr 2005
Posts: 76

PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 9:58 am    Post subject: Re: takes 1.5 gallons gasoline to produce 1 gallon ethanol in modern agriculture Reply with quote

a_plutonium@hotmail.com wrote:

Quote:
I know little to nothing about ethanol as an octane booster. But this
is a subject that needs research.

Really ? Research by yourself maybe ?

Graham
Back to top
David Bostwick
science forum addict


Joined: 03 May 2005
Posts: 78

PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 2:19 pm    Post subject: Re: takes 1.5 gallons gasoline to produce 1 gallon ethanol in modern agriculture Reply with quote

In article <1150662400.981598.135660@r2g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, "Frank" <frank.logullo@dol.net> wrote:

[...]

Quote:

Later this am, Tim Russert had 3 oil company executives on. When
Brazil was discussed, it was mentioned that their fuel needs are only
3% of US's. Guess we all need stills in our back yards.


Part of the benefit to Brazil is that they can (have) put the ethanol plants
right next to the cane fields. We'd have a lot higher transportation costs
and fuel usage to bring corn to processing plants.
Back to top
Bob Eldred
science forum beginner


Joined: 22 May 2005
Posts: 11

PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 3:02 pm    Post subject: Re: takes 1.5 gallons gasoline to produce 1 gallon ethanol in modern agriculture Reply with quote

<a_plutonium@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1150615796.441742.297310@y41g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
Quote:
I am getting annoyed by politicians running for office who tout ethanol
as a great new energy source. Iowa and Nebraska are campaigning with
ethanol as an issue. This does great harm. For farmers and others may
think that ethanol is some sort of solution.

Ethanol can be a solution provided the farming of grains is done
without using any petroleum products. That means the old way of farming
using horses and no tractors.

The science is that it takes 1.5 gallons of gasoline/diesel to produce
1 gallon of ethanol.
Snip......



That is simply not true, it's old data pushed by David Pimental and others.
A more modern number shows a net positive energy balance of 167%. This
includes all inputs and outputs including transportation, fertilizer,
farming, distilation, etc. It results in a net energy INCREASE for corn
ethanol of approxametely 33,000 BTU's per gallon. Source: Hosein, USDA,
2001.

Beyond that, nobody expects corn to be the ultimate source for ethanol in
the future. Corn is convienient and available at this time but in the
future, cellulostic ethanol using far more of the biomass will become the
norm. It's efficiency should be higher because of greater plant utilization
and lower farming costs.
Bob
Back to top
t1
science forum beginner


Joined: 19 Jun 2006
Posts: 1

PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 4:40 pm    Post subject: Re: takes 1.5 gallons gasoline to produce 1 gallon ethanol in modern agriculture Reply with quote

a_plutonium@hotmail.com wrote:

[snip]

Quote:
Would anyone in the world gleefully hand over $1.50 and be happy with
the receipt of $1.00. Of course not. Just use the 1.5 gallons of
gasoline rather than turn it into 1 gallon of ethanol.

The point that seems to keep getting overlooked is the need for a good
portable energy carrier in our civilization (and irritatingly enough
gasoline and diesel are currently the best(pollution,global warming
aside)). You may be trying to imply that you are using more oil than
you are producing. But that may not be the case at all. In fact even if
more energy is required to produce ethanol than you get from it, it may
still be desirable to do but the energy required to produce it will
have to come from other sources. I do not claim that ethanol is a good
energy carrier but it might be and probably is better (much) than
hydrogen and may be cheaper to produce than non-petroleum based
gasoline.

Quote:

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
Back to top
a_plutonium@hotmail.com
science forum Guru


Joined: 11 Sep 2005
Posts: 1063

PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 6:30 pm    Post subject: Re: takes 1.5 gallons gasoline to produce 1 gallon ethanol in modern agriculture Reply with quote

Bob Eld wrote:
Quote:
a_plutonium@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1150615796.441742.297310@y41g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
I am getting annoyed by politicians running for office who tout ethanol
as a great new energy source. Iowa and Nebraska are campaigning with
ethanol as an issue. This does great harm. For farmers and others may
think that ethanol is some sort of solution.

Ethanol can be a solution provided the farming of grains is done
without using any petroleum products. That means the old way of farming
using horses and no tractors.

The science is that it takes 1.5 gallons of gasoline/diesel to produce
1 gallon of ethanol.
Snip......


That is simply not true, it's old data pushed by David Pimental and others.
A more modern number shows a net positive energy balance of 167%. This
includes all inputs and outputs including transportation, fertilizer,
farming, distilation, etc. It results in a net energy INCREASE for corn
ethanol of approxametely 33,000 BTU's per gallon. Source: Hosein, USDA,
2001.

Beyond that, nobody expects corn to be the ultimate source for ethanol in
the future. Corn is convienient and available at this time but in the
future, cellulostic ethanol using far more of the biomass will become the
norm. It's efficiency should be higher because of greater plant utilization
and lower farming costs.
Bob

Thanks for the interesting reply and the source Hosein. I suspect
Pimental of Cornell is correct on this issue and that Hosein is wrong.
We have too much trouble with subjective people entering this debate.
Subjective as to the pull of money.

And it is a shame that our bastions of objective research by
Universities are not being objective but rather subjectively pulled by
this debate, funded by ethanol interests and interests that are not
scientific. Universities of Iowa State, Univ of Nebraska and all these
land grant aggie schools should be verifying that ethanol in petrol
based farming is a loss. Not just Cornell University.

I looked at that website of Hosein:
http://www.oregon.gov/ENERGY/RENEW/Biomass/docs/FORUM/net_energy_balance_2004.pdf

to try to find out where Hosein made his errors.

I am trying to offer a more simplified scientific approach to determine
once and for all the theoretical physics and chemistry underpinning the
energy.

I believe that if we convert the grain such as corn into a liquid
state, since gasoline and diesel are liquids would divulge the answer
as to whether ethanol is a positive energy or a negative energy.

Let us take just one corn plant. What is an average number of corn
kernels one corn plant can produce? Let us say it is a 1,268 just to
throw out a number. Now, how much volume of liquid can 1,268 corn
kernels be reduced to as corn-oil? Can one corn plant be reduced to say
1/20 of a liter of corn-oil? Now according to Hosein's Table 1 shows
how many gallons of gasoline and diesel per acre are used.

All I need is a estimation of how many times a piece of machinery
passes by a single corn plant and to convert that passing by as to how
many drops of diesel is spent on that corn plant. I then convert how
much fertilizer and herbicide and pesticide is used per corn plant into
a liquid form.

In the end, I balance out the corn oil liquid with the amount of liquid
costs (diesel, herbicide, etc). Does the cost exceed 1/20 of a liter of
corn-oil that a single corn plant can produce.

By shifting the analysis to a liquid form, I hope to reduce the problem
to a more simplified analysis.

And I hope it shows quite clearly that a single corn plant that is
farmed via petrol machinery in toto cannot possibly come out ahead. If
we become Amish style farmers then the ethanol is 100% a winner. This
is the old formula given by someone at Rutgers University in the 1980s
who said that Primitive Farming for every 1 unit of energy spent by
human and animal labor yields 49 units of grain energy but in Petrol
based farming for every 49 units of petrol energy spent yields only 1
unit of grain energy. I think this Rutgers researcher may have the
equation a little bit exaggerated but on the correct track of truth.

So what I think is happening with reports such as Hosein is that they
are reverting to data that an Amish farmer would produce corn. And in
that table, there are many farm data where farmers do not properly
fertilize or underreport their diesel expenses.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
Back to top
Pooh Bear
science forum addict


Joined: 17 Apr 2005
Posts: 76

PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 6:59 pm    Post subject: Re: takes 1.5 gallons gasoline to produce 1 gallon ethanol in modern agriculture Reply with quote

a_plutonium@hotmail.com wrote:

Quote:
I suspect Pimental of Cornell is correct on this issue and that Hosein is wrong.

On the contrary, Pimental's work is regularly criticised on several counts.

" Pimentel's analysis is based upon older data, and contains a number of
inaccuracies. It does not properly account for the efficiency of much of the
industrial processing related to ethanol. Pimentel's energy balance is based upon the
performance of 1979 ethanol conversion facilities. "

The efficiency of producing ethanol has increased greatly in the intervening decades
!

http://journeytoforever.org/ethanol_rooster.html

Graham
Back to top
Dan Bloomquist
science forum addict


Joined: 05 May 2005
Posts: 94

PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 7:34 pm    Post subject: Re: takes 1.5 gallons gasoline to produce 1 gallon ethanol in modern agriculture Reply with quote

Pooh Bear wrote:

Quote:

a_plutonium@hotmail.com wrote:


I suspect Pimental of Cornell is correct on this issue and that Hosein is wrong.


On the contrary, Pimental's work is regularly criticised on several counts.

" Pimentel's analysis is based upon older data, and contains a number of
inaccuracies. It does not properly account for the efficiency of much of the
industrial processing related to ethanol. Pimentel's energy balance is based upon the
performance of 1979 ethanol conversion facilities. "

The efficiency of producing ethanol has increased greatly in the intervening decades
!

http://www.energybulletin.net/14849.html

Quote:
http://journeytoforever.org/ethanol_rooster.html

http://journeytoforever.org/ethanol_energy.html

1.3, think about it. I've posted the numbers before. Crop fuels will not
have an impact, period. To talk like they will creates unfounded hope
that we can fix this with crop fuels.

--
"We need an energy policy that encourages consumption"
George W. Bush.

"Conservation may be a sign of personal virtue, but it is not a
sufficient basis for a sound, comprehensive energy policy."
Vice President Dick Cheney
Back to top
Pooh Bear
science forum addict


Joined: 17 Apr 2005
Posts: 76

PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 8:09 pm    Post subject: Re: takes 1.5 gallons gasoline to produce 1 gallon ethanol in modernagriculture Reply with quote

Dan Bloomquist wrote:

Quote:
Pooh Bear wrote:

a_plutonium@hotmail.com wrote:

I suspect Pimental of Cornell is correct on this issue and that Hosein is wrong.

On the contrary, Pimental's work is regularly criticised on several counts.

" Pimentel's analysis is based upon older data, and contains a number of
inaccuracies. It does not properly account for the efficiency of much of the
industrial processing related to ethanol. Pimentel's energy balance is based upon the
performance of 1979 ethanol conversion facilities. "

The efficiency of producing ethanol has increased greatly in the intervening decades
!

http://www.energybulletin.net/14849.html

http://journeytoforever.org/ethanol_rooster.html

http://journeytoforever.org/ethanol_energy.html

1.3, think about it. I've posted the numbers before. Crop fuels will not
have an impact, period. To talk like they will creates unfounded hope
that we can fix this with crop fuels.

It's pretty clear that ethanol and bio-diesel will simply be a part of the fix ( maybe
10-20% of road fuel )

The simplest fix is to use less energy and ensure that it's used efficiently.

Graham
Back to top
Ron Jones
science forum Guru Wannabe


Joined: 16 May 2005
Posts: 175

PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 8:48 pm    Post subject: Re: takes 1.5 gallons gasoline to produce 1 gallon ethanol in modernagriculture Reply with quote

Pooh Bear wrote:
Quote:
Dan Bloomquist wrote:
1.3, think about it. I've posted the numbers before. Crop fuels will
not have an impact, period. To talk like they will creates unfounded
hope that we can fix this with crop fuels.

It's pretty clear that ethanol and bio-diesel will simply be a part
of the fix ( maybe 10-20% of road fuel )

The simplest fix is to use less energy and ensure that it's used
efficiently.


Surely the best crop fuel is bio-diesel. It will just mean that all you
guys over the pond will have to give up gas guzzlers, and buy diesel
cars.... Like most of us do over here - plus if you had our fuel tax you
would soon do the same! - All road fuels are about 1GBP per litre at
present.

--
Ron Jones
Process Safety & Development Specialist
Don't repeat history, unreported chemical lab/plant near missesa at
http://www.crhf.org.uk Only two things are certain: The universe and
human stupidity; and I'm not certain about the universe. ~ Albert
Einstein
Back to top
Pooh Bear
science forum addict


Joined: 17 Apr 2005
Posts: 76

PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 8:52 pm    Post subject: Re: takes 1.5 gallons gasoline to produce 1 gallon ethanol in modernagriculture Reply with quote

Ron Jones wrote:

Quote:
Pooh Bear wrote:
Dan Bloomquist wrote:
1.3, think about it. I've posted the numbers before. Crop fuels will
not have an impact, period. To talk like they will creates unfounded
hope that we can fix this with crop fuels.

It's pretty clear that ethanol and bio-diesel will simply be a part
of the fix ( maybe 10-20% of road fuel )

The simplest fix is to use less energy and ensure that it's used
efficiently.

Surely the best crop fuel is bio-diesel.

Don't disagree with that one for sure. Simple to process and diesel engines are
more efficient than gasoline ones.

Quote:
It will just mean that all you guys over the pond will have to give up gas
guzzlers, and buy diesel
cars.... Like most of us do over here

I'd hardly say most. Many certainly.

Quote:
- plus if you had our fuel tax you would soon do the same! - All road fuels
are about 1GBP per litre at present.

95p here. ( equivalent to ~ $6.50 / US gal )

Graham
Back to top
a_plutonium@hotmail.com
science forum Guru


Joined: 11 Sep 2005
Posts: 1063

PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 9:03 pm    Post subject: If Pimental is correct then corn should be about $2.50 to $2.70 a bushel; if Hosein then $6.00 per bushel Re: takes 1.5 gallons gasoline to produce 1 gallon ethanol in modern agriculture Reply with quote

Bob Eld wrote:

Quote:

That is simply not true, it's old data pushed by David Pimental and others.
A more modern number shows a net positive energy balance of 167%. This
includes all inputs and outputs including transportation, fertilizer,
farming, distilation, etc. It results in a net energy INCREASE for corn
ethanol of approxametely 33,000 BTU's per gallon. Source: Hosein, USDA,
2001.

Markets weigh in on this debate, for which the Universities such as
Iowa State, Univ of Nebraska and all the other aggie schools have been
derelict.

A bushel of corn yields about 2 gallons of ethanol. The price of a
gallon of diesel/gasoline is about $3.00 a gallon.

So, if Pimental is correct that we lose energy by petrol-farming to
make ethanol then the price of a bushel of corn would be about $2.50 a
bushel.

On the other hand, if Hosein is correct, then since in his estimation
of 167% that the price of a bushel of corn on today's commodity market
would be that of 2 X $3.00 which equals $6.00 per bushel. It has been a
very long time since I saw corn at 6 dollars a bushel.

Now some may say the markets have not eliminated the corn excess of
years past and will take time for the ethanol plants to be built. I say
this is baloney hacky wacky. We have lived with ethanol ramped
production for 5 years now, first as a MTBE octane booster replacement
and now as a full competitor to petrol fuel.

The reason the Markets have not seen a spike in the price of a bushel
of corn or any other grains that could produce ethanol, is because,
fundamentally, the costs of diesel and gasoline to operate farms is
greater than the energy in ethanol fuel.

The Commodity Markets around the world have voted as to whether
Archimedes Plutonium, Pimental, a Rutgers University professor are
correct. Or whether Mr. Hosein and other ethanol advocates are correct.
And the answer is a resounding support for the Plutonium, Pimental &
Rutgers group.

Another clear evidence is China. China has alot of land and little
petrol resources. So what is China to do? If Hosein was correct, then
China would be building ethanol plants left and right and have its
Amish style farming supply those ethanol plants. In other words, if
Hosein was correct, China would be transforming itself into a energy
independent nation where nearly all of its energy needs are met by
ethanol.

But because Plutonium,Pimental, Rutgers professor are more to the
truth, that China needs its land for food production more than the
ethanol content of its crops.

For the past 6 years as I have repeatedly posted this thread, and I
have recieved something like 100 anti replies for every 1 reply in
support of the Plutonium, Pimental, Rutgers position. So I say to all
those anti-ists, why is your beloved ethanol corn worth only $2.50 per
bushel, when if your beloved ethanol would make corn worth at least
$6.00 a bushel. Is it because you forever are too ignorant to realize
that petrol farming costs more in the diesel and gasoline.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
Back to top
Google

Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 20 [289 Posts] Goto page:  Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, ..., 18, 19, 20 Next
View previous topic :: View next topic
The time now is Sun Jun 25, 2017 10:33 pm | All times are GMT
Forum index » Science and Technology » Chem
Jump to:  

Similar Topics
Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
No new posts 5 gallon musical water bottle Glenn Sowell Acoustics 27 Sun Jul 02, 2006 2:22 pm
No new posts Do any bad-smelling compounds result from anoxic bacteria... Radium Chem 9 Mon Jun 26, 2006 10:59 pm
No new posts Bacterial Decomposition of Ethanol Radium Chem 0 Mon Jun 26, 2006 3:19 pm
No new posts Why can't particle accelerators produce fusion? eastmond@yahoo.com Fusion 2 Thu Jun 22, 2006 11:04 pm
No new posts 16% ammonia in ethanol cds_catch22@yahoo.com Chem 9 Thu May 25, 2006 9:41 pm

Copyright © 2004-2005 DeniX Solutions SRL
Other DeniX Solutions sites: Electronics forum |  Medicine forum |  Unix/Linux blog |  Unix/Linux documentation |  Unix/Linux forums  |  send newsletters
 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.0417s ][ Queries: 16 (0.0042s) ][ GZIP on - Debug on ]