Isn't this looking at ethanol in a vacuum?

The issue with biofuels is rarely the carbon burned in the fuel.  The issue with biofuels is the carbon emissions in the process of growing the feedstocks, in the conversion of our land from carbon sinks to carbon emitters, in the inappropriately located, poorly regulated or excessively large biofuels facilities, etc.  We need to take a full life cycle view of bio-energy.

And on the bigger scale:  This isn't about ethanol v. crude for autos.  This is about more of the same v. transitioning our energy to truly renewable.  This is about refusing to upgrade our cars because we can claim to use "renewable" ethanol instead of making more efficient cars.  This is about Big Ag and Big Oil vying for their next big grab on our natural resources.

If anybody opposes perennials for on-the-farm energy using pyrolsis or some other highly-efficient method of producing energy, please let me know....  But FYI, directly from the new policy statement:  "Sierra Club opposes further deployment of corn-based ethanol based on its extremely dubious net carbon benefits and its unresolved direct and indirect environmental impacts.  The Club also opposes proposals to overuse agricultural waste and residue products (e.g., corn stover) without rigorous evidence that the material being used is surplus to the needs of soil health and fertility."

Donna

On Dec 9, 2010, at 5:23 PM, Ed Woolsey wrote:

> Lee:
>       No worries.  I always enjoy some discussion on the subject.  This is
> one of those topics where you’ve always needed to follow WHO pays for these
> studies, and, the strings that come attached, attached to so many of our
> academics today.  With most of these AQ tests there were always “agendas”.
> I fear that this is one of the main reasons that the enviro community is so
> skeptical of ethanol.
>       Ethanol does not have the energy (btu’s) per gallon of gasoline.
> 73,000 vs 115,000. or about 30% less…so Gerald…I’m not sure how you would
> drop 10% or Lee…you would drop…30-40%.   9X115,000 plus 1x73,000 for
> E10 and 10x115,000 for straight gasoline.  I’m calling BS….ok…a little BS.
> Gasoline is REFORMULATED for cold weather conditions.  The use of  lighter
> components (volatile that start easier) would lower the total btu’s in your
> winter blend.  Or, gasoline companies would have an economic incentive to
> dump  lower grade gasoline and boost it more than 10%vol.  Perhaps we need
> to monitor the blends more.
> Other related issue is the use of ethanol octane…110 vs gasoline’s 85 or a
> little higher.  Octane is an indicator of how efficiently the fuel combusts.
> Because ethanol has a higher octane you can use it in the higher efficiency
> engines. (diesel)  Ethanol likes 16 to 1 and the current engines are about 8.5
> to 1.  Ethanol is short shifted big time.  Boosting the compression ratio for the
> fuel results is something like 25% greater fuel efficiency. (If anyone’s
> interested they can look it up or I can find it somewhere)  Oh, and the
> reduced efficiency leads to what???? yes...more pollutants.
> Short story long….what we should be using is about 80%ethanol 20% water
> mixture in a higher compression engine…tuned for the fuel.  Then lets see that
> AQ study….ethanol will smoke any fossil.  (pun intended) e
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> To unsubscribe from the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to:
> [log in to unmask]
>
> Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information:
> http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp
>
> Sign up to receive Sierra Club Insider, the flagship
> e-newsletter. Sent out twice a month, it features the Club's
> latest news and activities. Subscribe and view recent
> editions at http://www.sierraclub.org/insider/

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe from the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to:
[log in to unmask]

Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information:
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp