Comments GregH has made

  • return on the fossil fuel investment

    You mention that "corn-based ethanol provides 26 percent more energy than is required for its production, while cellulosic provides 80 percent more energy."

    According to the New York Times (April 10, 2006), sugar cane ethanol provides 8.3 times (yes, that's 830 percent) more energy than is required for its production.

    Assuming these numbers are even half accurate, it is obvious that sugar cane would be a lot better use of the world's land, fertilizers, and petrochemical inputs. Corn can only compete because of the huge subsidies it gets from the U.S. government.On How the world got addicted to oil, and where biofuels will take us posted 2 years, 11 months ago 28 Responses

  • return on the fossil fuel investment

    You mention that "corn-based ethanol provides 26 percent more energy than is required for its production, while cellulosic provides 80 percent more energy."

    According to the New York Times (April 10, 2006), sugar cane ethanol provides 8.3 times (yes, that's 830 percent) more energy than is required for its production.

    Assuming these numbers are even half accurate, it is obvious that sugar cane would be a lot better use of the world's land, fertilizers, and petrochemical inputs. Corn can only compete because of the huge subsidies it gets from the U.S. government.On A Grist special series on biofuels posted 2 years, 11 months ago 28 Responses

  • return on the fossil fuel investment

    You mention that "corn-based ethanol provides 26 percent more energy than is required for its production, while cellulosic provides 80 percent more energy."

    According to the New York Times (April 10, 2006), sugar cane ethanol provides 8.3 times (yes, that's 830 percent) more energy than is required for its production.

    Assuming these numbers are even half accurate, it is obvious that sugar cane would be a lot better use of the world's land, fertilizers, and petrochemical inputs. Corn can only compete because of the huge subsidies it gets from the U.S. government.On A lighthearted look at biofuels through time posted 2 years, 11 months ago 28 Responses

  • return on the fossil fuel investment

    You mention that "corn-based ethanol provides 26 percent more energy than is required for its production, while cellulosic provides 80 percent more energy."

    According to the New York Times (April 10, 2006), sugar cane ethanol provides 8.3 times (yes, that's 830 percent) more energy than is required for its production.

    Assuming these numbers are even half accurate, it is obvious that sugar cane would be a lot better use of the world's land, fertilizers, and petrochemical inputs. Corn can only compete because of the huge subsidies it gets from the U.S. government.On The numbers behind ethanol, cellulosic ethanol, and biodiesel in the U.S. posted 2 years, 11 months ago 28 Responses