<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for A new reliance on coal could sap green cred from the ethanol industry]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by blindriverboy http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/ Fri, 26 May 2006 05:44:47 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/1 coal fired ethanol plant....irony alert

umm, maybe its me, but cant we make a ethanol plant that runs on ethanol? it must be me...

]]> coal fired ethanol plant....irony alert

umm, maybe its me, but cant we make a ethanol plant that runs on ethanol? it must be me...

]]> Comment #2 by johnilsr http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/ Fri, 26 May 2006 06:37:37 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/2 One Plant Is Using Corn Stover for Thermal Needs

Back in March, I wrote about the Central Minnesota Ethanol Coop's new biomass energy system at their plant near Little Falls. See Ethanol Cooperative Installing Biomass Energy System For On-Site Energy Needs

]]> One Plant Is Using Corn Stover for Thermal Needs

Back in March, I wrote about the Central Minnesota Ethanol Coop's new biomass energy system at their plant near Little Falls. See Ethanol Cooperative Installing Biomass Energy System For On-Site Energy Needs

]]> Comment #3 by johnilsr http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/ Fri, 26 May 2006 06:38:56 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/3 Correction to my post above

My above post should have said "waste wood" not corn stover.

]]> Correction to my post above

My above post should have said "waste wood" not corn stover.

]]> Comment #4 by Pamela Drew http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/ Fri, 26 May 2006 07:42:22 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/4 Costlier Warts on the Ethanol

You make some wonderful points about the hidden costs behind the clean green hype.  Beyond those are a few getting the consumers' greenbacks.

The conservative think tank CATO Institute report,  ADM: Case Study in Corporate Welfare , stated

"At least 43 percent of ADM's annual profits are from products heavily subsidized or protected by the American government. Moreover, every $1 of profits earned by ADM's corn sweetener operation costs consumers $10, and every $1 of profits earned by its ethanol operation costs taxpayers $30."  

Here's the link to the full report. ADM can see GREEN from ethanol, but beyond the hype, taxpayers may see some RED!!

   http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa241es.html  

]]> Costlier Warts on the Ethanol

You make some wonderful points about the hidden costs behind the clean green hype.  Beyond those are a few getting the consumers' greenbacks.

The conservative think tank CATO Institute report,  ADM: Case Study in Corporate Welfare , stated

"At least 43 percent of ADM's annual profits are from products heavily subsidized or protected by the American government. Moreover, every $1 of profits earned by ADM's corn sweetener operation costs consumers $10, and every $1 of profits earned by its ethanol operation costs taxpayers $30."  

Here's the link to the full report. ADM can see GREEN from ethanol, but beyond the hype, taxpayers may see some RED!!

   http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa241es.html  

]]> Comment #5 by GreenWash http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/ Fri, 26 May 2006 12:53:47 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/5 What's Your Solution?

You all are so quick to cast stones from your glass houses. You so hastily deride corn-based ethanol, the farmers who grow corn, the auto manufacturers who see promise in E-85, and the politicians who are attempting to do something about our impending energy crisis.

So let's hear it...what's your solution? What's your answer? What are YOU doing to help address the problem? What other technology can you name that is making a difference TODAY in our liquid transportation fuel complex?

....That's what I thought. Is corn ethanol perfect? No. Is it helping reduce U.S. oil and gasoline consumption? Absolutely. Is it helping reduce GHG emissions? You bet. Is it keeping energy dollars local vs. sending them to the Persian Gulf? Yep.

Do your homework. Even coal-fired ethanol plants are minor source emitters. And with amonia scrubbers and other technologies, emissions from some coal-fired plants are actually CLEANER than from natural gas fired plants (which are generally very clean).

If you want to b!tch about emissions, look at the power plants and oil refineries. But, oh yeah, the computer you used to hack out your anti-ethanol diatribe probably derives its electricity from a coal-fired power plant.

Pull your heads out, you ridiculous morons. Get a grip and apply your energies to an argument that actually needs arguing...

]]> What's Your Solution?

You all are so quick to cast stones from your glass houses. You so hastily deride corn-based ethanol, the farmers who grow corn, the auto manufacturers who see promise in E-85, and the politicians who are attempting to do something about our impending energy crisis.

So let's hear it...what's your solution? What's your answer? What are YOU doing to help address the problem? What other technology can you name that is making a difference TODAY in our liquid transportation fuel complex?

....That's what I thought. Is corn ethanol perfect? No. Is it helping reduce U.S. oil and gasoline consumption? Absolutely. Is it helping reduce GHG emissions? You bet. Is it keeping energy dollars local vs. sending them to the Persian Gulf? Yep.

Do your homework. Even coal-fired ethanol plants are minor source emitters. And with amonia scrubbers and other technologies, emissions from some coal-fired plants are actually CLEANER than from natural gas fired plants (which are generally very clean).

If you want to b!tch about emissions, look at the power plants and oil refineries. But, oh yeah, the computer you used to hack out your anti-ethanol diatribe probably derives its electricity from a coal-fired power plant.

Pull your heads out, you ridiculous morons. Get a grip and apply your energies to an argument that actually needs arguing...

]]> Comment #6 by sunflower http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/ Fri, 26 May 2006 14:50:51 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/6 Low Hanging Fruit

Peak oil may indicate ethanol and pv have roles as transitional technologies.   But these technologies currently have unnecessary carbon liabilities and energy metric issues.   This is not low hanging fruit.

All fossil fuel CO2 must be eliminated from our economy.  Nothing else matters.  Tar sands and coal must be totally eliminated.  

Some transitional investments are better than others.  Car-pooling is low hanging fruit.

]]> Low Hanging Fruit

Peak oil may indicate ethanol and pv have roles as transitional technologies.   But these technologies currently have unnecessary carbon liabilities and energy metric issues.   This is not low hanging fruit.

All fossil fuel CO2 must be eliminated from our economy.  Nothing else matters.  Tar sands and coal must be totally eliminated.  

Some transitional investments are better than others.  Car-pooling is low hanging fruit.

]]> Comment #7 by amazingdrx http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/ Fri, 26 May 2006 14:58:38 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/7 Renewable electric powered transportation

"What's Your Solution?"

That's the solution many of us "morons" have explained over and over here.  Maybe you would do well to read some of our posts.

Education, it's a wonderful experience!  Hehey.

]]> Renewable electric powered transportation

"What's Your Solution?"

That's the solution many of us "morons" have explained over and over here.  Maybe you would do well to read some of our posts.

Education, it's a wonderful experience!  Hehey.

]]> Comment #8 by LegumeSam http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/ Fri, 26 May 2006 16:02:41 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/8 Consumption-side approaches

So let's hear it...what's your solution? What's your answer? What are YOU doing to help address the problem? Please do carefully read the John Bellamy Foster article.

 Alternative energy technologies might benefit the individuals who use them in certain ways -- for instance, if my car runs on corn oil, then the finances of running my car hinge on the price of corn oil, not crude oil, and I benefit from that.  (Of course, if everyone did as I did, the price of corn oil might shoot through the roof, and I wouldn't benefit.  That's not even looking at the ecological costs of growing all that biomass for fuel.)

  But as for solving the social problems caused by the fossil fuel economy... see the part of the Foster article where it says increased efficiency in using a natural resource, such as coal, only resulted in increased demand for that resource, not a reduction in demand. This was because such improvement in efficiency led to a rising scale of production.    If we really wish to deal with the environmental problems of a society that consumes 85 million barrels of oil every day, nicer energy production methods (eg corn oil) might in theory "make it possible" for the world to use less oil, but in real life what will happen is that consumption of all forms of energy will increase because capitalism requires growth.  That's what Jevons'  Paradox is about.

A more rational approach would be to start by asking why world-society needs to consume 85 million barrels of oil every day.  The next step is to investigate, and change, the social relations of a world-society that sucks oil off the planet so voraciously.  "Conservation" within the existing framework might save a couple of million barrels per day here and there at most, while leaving the existing social malaise intact.  

We must look at the problem from the consumption-side.  This will mean that environmental problems will have to have social solutions.  The high-energy consumption lifestyle, that which consumes all the barrels of oil every say, is conditioned by the form of society.  In general, most of society is dependent upon an economy that appeals to the high-consumption consumer to keep the circulation of money going.  A much slower economy, with less production and less consumption, would be ecologically desirable; but under current conditions a huge segment of the population would have no way of earning a living if this were to pass.  Thus a new, less consumeristic, society will require an overall transformation of the social form.  Otherwise we will all either depend upon, or want to be, that high-energy consumer.  

]]> Consumption-side approaches

So let's hear it...what's your solution? What's your answer? What are YOU doing to help address the problem? Please do carefully read the John Bellamy Foster article.

 Alternative energy technologies might benefit the individuals who use them in certain ways -- for instance, if my car runs on corn oil, then the finances of running my car hinge on the price of corn oil, not crude oil, and I benefit from that.  (Of course, if everyone did as I did, the price of corn oil might shoot through the roof, and I wouldn't benefit.  That's not even looking at the ecological costs of growing all that biomass for fuel.)

  But as for solving the social problems caused by the fossil fuel economy... see the part of the Foster article where it says increased efficiency in using a natural resource, such as coal, only resulted in increased demand for that resource, not a reduction in demand. This was because such improvement in efficiency led to a rising scale of production.    If we really wish to deal with the environmental problems of a society that consumes 85 million barrels of oil every day, nicer energy production methods (eg corn oil) might in theory "make it possible" for the world to use less oil, but in real life what will happen is that consumption of all forms of energy will increase because capitalism requires growth.  That's what Jevons'  Paradox is about.

A more rational approach would be to start by asking why world-society needs to consume 85 million barrels of oil every day.  The next step is to investigate, and change, the social relations of a world-society that sucks oil off the planet so voraciously.  "Conservation" within the existing framework might save a couple of million barrels per day here and there at most, while leaving the existing social malaise intact.  

We must look at the problem from the consumption-side.  This will mean that environmental problems will have to have social solutions.  The high-energy consumption lifestyle, that which consumes all the barrels of oil every say, is conditioned by the form of society.  In general, most of society is dependent upon an economy that appeals to the high-consumption consumer to keep the circulation of money going.  A much slower economy, with less production and less consumption, would be ecologically desirable; but under current conditions a huge segment of the population would have no way of earning a living if this were to pass.  Thus a new, less consumeristic, society will require an overall transformation of the social form.  Otherwise we will all either depend upon, or want to be, that high-energy consumer.  

]]> Comment #9 by Biodiversivist http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/ Sat, 27 May 2006 03:31:06 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/9 Greenwash

So let's hear it...what's your solution?

The Pruis?

Is it helping reduce U.S. oil and gasoline consumption? Absolutely.

Is it helping reduce GHG emissions? You bet.

Is it keeping energy dollars local vs. sending them to the Persian Gulf? Yep. Dealerships get their share of the pie and it is too bad American industrial leaders are such ridiculous morons that need to pull their heads out before all cars sold in America are made in Japan.

The electric plug-in? Solar, wind, to charge those plug-ins?

]]> Greenwash

So let's hear it...what's your solution?

The Pruis?

Is it helping reduce U.S. oil and gasoline consumption? Absolutely.

Is it helping reduce GHG emissions? You bet.

Is it keeping energy dollars local vs. sending them to the Persian Gulf? Yep. Dealerships get their share of the pie and it is too bad American industrial leaders are such ridiculous morons that need to pull their heads out before all cars sold in America are made in Japan.

The electric plug-in? Solar, wind, to charge those plug-ins?

]]> Comment #10 by mwildfire http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/ Mon, 29 May 2006 09:29:35 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/10 does ethanol really save gasoline?

I've read several times that ethanol from corn is so inefficient it actually takes more fossil fuel to grow and process it than it replaces. Even if they don't use coal to run the plants, this is no solution. Also got to put in my plug, as a West Virginian, for this--coal is a horrible pollutant, not only when you burn it, but also when you mine it and when you transport it and when you wash it. Check out http://www.ohvec.org for more on this. Some other kinds of biomass are more efficient, but I don't buy the idea that we need to subsidize corn-ethanol plants now so we can develop switchgrass plants some other time. If we're taking this seriously as a solution, let's be building the plants designed to use vegetation that doesn't demand more oil input than they replace.
Mary

]]> does ethanol really save gasoline?

I've read several times that ethanol from corn is so inefficient it actually takes more fossil fuel to grow and process it than it replaces. Even if they don't use coal to run the plants, this is no solution. Also got to put in my plug, as a West Virginian, for this--coal is a horrible pollutant, not only when you burn it, but also when you mine it and when you transport it and when you wash it. Check out http://www.ohvec.org for more on this. Some other kinds of biomass are more efficient, but I don't buy the idea that we need to subsidize corn-ethanol plants now so we can develop switchgrass plants some other time. If we're taking this seriously as a solution, let's be building the plants designed to use vegetation that doesn't demand more oil input than they replace.
Mary

]]> Comment #11 by David Roberts http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/ Mon, 29 May 2006 13:37:54 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/11 Well put

Some other kinds of biomass are more efficient, but I don't buy the idea that we need to subsidize corn-ethanol plants now so we can develop switchgrass plants some other time.

I can think of a more succinct way to make the case!

]]> Well put

Some other kinds of biomass are more efficient, but I don't buy the idea that we need to subsidize corn-ethanol plants now so we can develop switchgrass plants some other time.

I can think of a more succinct way to make the case!

]]> Comment #12 by amazingdrx http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/ Mon, 29 May 2006 22:46:28 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/12 Yep Mary

"let's be building the plants designed to use vegetation that doesn't demand more oil input than they replace."

Algae in solar collectors fed on waste and regular power plant emmissions is that vegetation.  And none of it requires more combustion to refine.

Just recently saw John Prine do his song "Paradise" all about the devestation of coal mining, as relevant today as when he wrote it decades ago.  It would be great to see coal mining become just a horrible memory instead of an ongoing environmental issue.

But liquid fuel from coal looks like the latest industrial scam.

]]> Yep Mary

"let's be building the plants designed to use vegetation that doesn't demand more oil input than they replace."

Algae in solar collectors fed on waste and regular power plant emmissions is that vegetation.  And none of it requires more combustion to refine.

Just recently saw John Prine do his song "Paradise" all about the devestation of coal mining, as relevant today as when he wrote it decades ago.  It would be great to see coal mining become just a horrible memory instead of an ongoing environmental issue.

But liquid fuel from coal looks like the latest industrial scam.

]]> Comment #13 by bookerly http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/ Tue, 30 May 2006 00:00:28 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/13 Solutions...


   Dear Greenwash,

       We could invest in mass transit, natural gas powered buses (fleets of them), subway systems everywhere.  Bring back the trains.

       Make cities bicycle friendly.  We could provide free comfortable bicycles for short distance trips in cities.

       We can encourage research into ever more efficient and powerful bicycles.

       We can change zoning laws to encourage people to live, work and shop in close proximity, thus reducing the need for cars.

       We could get serious about all of these things with real money (not the symbolic money they get now) behind them.

       Or we can keep on re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic (trying to make cars and sprawl seem sustainable).

patrick

]]> Solutions...


   Dear Greenwash,

       We could invest in mass transit, natural gas powered buses (fleets of them), subway systems everywhere.  Bring back the trains.

       Make cities bicycle friendly.  We could provide free comfortable bicycles for short distance trips in cities.

       We can encourage research into ever more efficient and powerful bicycles.

       We can change zoning laws to encourage people to live, work and shop in close proximity, thus reducing the need for cars.

       We could get serious about all of these things with real money (not the symbolic money they get now) behind them.

       Or we can keep on re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic (trying to make cars and sprawl seem sustainable).

patrick

]]> Comment #14 by ichoose http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/ Tue, 30 May 2006 00:05:11 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/14 Alt Fuel Distraction

It's a good article, but, as Kaela says, might be more effective in the style of Mark Twain.  We've got to find a way to reach the masses who don't believe we have an impact...as well as those who believe but feel hopeless about it.

It wouldn't hurt to throw in a bunch of ideas of things people can do to lessen their own individual carbon footprints - things that won't turn their lifestyles upside-down overnight.  Give them the fact on how they can not only help the environment by making small changes, but also save themselves MONEY...there it is!

Changing lightbulbs to CSLs, turning off lights, doing laundry at night, watering lawn at night, recycling, carpooling, not letting the car idle while sitting in the carpool line, using the dryer less and a drying rack or clothesline, not washing towels & sheets every day (people actually do this!)...the list goes on and on.

Someone else mentioned the importance of fact-checking - we can't afford to put out any information that isn't correct.

Somehow find a way to plant a little seed in there regarding how huge a difference we could make as individuals...and if we did that, it would be easier to get the government to act accordingly.

]]> Alt Fuel Distraction

It's a good article, but, as Kaela says, might be more effective in the style of Mark Twain.  We've got to find a way to reach the masses who don't believe we have an impact...as well as those who believe but feel hopeless about it.

It wouldn't hurt to throw in a bunch of ideas of things people can do to lessen their own individual carbon footprints - things that won't turn their lifestyles upside-down overnight.  Give them the fact on how they can not only help the environment by making small changes, but also save themselves MONEY...there it is!

Changing lightbulbs to CSLs, turning off lights, doing laundry at night, watering lawn at night, recycling, carpooling, not letting the car idle while sitting in the carpool line, using the dryer less and a drying rack or clothesline, not washing towels & sheets every day (people actually do this!)...the list goes on and on.

Someone else mentioned the importance of fact-checking - we can't afford to put out any information that isn't correct.

Somehow find a way to plant a little seed in there regarding how huge a difference we could make as individuals...and if we did that, it would be easier to get the government to act accordingly.

]]> Comment #15 by Hans Noeldner http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/ Tue, 30 May 2006 05:03:21 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/15 Corn Ethanol

Unfortunately EROEI (energy returned on energy invested) has not been adequately covered in the Warts and Ethanol article nor in subsequent comments.  Corn ethanol has a lousy EROEI - 1.4 to 1 at best - that is one unit of fossil fuels yeilds no more than 1.4 units of ethanol.  Corn ethanol is basically a way to convert natural gas, diesel, and coal into alcohol while eroding topsoil and thus causing eutrophication of the Mississippi Gulf area.  It is as bad as feeding corn to livestock which then convert almost all of the nutrional value into manure.  (Go grass-fed bison!!  Go free-range chicken!!)

We are not going to break free from this mess until we clearly understand that automobiles are displacing natural life from Earth more rapidly than any other destructive force - including our own species.  Just look at how much of the United States we've already suffocated under asphalt!

GreenWash asks what we should do instead of producing ethanol.

(1) PARK YOUR CAR!  Even better, get rid of it!  Walk, bike, carpool, and use public transit instead
(2) Stop using fossil fuels to fertilize and mow lawns
(3) Stop using fossil fuels for recreation and to play (snowmobiles, RVs, vacation flights, water parks, etc.)
(4) Stop building suburbia and exurbia
(5) Densify existing urban areas
(6) Build mass transit as fast as possible
(7) If you have a yard, raise some food for your family

(FYI, I myself am doing and/or promoting all these things.)

The problem in the United States isn't supply of energy and other resources, it's our gluttony.  We live in a nation with more biologically productive land and natural resources per capita than any other on Earth.  If we can't build a sustainable civilization here - if we do ridiculous stuff like planting every square inch of farmland to feed automobiles - we deserve to become extinct.





]]> Corn Ethanol

Unfortunately EROEI (energy returned on energy invested) has not been adequately covered in the Warts and Ethanol article nor in subsequent comments.  Corn ethanol has a lousy EROEI - 1.4 to 1 at best - that is one unit of fossil fuels yeilds no more than 1.4 units of ethanol.  Corn ethanol is basically a way to convert natural gas, diesel, and coal into alcohol while eroding topsoil and thus causing eutrophication of the Mississippi Gulf area.  It is as bad as feeding corn to livestock which then convert almost all of the nutrional value into manure.  (Go grass-fed bison!!  Go free-range chicken!!)

We are not going to break free from this mess until we clearly understand that automobiles are displacing natural life from Earth more rapidly than any other destructive force - including our own species.  Just look at how much of the United States we've already suffocated under asphalt!

GreenWash asks what we should do instead of producing ethanol.

(1) PARK YOUR CAR!  Even better, get rid of it!  Walk, bike, carpool, and use public transit instead
(2) Stop using fossil fuels to fertilize and mow lawns
(3) Stop using fossil fuels for recreation and to play (snowmobiles, RVs, vacation flights, water parks, etc.)
(4) Stop building suburbia and exurbia
(5) Densify existing urban areas
(6) Build mass transit as fast as possible
(7) If you have a yard, raise some food for your family

(FYI, I myself am doing and/or promoting all these things.)

The problem in the United States isn't supply of energy and other resources, it's our gluttony.  We live in a nation with more biologically productive land and natural resources per capita than any other on Earth.  If we can't build a sustainable civilization here - if we do ridiculous stuff like planting every square inch of farmland to feed automobiles - we deserve to become extinct.





]]> Comment #16 by Hans Noeldner http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/ Tue, 30 May 2006 05:19:42 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/16 Here's our solution!!

GreenWash - the two best technological solutions to our liquid transportation fuels "problem" are conveniently connected to our bodies at our hips.  We already have a name for this superb technology: "legs".  

For our convenience, God Almighty has already perfected our "leg" infrastructure - the more we use them, the stronger and more efficient they become.  "Legs" work great all on their own, and even better when turning bicycle cranks.  Plus regular use of "legs" also makes our bodies - and our communities - much healthier!

]]> Here's our solution!!

GreenWash - the two best technological solutions to our liquid transportation fuels "problem" are conveniently connected to our bodies at our hips.  We already have a name for this superb technology: "legs".  

For our convenience, God Almighty has already perfected our "leg" infrastructure - the more we use them, the stronger and more efficient they become.  "Legs" work great all on their own, and even better when turning bicycle cranks.  Plus regular use of "legs" also makes our bodies - and our communities - much healthier!

]]> Comment #17 by lorleee http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/ Tue, 30 May 2006 06:02:54 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/unethacoal/17 warts & Ethanol

From your story:  "Greene estimates that an ethanol industry using environmentally preferable production methods could fully replace the gasoline used in America by mid-century"

I saw another story this morning saying that if you used all the  corn in the country, the ethanol would be able to replace 7% --- yes under 10%...
And then by golly, what would we eat since corn syrup is in just about everything.  So are they counting on that sawgrass for the other 93%

]]> warts & Ethanol

From your story:  "Greene estimates that an ethanol industry using environmentally preferable production methods could fully replace the gasoline used in America by mid-century"

I saw another story this morning saying that if you used all the  corn in the country, the ethanol would be able to replace 7% --- yes under 10%...
And then by golly, what would we eat since corn syrup is in just about everything.  So are they counting on that sawgrass for the other 93%

]]>