Bill2 wrote on Sep 23, 2007 1:08 AM:Ethanol is a joke - it takes more petroleum based fuel to make it than they get from processing the corn - not to menrion the shortage of food corn that it is causing. Price of corn in Mexico (where we get much of our corn) has quadrupeled since we started this ethanol boondoggle. We ship most of our corn overseas. Mythbusters put on a show not too long ago using a fairly late model Mercedes - first with diesel, then with well strained used cooking oil from a local fast food resteraunt - the mileage and power were virtually the same. Diesel originally designed his motor to run on PEANUT OIL. All of this can be verified by looking the information up on the web.-

fleet-fuel wrote on Sep 23, 2007 1:21 AM:Ethanol (E85) takes far more energy to produce, than it provides. It's a losing solution. Currently, there are TWO E85 stations in California, yet the State government just put out a bid for 600+ E85 vehicles. Disconnect anyone?!?! Biodiesel is slightly better, but plain old petroleum diesel is by far the most efficient.-

Rob wrote on Sep 23, 2007 8:53 AM:You may want to read up on these alternative fuels a little more before converting to them. Just as the MTBE additive to our gasoline proved to be far more damaging to us than ever disclosed these alternatives to fossil fuel may do much more harm than good.../

Ethanol Is a Hoax wrote on Sep 23, 2007 10:35 AM:It is welfare for the corn farmers. Promoting ethanol is a way of buying poltical favor in Iowa and the midwest. It takes mroe energy to make ethanol than it puts out, not a solution. Google ethanol and see for yourself/

Mary wrote on Sep 23, 2007 11:01 AM:Oops, there is quite a bit of recent research indicating that biofuels "is contributing more to global warming than fossil fuels, a study suggests. Measurements of emissions from the burning of biofuels derived from rapeseed and maize (corn for ethanol) have been found to produce more greenhouse gas emissions than they save. " Maize for ethanol is the prime crop for biofuel in the US where production for the industry has recently overtaken the use of the plant as a food. In Europe the main crop is rapeseed, which accounts for 80 per cent of biofuel production. Professor Smith told Chemistry World: �The significance of it is that the supposed benefits of biofuels are even more disputable than had been thought hitherto.� .../

Woodrow Wilson wrote on Sep 23, 2007 11:02 AM:Burning ethanol generates 60% more CO2 per mile than gasoline. Making ethanol from corn consumes more petroleum than it replaces--that's why it's more expensive than gasoline. Making ethanol from corn generates more pollutants than burning the gasoline it replaces. Buying ethanol made from corn buys Midwest Electoral votes./

Glad to see that the public knows wrote on Sep 23, 2007 1:32 PM:Knows that ethanol is a scam. Now if we could only convince the lawmakers in Washington.-

What? wrote on Sep 23, 2007 1:56 PM:There is an exelent story on biofuels in the October National Geographic. Here are the numbers from the article. Energy per gallon, ethonal has 67% of the energy of a gallon of gasoline. A gallon of biodiesel has 86% the energy of a gallon of diesel. It takes 1 gallon of fossil fuel to make 1.3 gallons of corn ethanol. On the greenhouse gas emissions side corn ethanol produses 22% less including use and production. On biodiesel you get 2.5 gallons for each gallon used in production. Biodiesel produces 68% less greenhouse gas in production and use. On the ethanol side of things I have to question the use of corn and attribute the big push for it's use to the power of the agri-buisness. They use cane to produce ethanol in Brazil and it takes 1 gallon to produce 8 gallons and it produces 56% less greenhouse gas. The bottom line is yeast converts sugar into alcohol. With corn you have to cook it and add enzimes to convert the starch to sugar befor you can use yeast to convert that sugar to alcohol. A good way to look at it is to compare beer to wine. With beer you cook the mash with enzymes to convert the starch to sugars to make wort. You then add yeast to the wort to ferment it to make alcohol. Wine on the other hand already has the sugar content naturally availble for fermentation./

Rob wrote on Sep 23, 2007 2:03 PM:It appears that Dave Downey may need to do a follow up story with the other side of the argument so the readers get all the information they need to form their opinion on the subject./

Oh? wrote on Sep 23, 2007 2:55 PM:So what about re-using french-fry grease as fuel rather than just dumping it? What about the value of lessoning the amount of money we give to the middle east for our energy needs? Is there no value to these things?/

Jacko wrote on Sep 23, 2007 3:02 PM:Ethanol is a negative-sum solution. Not only does it take more petroleum energy to make than it produces, it takes huge amounts of water to grow. With only two E85 stations in the state, our brilliant government leaders have just put out a purchase bid for over 600 E85 vehicles. Dumb.../

Josh wrote on Sep 23, 2007 4:16 PM:Biofuel development is still in its infancy. Current production of ethanol and biodiesel has a long way to go before it is highly efficient economically and environmentally. However, biofuels have many potential environmental advantages over petroleum (less harmful tailpipe emissions, significant reduction CO2 & other greenhouse gasses over lifecycle). While many issues need to be resolved before it is a viable energy alternative for the masses; I for one am tired of my hard earned dollars feeding the coffers of greedy oil execs and arab shieks, so I am investigating alternative energy sources with the hope that solutions will be found. BTW, while the actual burning of ethanol may produce more CO2; the CO2 in biofuel emissions is recycled from the atmosphere, as opposed to the CO2 introduced from petroleum that was previously burried underground.-

Roberto1 wrote on Sep 23, 2007 4:28 PM:For the ethanol naysayers....Brazil did it!/

Correct Roberto wrote on Sep 23, 2007 5:06 PM:The power is in sugar in Brazil, and it just so happens that sugar makes more sense to use to make ethanol. It is corn ethanol that is a joke. The NCT should doa more in depth article, or series of articles on the subject.-

What? wrote on Sep 23, 2007 6:47 PM:Roberto1 Brazil did it with cane ethanol. More sugar means more alcohol for less processing. Much more efficient to make than corn ethanol. It was also government mandated and heavly subsidized. Not only that but they switched back to gasoline after the OPEC embargo ended and gas prices dropped below the cost of their subsidzed ethanol. This is what caused them to develop the whole flex fuel thing so engines could run either gas or ethanol./

SacramentoE85 wrote on Sep 23, 2007 8:38 PM:It is AMAZING how quickly the anti-ethanol crowd finds and posts their disinformation. Much of what has been posted is through outdated data or is just plain wrong. Ethanol provides more energy per unit to produce, while gasoline provides less energy per unit to produce. In fact, ethanol is 81% more energy efficient than gasoline, even as corn ethanol. CO2 and other pollutants including smog are GREATLY reduced with ethanol compared to gasoline. The up-and-coming cellulosic ethanol will totally blow gasoline out of the water, and that's what Big Oil has shaky knees about, as well as OPEC and the Middle Eastern terrorists that thrive on our petroleum purchases. Wake up folks!/

Zog wrote on Sep 23, 2007 9:03 PM:Actually "Sacramento85", the above is misleading. Ethanol does indeed take more resources to produce than it provides. More water, more energy. If it actually was a viable solution, the "big oil" folks would be using it to create bigger profits and public goodwill. They are still using petroleum because it is the most cost efficient fuel base.-

Reardon wrote on Sep 23, 2007 10:22 PM:Ethanol is the new CNG, Compressed Natural Gas that was going to be the end-all and be-all in the 1970s. Then I heard the Segway would revolutionize transportation! (Seen any of those, lately?) I think I'll await a definitive article in Science magazine -- oops. In 1971 Science published the view of NASA that the world would COOL 6 degrees causing a new "Ice Age." I think I'll wait before I short my oil stocks.-

SacramentoEnergyRealist wrote on Sep 24, 2007 1:40 PM:SacramentE85 obviously has something to sell us.... Short-term, the best solution for California and the United States is drilling known domestic sources of petroleum (ANWR), and using other natural resources until viable, cost-effective options can be readily produced. It is not that I, or anyone else are opposed to alternatives to current modes of energy use/production (although I'm sure some are opposed to ANY alternative fuel solutions), but one must be realistic concerning current technologies, availability of alternative fuels/energy sources, and cost-effectiveness so that the general public would have access and be able to afford the alternative. Without these considerations, it is simply ridiculous to impose a government-mandated energy regime of any kind.

What? wrote on Sep 24, 2007 2:54 PM:Aw come on Reardon, the segway revoloutionizing transprtation was 100% marketing hype put out by it's developers. While the media will gobble that sort of thing up the buying public is more wait and see.

GBS wrote on Sep 24, 2007 7:30 PM:Most of you have it right...Ethanol isn't the answer. It requires much water and energy to produce, doesn't have enough energy density, and we're a drought or a bad crop away from a REAL problem if we get too dependent on it. The best near-term answer is battery technology and gas-electric hybrids. If Lithium technology (what powers your cell phones and laptops) can be made safe enough for cars, it has a tremendous power compared to its mass...much better than the batteries now in use. The danger is that it is a real problem if it catches fire. If/when that gets solved, plugging in your car and being able to drive it 300+ miles is possible.

Roberto1 wrote on Sep 24, 2007 9:30 PM:Gasoline in the US is already 10 ethanol in reformulated fuels which differ slightly from state to state. Increasing it anymore than 10-15% requires using flex-fuel technology. Even with ethanol coming online to a larger extent, The hydrocarbon business will continue to grow. Ethanol is already an integral part of the motoring market. Its time to take it to the next level. Again, Brazil did it and all the naysaying won't make it no so. Keep you oil stocks. I'm heavily invested in oil stocks and intend to keep it that way. If you want to know why...come to China and see for yourself./