biofuel skeptics, drink this:

[nynor]

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=grass-makes-better-ethanol-than-corn

[The Gaijin]

I am a skeptic indeed. How many bazillion acres of this stuff to fuel the SUVs of America? There is simply not enough arable land to make even a dent in the energy usage of America.

[Moses]

Soon we'll be paying farmers to grow weeds. Super.

[Lothar]

We already pay farmers to not plant crops or subsidizing the crops they do grow. If there is a market for a source of plant material that can, cost effectively, be converted to bio-fuels, thereby reducing our dependence on countries that hate us, I'm all for it.

This is far better than converting corn and causing a surge in the price of so many other products that are based on corn.

[The Gaijin]

The best thing by far is not to promote any of these feel good boondoggles. Corn, switchgrass or whatever. None of it can work, not by more than a tiny fraction of our energy needs - and we lose our focus on real changes plus research and development that should be going on.

[legion]

Originally Posted by The Gaijin

The best thing by far is not to promote any of these feel good boondoggles. Corn, switchgrass or whatever. None of it can work, not by more than a tiny fraction of our energy needs - and we lose our focus on real changes plus research and development that should be going on.

Clearly, you must work for an oil company. I'm sure all of that statement was paid for by Big Oil.

[M.D. Holloway]

Originally Posted by Lothar

We already pay farmers to not plant crops or subsidizing the crops they do grow. If there is a market for a source of plant material that can, cost effectively, be converted to bio-fuels, thereby reducing our dependence on countries that hate us, I'm all for it.

This is far better than converting corn and causing a surge in the price of so many other products that are based on corn.

Aside from the Diary subs and conservation land, I am not so sure any other farmers see any of the money you think they do. I know a bunch of farmers and I have to tell you, none are getting paid anything from the government not to farm.

This has been a myth for sometime. There are some that get something but they typically have farms inaccess of 20,000ac.

For those of you with a hard-on for the farmers of America, try talking to some in Kansas, Iowa or Nebraska - real farmers.

[911 in SC]

On a similar note, if not switchgrass, how about algae?

Solix Biofuels

Interesting, to say the least...

[Tim Hancock]

IF we built MANY more nuclear plants to provide the energy to power the bio-fuel plants then MAYBE it might be worthwhile/cost effective, but even then it seems far fetched on a large scale basis.

[The Gaijin]

Originally Posted by legion

Clearly, you must work for an oil company. I'm sure all of that statement was paid for by Big Oil.

OPEC actually.

[HardDrive]

Any new 'solution' that involved fuel of some kind is just another racket. The biofuel racket is being promoted because it will further enrich the wealthy agricorporations in the US.

I want an electric car, and I want the electricity to charge it to come from a combination of wind, solar and nuclear power.

Burning fuel of any kind to produce power is SO 1990s.

[rammstein]

Originally Posted by legion

Clearly, you must work for an oil company. I'm sure all of that statement was paid for by Big Oil.

Yeah, its obviously the work of Corporations. The big, evil, heartless kind.

[nynor]

Originally Posted by The Gaijin

I am a skeptic indeed. How many bazillion acres of this stuff to fuel the SUVs of America? There is simply not enough arable land to make even a dent in the energy usage of America.

apparently, you didn't read the article.

this stuff grows on very marginal land, land that cannot support commercial crops, of which we have billions of acres. the stuff makes over five times the amount of energy that it takes to produce it, which is better than OIL, being that a TANKER of oil burns 1/4 of the amount of fuel that it carries just GETTING HERE.


"Soon we'll be paying farmers to grow weeds. Super."

this might be the lamest comment on this post: if the weeds they produce make MONEY, what is the problem?

"I want an electric car, and I want the electricity to charge it to come from a combination of wind, solar and nuclear power. "

have fun plugging your inefficient car into the wall for eight hours after driving it only 60 miles. also, have fun getting rid of the spent nuclear fuel.

"The best thing by far is not to promote any of these feel good boondoggles. Corn, switchgrass or whatever. None of it can work, not by more than a tiny fraction of our energy needs - and we lose our focus on real changes plus research and development that should be going on."

this is my favorite criticism. these folks criticize biofuels because it hasn't worked yet, but they offer no solution. the status quo is so comfortable. you always have the option of riding a bicycle, no research required.

[Tim Hancock]

[QUOTE=nynor;3698034]apparently, you didn't read the article.

the stuff makes over five times the amount of energy that it takes to produce it, which is better than OIL, being that a TANKER of oil burns 1/4 of the amount of fuel that it carries just GETTING HERE.

QUOTE]

The 540% number was simply stated as being related to petroleum used for fertilization and harvesting with tractors. It does not mention anything about the energy required to convert it to fuel. At least that is how I read the article.

Switching to a fuel source that requires mass amounts of coal to convert it into something useful, does not sound like a good long term plan.

I still like nuclear.

[nynor]

read it again. they include the amount required to convert it into fuel.

[Moses]

Originally Posted by nynor

"Soon we'll be paying farmers to grow weeds. Super."

this might be the lamest comment on this post: if the weeds they produce make MONEY, what is the problem?

I was referring to federal subsidies, genius.

[The Gaijin]

Even if it is totally efficient - how many BTUs per acre of switchgrass? And how many acres would you need to plant to replace even 1% of oil imports?? And if you are not growing food - but fuel on that land - what are we going to eat?

A nation of 300 million souls - in a temperate climate. Most of us need heating, cooling and transportation.

Not even a small part of the answer to our problems.

[nynor]

Originally Posted by Moses

I was referring to federal subsidies, genius.

hmm.... and we were supposed to infer that from your post exactly how? and we are now supposed to infer exactly what about subsidies from your latest post? could you be a little more clear and help this idiot to understand what it is you are communicatiing?

[nynor]

Originally Posted by The Gaijin

Even if it is totally efficient - how many BTUs per acre of switchgrass? And how many acres would you need to plant to replace even 1% of oil imports?? And if you are not growing food - but fuel on that land - what are we going to eat?

A nation of 300 million souls - in a temperate climate. Most of us need heating, cooling and transportation.

Not even a small part of the answer to our problems.

this is the same criticism of those that i mentioned above: throwing it out simply because they believe it to be impossible. believe me, i like our gasoline burning cars and i am also skeptical that oil can be replaced in its entirety. but i also think that exploring other options is necessary. also, if we can put to work those parts of our land that sit idle, of which we have quite a lot, it is my opinion that this is a good thing.

[sammyg2]

Originally Posted by nynor

...... which is better than OIL, being that a TANKER of oil burns 1/4 of the amount of fuel that it carries just GETTING HERE.

Reference please. I find this extremely hard to believe.