April 23rd, 2006 | 
Parse error: syntax error, unexpected ‘:’ in /home/wherman/public_html/wp-content/plugins/exec-php/includes/runtime.php(42) : eval()’d code on line 1
Related posts:
|
|||
   Now Reading
Recently Read
|
The Prius Deception – Part II |
||
|
Copyright © 2010 William Herman - All Rights Reserved
Blog WebMastered by All in One Webmaster.
|
|||
Tags:
There is a lot of debate as to whether the net energy is really improved in ethanol, given the energy (and pollution) costs of growing and distilling the corn. Also, to replace gasoline would require that 28% of the U.S. land area be dedicated to this. The likely outcome would be more clearing of rainforests to grow these crops. It’s further arguable whether this is really sustainable, since growing the crops needed for ethanol deplete the soil of specific nutrients. In all, it’s not such a simple case, unless you’re Archer Daniels Midland.
28% would be a lot. I’d be willing to bet, however, that adjusting the prices for many crop types above their current ridiculously low levels would have a big impact on the amount of land available for growing crops for fuel. Of course, these numbers assume that we are trying to replace ALL of the gasoline we are consuming (or at least 85% of it). I don’t think that should be the goal of E85 use. It is just one weapon in an arsenal to reduce US dependence on foreign oil. The combination of the use of E85, diesel and electric motors – all technology available today – could make a major dent in our crystal meth-like addiction to middle eastern black crude. Total replacement of rotted animal guts will require new technologies or, G-d forbid, an actual reduction in energy consumption.