<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for Is anyone still taking this stuff seriously?]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by Ron Steenblik http://www.grist.org/article/ethanol-clutching-at-the-public-purse/ Mon, 05 Feb 2007 18:58:18 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/ethanol-clutching-at-the-public-purse/1 On biofuel plants vs. increasing fuel efficiency

Tom,

Thanks for the comprehensive survey of recent news items relating to the ethanol debate. (And for providing a link to our article, of course!)

Regarding the Oregon State University study (which is written in very clear, approachable language), it is worth pointing out that your last quote actually refers to Oregon only. Here's what the report says on page iv:

For comparison, the degree of energy independence resulting from a one mile-per-gallon increase in average motor vehicle fuel economy in Oregon would be equivalent to 3-4 corn ethanol plants like the one evaluated here [each 50 million gallons per year], or 13 biodiesel plants [each 2 million gallons per year] like the one evaluated here. [My emphasis.]

On a national basis, a lot more than 200 million gallons per year of ethanol capacity, or 26 million gallons per year of biodiesel capacity would be required to match a one mile-per-gallon increase in average motor vehicle fuel economy!

]]> On biofuel plants vs. increasing fuel efficiency

Tom,

Thanks for the comprehensive survey of recent news items relating to the ethanol debate. (And for providing a link to our article, of course!)

Regarding the Oregon State University study (which is written in very clear, approachable language), it is worth pointing out that your last quote actually refers to Oregon only. Here's what the report says on page iv:

For comparison, the degree of energy independence resulting from a one mile-per-gallon increase in average motor vehicle fuel economy in Oregon would be equivalent to 3-4 corn ethanol plants like the one evaluated here [each 50 million gallons per year], or 13 biodiesel plants [each 2 million gallons per year] like the one evaluated here. [My emphasis.]

On a national basis, a lot more than 200 million gallons per year of ethanol capacity, or 26 million gallons per year of biodiesel capacity would be required to match a one mile-per-gallon increase in average motor vehicle fuel economy!

]]> Comment #2 by Tom Philpott http://www.grist.org/article/ethanol-clutching-at-the-public-purse/ Mon, 05 Feb 2007 22:06:25 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/ethanol-clutching-at-the-public-purse/2 Thanks, Ron

To emphasize the point, matching a 1mpg boost in milage standards would require "three or four corn ethanol plants or 13 biodiesel plants" in Oregon alone.

Now, Oregon is a pretty small state--3.4 million people. Extrapolating based on US population, it would take 308 ethanol plants to match that standard nation wide. To be fair, Oregon's distance from the corn belt makes it less efficient than many other states, since corn has to be hauled there. So let's say that it would take 200 new corn-based ethanol plants to match a 1mpg boost in milage standards.

There are currently 97 plants up and running. So, if my rough analysis is right, we could double the current number of existing plants, and just achieve the net energy benefits 1 mpg boost in standards.

Wouldn't it be smarter to chill on the ethanol and just start pushing up CAFE? Even the tiniest steps would be just as effective as spending billions building out ethanol infrastructure.

Victual Reality

]]> Thanks, Ron

To emphasize the point, matching a 1mpg boost in milage standards would require "three or four corn ethanol plants or 13 biodiesel plants" in Oregon alone.

Now, Oregon is a pretty small state--3.4 million people. Extrapolating based on US population, it would take 308 ethanol plants to match that standard nation wide. To be fair, Oregon's distance from the corn belt makes it less efficient than many other states, since corn has to be hauled there. So let's say that it would take 200 new corn-based ethanol plants to match a 1mpg boost in milage standards.

There are currently 97 plants up and running. So, if my rough analysis is right, we could double the current number of existing plants, and just achieve the net energy benefits 1 mpg boost in standards.

Wouldn't it be smarter to chill on the ethanol and just start pushing up CAFE? Even the tiniest steps would be just as effective as spending billions building out ethanol infrastructure.

Victual Reality

]]> Comment #3 by spaceshaper http://www.grist.org/article/ethanol-clutching-at-the-public-purse/ Mon, 05 Feb 2007 22:14:46 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/ethanol-clutching-at-the-public-purse/3 Uh...

Wouldn't it be smarter to chill on the ethanol and just start pushing up CAFE?

...yes.

The true meaning of life is to plant trees, under whose shade you do not expect to sit.

]]> Uh...

Wouldn't it be smarter to chill on the ethanol and just start pushing up CAFE?

...yes.

The true meaning of life is to plant trees, under whose shade you do not expect to sit.

]]> Comment #4 by Nucbuddy http://www.grist.org/article/ethanol-clutching-at-the-public-purse/ Mon, 05 Feb 2007 23:11:15 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/ethanol-clutching-at-the-public-purse/4 CAFE standards vs. fuel-use rate

Is a change in a fuel-economy standard the same thing as a change in rate of fuel consumption?

]]> CAFE standards vs. fuel-use rate

Is a change in a fuel-economy standard the same thing as a change in rate of fuel consumption?

]]> Comment #5 by Pandu http://www.grist.org/article/ethanol-clutching-at-the-public-purse/ Mon, 05 Feb 2007 23:31:32 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/ethanol-clutching-at-the-public-purse/5 Zein


Before I started my current job, I worked for the USDA Agricultural Research Service on a project related to ethanol for fuel.  As I was told, it was not cost-effective to make ethanol from corn because so much of the corn is wasted.  Only the starch is needed to make ethanol, and so our job was to find uses for other components of the corn.

I was working to help develop a method of isolating and extracting a relatively high quality zein product from the corn.  Zein is a kind of protein that makes up about half the protein in corn.  It is notable for its film-forming properties, and is presently used as an edible coating such as on pills.

I was the lab technician on this project for about a year (around 2000), and I left before the project was over.  At that point, the zein we were able to extract from corn was not anywhere close to competing with other zein sources on the market.  I believe the researcher (there was only the two of us) retired shortly after.  I don't know what became of the program, but I figure it was probably nothing.  

Considering that our project was existing on the premise that producing corn for ethanol was not a profitable option, and that our project likely did not help much, I wonder how the farmers are getting paid enough for this.

]]> Zein


Before I started my current job, I worked for the USDA Agricultural Research Service on a project related to ethanol for fuel.  As I was told, it was not cost-effective to make ethanol from corn because so much of the corn is wasted.  Only the starch is needed to make ethanol, and so our job was to find uses for other components of the corn.

I was working to help develop a method of isolating and extracting a relatively high quality zein product from the corn.  Zein is a kind of protein that makes up about half the protein in corn.  It is notable for its film-forming properties, and is presently used as an edible coating such as on pills.

I was the lab technician on this project for about a year (around 2000), and I left before the project was over.  At that point, the zein we were able to extract from corn was not anywhere close to competing with other zein sources on the market.  I believe the researcher (there was only the two of us) retired shortly after.  I don't know what became of the program, but I figure it was probably nothing.  

Considering that our project was existing on the premise that producing corn for ethanol was not a profitable option, and that our project likely did not help much, I wonder how the farmers are getting paid enough for this.

]]> Comment #6 by Ron Steenblik http://www.grist.org/article/ethanol-clutching-at-the-public-purse/ Tue, 06 Feb 2007 01:15:59 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/ethanol-clutching-at-the-public-purse/6 RE: CAFE standards vs. fuel-use rate

Nucbuddy,

Is a change in a fuel-economy standard the same thing as a change in rate of fuel consumption?

GOOD QUESTION!. Indeed, I was thinking of at some point writing a separate blog on this very topic.

The short answer is: No.

The long answer is: No, and therefore beware of confusion over the cost of achieving a one mile-per-gallon increase in an average fuel economy (e.g., CAFE) standard with the the cost of achieving a one mile-per-gallon increase in average fuel economy (i.e., roughly a 4% improvement), which is yet different from the cost of reducing fuel consumption by an equivalent amount.

Researchers, such as those at the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), when estimating the cost of increasing the CAFE standard assume no change in the model composition of the vehicles manufactured and purchased. That is to say, they assume that the fuel-economy gains are achieved solely through technological improvements in the vehicles themselves. To quote from their December 2003 study, "

]]> RE: CAFE standards vs. fuel-use rate

Nucbuddy,

Is a change in a fuel-economy standard the same thing as a change in rate of fuel consumption?

GOOD QUESTION!. Indeed, I was thinking of at some point writing a separate blog on this very topic.

The short answer is: No.

The long answer is: No, and therefore beware of confusion over the cost of achieving a one mile-per-gallon increase in an average fuel economy (e.g., CAFE) standard with the the cost of achieving a one mile-per-gallon increase in average fuel economy (i.e., roughly a 4% improvement), which is yet different from the cost of reducing fuel consumption by an equivalent amount.

Researchers, such as those at the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), when estimating the cost of increasing the CAFE standard assume no change in the model composition of the vehicles manufactured and purchased. That is to say, they assume that the fuel-economy gains are achieved solely through technological improvements in the vehicles themselves. To quote from their December 2003 study, "

]]> Comment #7 by Biodiversivist http://www.grist.org/article/ethanol-clutching-at-the-public-purse/ Tue, 06 Feb 2007 02:45:52 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/ethanol-clutching-at-the-public-purse/7 Missing from all of the equations

is an acknowledgement of human nature. Few of the half million people who have bought a Prius did so solely to save money. If environmentally benign cars continue to gain status, the free market response will dwarf any government attempt to increase gas mileage. The first company to come out with a car priced similarly to a Prius or Civic that can literally smoke tires and still get 50 mpg will sell like hotcakes. That car will be a plug-in hybrid with a big electric motor. Owners will have the option of fast acceleration or high mileage, depending on who they are trying to impress. Time will tell.

In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world

]]> Missing from all of the equations

is an acknowledgement of human nature. Few of the half million people who have bought a Prius did so solely to save money. If environmentally benign cars continue to gain status, the free market response will dwarf any government attempt to increase gas mileage. The first company to come out with a car priced similarly to a Prius or Civic that can literally smoke tires and still get 50 mpg will sell like hotcakes. That car will be a plug-in hybrid with a big electric motor. Owners will have the option of fast acceleration or high mileage, depending on who they are trying to impress. Time will tell.

In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world

]]> Comment #8 by amazingdrx http://www.grist.org/article/ethanol-clutching-at-the-public-purse/ Tue, 06 Feb 2007 03:01:02 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/ethanol-clutching-at-the-public-purse/8 118 billon over 11 years

How much gas would be saved by plugin hybrids given that same 118 billion in government subsidies?  100 billion gallons over 11 years from 39 million 3k per plugin hybrid vehicle tax credits.

The plugin hybrid subsidy has the added benefit of GHG elimination by curtailing combustion of 100 billion gallons of liquid fuel and preserving conservation land (that would otherwise be used for fuel farming)to sequester CO2.

In addition the plugin tax credits would spur mass production of plugin hybrids lowering the cost and making  plugins competitive on initial price  with internal combustion vehicles.

This could help plugin technology reach the critical 10% level, putting it right into the exponential part of the typical new product adoption curve.

That could start the total replacement of internal combustion drivetrains.  Eventually reducing  liquid fuel use by 90% when internal combustion only exists in classic cars in museums.  

Fuel farming will never provide over a few percent of present oil based fuel consumption.  There just isn't enough farmland to acomplish anymore than that.

Then as global climate change marches on, unabated by fuel farming and flex fuel vehicle scamming, farmland will be converted to desert as drought dries up aqifers.  No more farmland will be left for fuel farming then.  It will all be needed for food production.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog

]]> 118 billon over 11 years

How much gas would be saved by plugin hybrids given that same 118 billion in government subsidies?  100 billion gallons over 11 years from 39 million 3k per plugin hybrid vehicle tax credits.

The plugin hybrid subsidy has the added benefit of GHG elimination by curtailing combustion of 100 billion gallons of liquid fuel and preserving conservation land (that would otherwise be used for fuel farming)to sequester CO2.

In addition the plugin tax credits would spur mass production of plugin hybrids lowering the cost and making  plugins competitive on initial price  with internal combustion vehicles.

This could help plugin technology reach the critical 10% level, putting it right into the exponential part of the typical new product adoption curve.

That could start the total replacement of internal combustion drivetrains.  Eventually reducing  liquid fuel use by 90% when internal combustion only exists in classic cars in museums.  

Fuel farming will never provide over a few percent of present oil based fuel consumption.  There just isn't enough farmland to acomplish anymore than that.

Then as global climate change marches on, unabated by fuel farming and flex fuel vehicle scamming, farmland will be converted to desert as drought dries up aqifers.  No more farmland will be left for fuel farming then.  It will all be needed for food production.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog

]]>