BoatBanter.com - Ethanol; working now

BoatBanter.com (https://www.boatbanter.com/)

- ASA (https://www.boatbanter.com/asa/)

- - Ethanol; working now (https://www.boatbanter.com/asa/69587-ethanol%3B-working-now.html)

Ethanol; working now

A bit of CCP of which I'm not to swift. Some information. A rather long
read but some very good information about Ethanol

Ethanol has a positive energy balance, meaning the ethanol yields more
energy than it takes to produce it. It is an efficient fuel made through
an efficient process.
It takes less than 35,000 BTUs of energy to turn corn into ethanol,
while the ethanol offers at least 77,000 BTUs of energy. Ethanol's
energy balance is clearly positive.
Research studies from a variety of sources have found ethanol to have a
positive net energy balance. The most recent, by the U.S. Department of
Agriculture, shows that ethanol provides an average net energy gain of
at least 77%.

One faulty, outdated study shows ethanol's net energy balance to be
negative. That research uses fundamentally flawed, decades old data that
is not valid considering today's efficiencies in agriculture and in
ethanol production. brings the overall price down.
The U.S. ethanol industry provides more than 4 billion gallons of fuel
to our nation's supply each year. Especially when refining capacity is
tight, a larger fuel supply means less price volatility.
Removing ethanol from our nation's supply would mean we'd immediately
need to find 3% more fuel – that would cause dramatic spikes in fuel
prices.

Ethanol's impact on air quality
Using ethanol-blended fuel has a positive impact on air quality. Ethanol
is an oxygenate, and that oxygen helps the fuel burn more cleanly and
more completely - a cleaner fuel for cleaner air.
Many areas of the country have used ethanol in order to meet EPA clean
air standards with great results. Ethanol reduces the emissions of
carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds, and toxic air emissions.

Ethanol's role in energy independence
Ethanol is an American-made fuel that helps our country to be more
energy independent. U.S. ethanol production provides more than 4 billion
gallons of fuel for our country – fuel produced at home from renewable
resources, fuel that doesn't need to be imported.
Ethanol is not the only answer to America's energy needs, but it is
part of the overall solution. Energy independence means having choices,
and ethanol is one of those choices that can be made right here in the
U.S. from renewable resources.
Ethanol's impact on the economy
Ethanol has a tremendously positive impact on our nation's economy. It
creates jobs and increases revenues; increases farm income and reduces
farm program payments; and decreases the amount of energy we import.
The combination of reduced farm program payments and increased tax
revenues adds at least $1.30 to the U.S. Treasury for every gallon of
ethanol produced. This figure even takes into consideration the ethanol
incentive program. (AUS Consultants, Inc.)
Ethanol has a tremendously positive impact on the local economies around
the plants themselves. Local people are employed; local crops are
purchased to make the ethanol; and local tax bases are significantly
expanded.
An average-sized ethanol plant employs about 40 people with good-paying,
high-skill jobs and provides spin-off jobs through local providers of
goods and services for the plant.
week's time.

The Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS)
The Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS) is a policy that would require an
increasing amount of renewable fuels to be used each year. The RFS in
the recently passed federal energy bill would slate 7.5 billion gallons
of ethanol to be used in the U.S. by 2012. In 2004, the U.S. used 3.4
billion gallons of ethanol.
The RFS would streamline the current patchwork of fuel regulations we
have across this country. States, regions – and in some cases cities
– have different fuel requirements, and the RFS would allow renewable
fuels to be used where they make the most sense instead of forcing the
production of all these "boutique" fuels.

*
*
*
*

http://community.webtv.net/tassail/ThomPage

Ethanol; working now

"Thom Stewart" wrote
It takes less than 35,000 BTUs of energy to turn corn into ethanol,
while the ethanol offers at least 77,000 BTUs of energy. Ethanol's
energy balance is clearly positive.

OK, but how many BTUs did it take to grow the corn? Don't forget the fuel to
plow, disk, plant and harvest the corn then the fuel for the silo heaters needed
to dry it for shipment then shipping costs to collect the corn and take it to
the distillery.

One faulty, outdated study shows ethanol's net energy balance to be
negative. That research uses fundamentally flawed, decades old data that
is not valid considering today's efficiencies in agriculture and in
ethanol production. brings the overall price down.

Let's see the numbers.

Removing ethanol from our nation's supply would mean we'd immediately
need to find 3% more fuel - that would cause dramatic spikes in fuel
prices.

I was told that back in the 1970s so I tried "gasahol" - 10% methanol. My cars
ran, albiet with less power, but I got almost exactly 10% less miles per gallon.
That says the alchohol wasn't burning at all, that it was just an expensive
filler, like mixing sawdust into hamburger. I used the first tank of the new
ethanol-blended gas last week and got 15MPG instead of the usual 18-20.

Ethanol's impact on air quality
Using ethanol-blended fuel has a positive impact on air quality. Ethanol
is an oxygenate, and that oxygen helps the fuel burn more cleanly and
more completely - a cleaner fuel for cleaner air.
Many areas of the country have used ethanol in order to meet EPA clean
air standards with great results. Ethanol reduces the emissions of
carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds, and toxic air emissions.

BS! Adding a small quantity any oxygenate to gasoline reduces the unburned
hydrocarbons, but raises the cost of the gas and reduces mileage. We could also
reduce unburned hydrocarbons plus improve mileage by raising compression ratios
again. But that'd cause more nitric acid in the air. And thats why the law says
engines must burn unleaded gas - because it forced manufacturers to lower
compression ratios. And that in turn necessitated expensive and now ubiquitous
catalitic converters and MTBE.

Ethanol is an American-made fuel that helps our country to be more
energy independent.

That's great! Now all we have to do is get EPA to require that all new cars
have 14:1 compression suitable for burning ethanol efficiently. Or course we'll
have watering eyes and rotting drapes but less hyrocarbons.

Otherwise, ........

Ethanol; working now

"Thom Stewart" wrote in message
...
Hey Wop!!

What an asinine reply!

So how much BTU's to plant the dinosaurs and convert them to oil. How
much BTU's to tramp around the world trying to find oil. How many dry
holes. How many BTU's setting Rigs, pumping. transporting crews, Tankers
transporting crude thousands of miles over the worlds Oceans; traveling
one way with empty tanks, land transport to Refineries. Seaman's pay,
Roust-abouts pay, Shipping terminals cost and their payrolls. I don't
think a Farmer and tractor running a disc plow and a harvester will even
come close to that cost.

You inadvertently explain why ethanol is not the miracle cure you claim it
is. The farmer and tractor. Pesticides to keep the bugs at bay, you know,
petrochemicals. Energy needed to convert the corn into ethanol, currently
not a very efficient process. At the end of the day, it still requires 1.1
gallons of fossil fuel equivalents to produce 1 gallon of ethanol at this
time. A simpler analogy, would you invest $110,000 for a return of $100,000
and think it was a good investment?

John Cairns

Ethanol; working now

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 11 May 2006 16:41:24 GMT, "Maxprop" said:

The numbers I've seen indicate 1.5 gallons of E85 (the highest useable
concentration of EToH) roughly equal one gallon of gasoline.

I think that's a slightly different issue. As I understand it, what you're
saying is that it takes 1.5 gallons of ethanol to provide the same
effective
energy output as 1 gallon of gasoline--strictly an energy output issue.
The
numbers I was talking about related to inputs to and output of the ethanol
itself, and suggested that one used about 2/3 of a gallon of petroleum
products to produce 1 gallon of ethanol.

The numbers I've seen, with respect to cellulosic ethanol production, are
far less. I tried to relocate the website, but had no luck.

Max

Ethanol; working now

"Thom Stewart" wrote in message
...
Hey Piasano!!

What an asinine reply!

Go to Naples.

So how much BTU's to plant the dinosaurs and convert them to oil. How
much BTU's to tramp around the world trying to find oil. How many dry
holes. How many BTU's setting Rigs, pumping. transporting crews, Tankers
transporting crude thousands of miles over the worlds Oceans; traveling
one way with empty tanks, land transport to Refineries. Seaman's pay,
Roust-abouts pay, Shipping terminals cost and their payrolls. I don't
think a Farmer and tractor running a disc plow and a harvester will even
come close to that cost.

Obviously less than we get from the gasoline or we wouldn't be doing it. These
are private funds from hardheaded businessmen who wouldn't be wasting their
money. OTOH the gummymint is subsidizing Ethanol. So again, how much energy does
it take to get a gallon of Ethanol, including the energy to grow the corn, Vs
the energy that gallon produces in an engine designed for gasoline??

Plus; it is a renewable source!! Who and how are you going to use to
plant new Dino. and where are you going to get them;----

What else; Oh yeah, had to go back to see what else; Compress Ratio &
Nitric Acid! No one said to change engine Compression. That's all in
your mind, Vito. Just the same as your Nitric Acid. If we burn Alky or
Gasoline will there be a change in the Nitric emission?

Yes! Unleaded gas will burn and produce energy at well under 10:1 compression.
Back in 1970 EPA forced mfgr.s to lower compression ratios to those levels to
reduce the NOx emissions. OTOH cousin Enzo and others used compression ratios of
14:1 and more to very effectively burn Ethanol in their racing engines. It don't
burn worth a crap in todays US motors.

ETHANOL FOR E85 AND AMERICAN FUEL INDEPENDENCE

Fine with me if you make it burn efficiently enough to be economically viable.
My sympathy is with the farmers not big oil - except when my taxes are being
handed to some lunatics who want to spend more to produce less energy. But the
tree huggers will squall when they find out that the new emission levels are
rotting their cloths, burning eyes and killing fish, not to mention making even
worse holes in the ozone layer.

Ethanol; working now

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 11 May 2006 16:41:24 GMT, "Maxprop" said:

The numbers I've seen indicate 1.5 gallons of E85 (the highest useable
concentration of EToH) roughly equal one gallon of gasoline.

I think that's a slightly different issue. As I understand it, what you're
saying is that it takes 1.5 gallons of ethanol to provide the same effective
energy output as 1 gallon of gasoline--strictly an energy output issue. The
numbers I was talking about related to inputs to and output of the ethanol
itself, and suggested that one used about 2/3 of a gallon of petroleum
products to produce 1 gallon of ethanol.

OK, but then I must burn 1.5 gallons (50% more) Ethanol to go the same miles as
a gollon of gas so 2/3 x 1.5 = 1, ie it takes the energy equivalent of 1 gallon
of gas to get the same energy as one gallon of gas out of Ethanol. Kind of like
buying a bushel of seed corn then working one's ass off to plant then harvest it
and only get one bushel of corn back.

Ethanol; working now

Max,

Here is the figures from the Dept of Ag;
These figure are for Corn Cellular is even better, with less emissions

Ethanol; working now

Ethanol has a positive energy balance, meaning the ethanol yields more
energy than it takes to produce it. It is an efficient fuel made through
an efficient process.
It takes less than 35,000 BTUs of energy to turn corn into ethanol,
while the ethanol offers at least 77,000 BTUs of energy. Ethanol's
energy balance is clearly positive.
Research studies from a variety of sources have found ethanol to have a
positive net energy balance. The most recent, by the U.S. Department of
Agriculture, shows that ethanol provides an average net energy gain of
at least 77%.

One faulty, outdated study shows ethanol's net energy balance to be
negative. That research uses fundamentally flawed, decades old data that
is not valid considering today's efficiencies in agriculture and in
ethanol

http://community.webtv.net/tassail/ThomPage

Ethanol; working now

Pleeeese Robert,

How much energy is consumed to discover, recover, transport, refine
and sell oil ?

The cost is now at a point to encourage new sources, the politic of the
day is just the icing on the cake.

The world consumes 1480 Barrels of oil per second.

Capt. Suzy
35s5
NY

Ethanol; working now

1480 Barrels per second!

I do believe that would fall under the heading; ADDICTION!

http://community.webtv.net/tassail/ThomPage

Ethanol; working now

Thats nothing, more soda pop is sold per second.

Lets get real here, oil is cheap and used to make just about
everything.

We still have an ambundant supply on earth but it's getting more
expensive to get it...simple supply and demand issue.

Enjoy the cheap gasoline, lets save the whales for the sea, the sugar
cane for the sugarbowls, and hershey bars, and sugar beets for
thanksgiving!

Barleys for beer, not gas tanks!

Capt. Suzy
35s5
NY

Jeb Bush for President!

Ethanol; working now

Joe,

I really don't like those "Ragheads" having such a firm grip on our
Balls. I guess I have to class "Big Oil" with the Ragheads, with their
Gouging record breaking Profits.
I know its going the hurt, loosening that grip and it will take time.
(More time than I have left in my life) Let's get it started Now! Let's
not let Big Oil drive us into a "Depression" (Even though they send we
New Money each month)

No better time to start than RIGHT NOW!

http://community.webtv.net/tassail/ThomPage

Ethanol; working now

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 12 May 2006 03:01:12 GMT, "Maxprop" said:

The numbers I've seen, with respect to cellulosic ethanol production, are
far less.

I understand there are other problems with using that process. It may have
promise, but we're not there yet.

What sort of problems? The Brazilians are using sugar cane--the whole
plant--which is a type of cellulosic + sugar-based ethanol production. And
they have divorced themselves completely from foreign oil importation.

Max

Ethanol; working now

"Thom Stewart" wrote in message
...
Max,

Here is the figures from the Dept of Ag;
These figure are for Corn Cellular is even better, with less emissions

Ethanol; working now

Ethanol has a positive energy balance, meaning the ethanol yields more
energy than it takes to produce it. It is an efficient fuel made through
an efficient process.
It takes less than 35,000 BTUs of energy to turn corn into ethanol,
while the ethanol offers at least 77,000 BTUs of energy. Ethanol's
energy balance is clearly positive.
Research studies from a variety of sources have found ethanol to have a
positive net energy balance. The most recent, by the U.S. Department of
Agriculture, shows that ethanol provides an average net energy gain of
at least 77%.

One faulty, outdated study shows ethanol's net energy balance to be
negative. That research uses fundamentally flawed, decades old data that
is not valid considering today's efficiencies in agriculture and in
ethanol

Logic would presume that ultimately a compendium of different methods of
producing ethanol will be utilized, all with some degree of success. Like
it or not, ethanol is coming, and it will be the predominant source of fuel
for automobiles at some time in the future. Unlike petroleum, it is
renewable and meets at least some of the requirements of a cleaner-emission
fuel. Ethanol's detractors better get used to it.

Max

Ethanol; working now

Maxprop wrote:
"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 12 May 2006 03:01:12 GMT, "Maxprop" said:

The numbers I've seen, with respect to cellulosic ethanol production, are
far less.
I understand there are other problems with using that process. It may have
promise, but we're not there yet.

What sort of problems? The Brazilians are using sugar cane--the whole
plant--which is a type of cellulosic + sugar-based ethanol production. And
they have divorced themselves completely from foreign oil importation.

Max

And it was announced yesterday that we (the US) are going to import
Brazilian ethanol (can't remember if it was on MSNBC or
FOXEWS)...one of the reasons given was that you can't run a pipeline
from the Midwest to the East because it condenses in the pipe...What
happened to our trucking system and trains??? Another reason was to
strengthen our relationships within this hemisphere...(yeah...look
at what NAFTA did for us....)

Ethanol; working now

"katy" wrote in message
...
Maxprop wrote:
"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 12 May 2006 03:01:12 GMT, "Maxprop"
said:

The numbers I've seen, with respect to cellulosic
ethanol production, are
far less.
I understand there are other problems with using that
process. It may have
promise, but we're not there yet.

What sort of problems? The Brazilians are using sugar
cane--the whole
plant--which is a type of cellulosic + sugar-based
ethanol production. And
they have divorced themselves completely from foreign
oil importation.

Max

And it was announced yesterday that we (the US) are going
to import
Brazilian ethanol (can't remember if it was on MSNBC or
FOXEWS)...one of the reasons given was that you can't run
a pipeline
from the Midwest to the East because it condenses in the
pipe...What
happened to our trucking system and trains??? Another
reason was to
strengthen our relationships within this
hemisphere...(yeah...look
at what NAFTA did for us....)

We import a lot of steel castings from Brazil. Cheap, about
half of USA made.

Scotty

Ethanol; working now

Katy,

Don't pay to much attention to Dave on this subject, he is an AGAINSTER
of ethanol. He can't seem to realize that Ethanol is a perfected fuel
and getting better all the time.

Cellulosic Ethanol is cheaper and a better fuel than Corn Ethanol and
more and more methods are being developed in its production all the
time. Not all of them are successful as others but Cellulosic Ethanol is
in production now and a proven commercial form of fuel.

Most of the sugar mills in So America have added a Cellulosic Unit to
their operation. It produces profit from what was a waste disposal
problem. The production of Cellulosic Ethanol, when using gas to
separate the Carbon Monoxide from the Alcohol produces Heat. A lot of
heat. They are Co-Generating Electricity with it while using waste and
heat disposal. There are still several other methods being explored and
developed that aren't perfected as yet that hold promise. That may what
"Chicken Little Dave" is talking about.

http://community.webtv.net/tassail/ThomPage

Ethanol; working now

Thom, carbon monoxide is a gas already while alcohol is a liquid. Why the
need to bring in another gas to separate two substances that seem likely to
separate themselves naturally?

"Thom Stewart" wrote in message
...
Katy,

Don't pay to much attention to Dave on this subject, he is an AGAINSTER
of ethanol. He can't seem to realize that Ethanol is a perfected fuel
and getting better all the time.

Cellulosic Ethanol is cheaper and a better fuel than Corn Ethanol and
more and more methods are being developed in its production all the
time. Not all of them are successful as others but Cellulosic Ethanol is
in production now and a proven commercial form of fuel.

Most of the sugar mills in So America have added a Cellulosic Unit to
their operation. It produces profit from what was a waste disposal
problem. The production of Cellulosic Ethanol, when using gas to
separate the Carbon Monoxide from the Alcohol produces Heat. A lot of
heat. They are Co-Generating Electricity with it while using waste and
heat disposal. There are still several other methods being explored and
developed that aren't perfected as yet that hold promise. That may what
"Chicken Little Dave" is talking about.

http://community.webtv.net/tassail/ThomPage

Ethanol; working now

Edgar,

This says it better than I. Just remember and awful lot is old reshearch
(Mid 1990's and is in the beginning stages of production)

Your continued donations keep Wikipedia running!****
Cellulosic ethanol
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Cellulosic ethanol is a blend of normal ethanol that can be produced
from a great diversity of biomass including waste from urban,
agricultural, and forestry sources. There are at least two methods of
production of cellulosic ethanolâ€"enzymatic hydrolysis and
synthesis gas fermentation. Neither process generates toxic emissions
when it produces ethanol. The technology is very new and exists in pilot
configurations where testing is ongoing.
According to US Department of Energy studies conducted by the Argonne
Laboratories of the University of Chicago, one of the benefits of
cellulosic ethanol is that it reduces greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) by
85% over reformulated gasoline. By contrast, sugar-fermented ethanol
reduces GHG emissions by 18% to 29% over gasoline.
In April 2004, Iogen Corporation, a Canadian biotechnology firm, became
the first business to commercially sell cellulosic ethanol. The primary
consumer thus far has been the Canadian government, which, along with
the United States government (particularly the Department of Energy's
National Renewable Energy Laboratory), has invested millions of dollars
into assisting the commercialization of cellulosic ethanol.
Genencor and Novozymes are two other companies that have received United
States government Department of Energy funding for research into
reducing the cost of cellulase, a key enzyme in the production
cellulosic ethanol by enzymatic hydrolysis.
Other enzyme companies such as Dyadic International, Inc. (AMEX: DIL)
have been using fungi to develop and manufacture cellulases in 150,000
liter industrial fermenters since 1994. With the advent of genetic
engineering and genomics companies like Dyadic, Genencor and Novozymes
have the modern biological tools such as Dyadic's patented C1 Host
Technology [1] to develop and manufacture large volumes of new and
better performing enzyme mixtures to make the production of cellulosic
ethanol more economical.
BRI Energy, LLC is a company whose pilot plant in Fayetteville, Arkansas
is currently using synthesis gas fermentation to convert a variety of
waste into ethanol. After gasification, anaerobic bacteria (Clostridium
ljungdahlii) are used to convert the syngas (CO, CO2, and H2) into
ethanol. The heat generated by gasification is also used to co-generate
excess electricity.
There are two broad ways of producing alcohol from cellulose. Hydrolysis
breaks down the cellulose chains into sugar molecules that are then
fermented and distilled. Gasification transforms the carbon in the raw
material into a gaseous carbon monoxide that is then fed to a special
kind of fermenter.
[edit]
Hydrolysis processes
The cellulose molecules are composed of long chains of beta-glucose
molecules. In the hydrolysis process, these chains are broken down to
"free" the sugar, before feeding it to a fermenter for alcohol
production. There are four or five stages in the process:
An optional "pre-treatment" phase, to make the raw material such as wood
or straw amenable to hydrolysis,
Hydrolysis, to break down the molecules of cellulose into sugars;
Separation of the sugar solution from the residual materials, notably
lignin;
Fermentation of the sugar solution;
Distillation to produce 99.5% pure alcohol.
There are two major hydrolysis processes: a chemical reaction using
acids, or an enzymatic reaction.
[edit]
Chemical hydrolysis
In the traditional methods developed in the 19th century and at the
beginning of the 20th century, hydrolysis is performed by attacking the
cellulose with an acid under high heat and high pressure. Modern
variations of this technique are being explored by companies such as
Arkenol or BC International Corporation.
[edit]
Enzymatic Hydrolysis
Cellulose chains can be broken into beta-glucose atoms by the cellulase
enzyme. This reaction occurs at body temperature in the stomach of
ruminants, where the enzyme are produced by bacteriaâ€"there are
actually at least three enzymes, used at various stages of the
conversion. The enzymatic hydrolysis process depends on a steady supply
of the cellulase enzymes.
The IOGEN corporation is a Canadian producer of enzymes. They are
promoting an enzymatic hydrolysis process that uses "specially
engineered enzymes". The raw material (wood or straw) has to be
pre-treated to make it amenable to hydrolysis.
Genencor and Novozymes are two other companies that have received United
States government Department of Energy funding for research into
reducing the cost of cellulase, a key enzyme in the production
cellulosic ethanol by enzymatic hydrolysis.
Other enzyme companies such as Dyadic International, Inc. (AMEX: DIL)
have been using fungi to develop and manufacture cellulases in 150,000
liter industrial fermenters since 1994. With the advent of genetic
engineering and genomics companies like Dyadic, Genencor and Novozymes
have the modern biological tools such as Dyadic's patented C1 Host
Technology [2] to develop and manufacture large volumes of new and
better performing enzyme mixtures to make the production of cellulosic
ethanol
more economical.
[edit]

Gasification process
The gasification process of the BRI Energy company does not rely on
chemical decomposition of the cellulose chain. Instead of breaking the
cellulose into sugar molecules, the carbon in the raw material is
converted into carbon monoxide, using what amounts to partial
combustion. The carbon monoxide is then fed into a special kind of
fermenter. Instead of yeast, which operates on sugar, their process uses
a microorganism named â€œClostridium ljungdahliiâ€?. This
microorganism will ingest (eat) carbon monoxide and produce ethanol,
hydrogen and water. The process can thus be broken into three steps:
Gasification â€" Complex carbon based molecules are broken apart to
access the carbon as carbon monoxide
Fermentation â€" Convert the carbon monoxide into ethanol using the
Clostridium ljungdahlii organism
Distillation â€" Ethanol is separated from hydrogen and water
[edit]

Economic importance
The quest for alternative energies has provided many ways to produce
electricity, such as wind farms, hydropower, or solar cells. However,
about 40% of the total energy consumption is dedicated to transports and
in practice requires liquid fuels such as gasoline, diesel fuel, or
kerosene. These fuels are all obtained by refining petroleum. This
dependency on oil has two major drawbacks: burning fossil fuels such as
oil contributes to global warming; and importing oil creates a
dependency on oil producing countries. Ethanol fuel is a practical
alternative to oil.

Ethanol, today, is produced mostly from sugars or starches, obtained
from fruits and grains. In contrast, cellulosic ethanol is obtained from
cellulose, the main component of wood, straw and much of the plants.
Since cellulose cannot be digested by humans, the production of
cellulose does not compete with the production of food. The price per
ton of the raw material is thus much cheaper than grains or fruits.
Moreover, since cellulose is the main components of plants, the whole
plant can be harvested. This results in much better yields per
acreâ€"up to 10 tons, instead of 4 or 5 tons for the best crops of
grain.
The raw material is plentiful. Cellulose is present in every plant:
straw, grass, wood. Most of these "bio-mass" products are currently
discarded. Transforming them into ethanol might provide as much as 30%
of the current fuel consumption in the USâ€"and probably similar
figures in other oil-importing regions like China or Europe. Moreover,
even land marginal for agriculture could be planted with cellulose
producing crops like switchgrass, resulting in enough production to
substitute for all the current oil imports.
[edit]

GROUP:
This, I hope, is my last OT post on this subject. I think I've said
enough. At least enough to understand there is an answer to reducing
Imported Oil. Not the total answer; not yet anyway, but a very real way
to reduce Imported Oil RIGHT NOW!

http://community.webtv.net/tassail/ThomPage

Ethanol; working now

"Thom Stewart" wrote:
| Joe,
|
| I really don't like those "Ragheads" having such a firm grip on our
| Balls. I guess I have to class "Big Oil" with the Ragheads, with their
| Gouging record breaking Profits.
| I know its going the hurt, loosening that grip and it will take time.
| (More time than I have left in my life) Let's get it started Now! Let's
| not let Big Oil drive us into a "Depression" (Even though they send we
| New Money each month)
|
| No better time to start than RIGHT NOW!

Total wack job! This Tom Stewart is a nut case for sure...

Paladin

*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ***

Ethanol; working now

"Maxprop" wrote in message nk.net...
| | Logic would presume that ultimately a compendium of different methods of
| producing ethanol will be utilized, all with some degree of success. Like
| it or not, ethanol is coming, and it will be the predominant source of fuel
| for automobiles at some time in the future. Unlike petroleum, it is
| renewable and meets at least some of the requirements of a cleaner-emission
| fuel. Ethanol's detractors better get used to it.
|
| Max

IDIOT!

Ethanol has only about 60% of the BTUs that gasoline has. Not only that, but
it costs about 200% more to produce than gasoline. So, instead of paying
three bucks a gallon for gas and going thirty miles on a gallon you're gonna
pay six bucks a gallon and go only twenty miles on a gallon? Sure you are....

So many folks --- so few who can frame a rational thought.

Paladin

*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ***

Ethanol; working now

"Paladin" noneofyourbusiness.www wrote:

So many folks --- so few who can frame a rational thought.

You are sooooo correct! Capt. Neal is one of them...

HTH,

LP

Ethanol; working now

"Lady Pilot" wrote in message news:vxUbg.13229$8q.10897@dukeread08...
|
| "Paladin" noneofyourbusiness.www wrote:
|
| So many folks --- so few who can frame a rational thought.
|
| You are sooooo correct! Capt. Neal is one of them...
|
| HTH,
|
| LP

One of whom? One of the many or one of the few?

If one of the few then... I AGREE! Capt. Neal was the greatest subscriber this group's ever had. Evaluate the group in its
present form and you'll see that it's lost whatever charm it once had when the good captain, and his troop of shakespearean actors
held sway. Like the Phil Hendrie show, the last of which will air the 23rd of June, it's the end of an era -- an inspired era. The
genius that was Capt Neal can only be expected to uplift the many for a finite period of time.

P.S. Paladin sounds like one of those gayboy dispruptive meow army fools. You should plonk him.

Ralph Waldo Emerson