Ethanol -- Debate

[like2program]

-----------Warning Debatable Material Below-----------
----That means I want you to debate with me stupid---

Hi I just wanted to start a discussion about ethanol.
Let me just point out that Ethanol actually needs 1 gallon of gas for transportation of the ethanol to make 1 gallon of ethanol or less.Plus, it decreases america's profits because corn is our major export.
What are your thoughts on this?


Think about your reply

 

[Rufio1]

Like you said man, the amount of gas actually consumed during the production of ethanol exceeds the amount that is returned. Its a waste of farm crops and land. Plus I'm not 100% sure about this, but the rice shortage might be cased by the push for Ethanol, more rice farms are converting to crops that can be manufactured into Ethanol. Its really just not helping anyone..

 

[Spartan Erik]

Ethanol is the future, but by the current method we're using it is not worth it!

Shell Oil Co. worked on developing enzymes that converted various leftover plant material into ethanol.. but since gas was cheap then their project was disbanded. I'm pretty sure they're kicking themselves in the foot now.

All I know is that the future will not have internal combustion engines since they are extremely inefficient!

 

[HomerJ]

If they didn't subsidize it, it wouldn't be a problem. It would get used only when the technology is ready to make it worthwhile. However, farm subsidies and all the government's tinkering with the market created a situation where it is profitable despite actually being unprofitable.

 

[shaunak]

Lets see,
* If we use biofuels, there will be less food crop available, which means inflation will increase and people will starve...
* If we dont, we will have no fuel left to sustain our selves. We will continue to rely on the ever dwindling oil resources [its hitting $ 122 US a barrel now]

The best solution is to develop hydrogen fuel cell powered cars...

Till then ..... WALK.

 

[mattura]

Ethanol is needed for many different purposes. You can't just stop production as many industries rely on it.

 

[Zangetsu]

why dont we use other fuels such as water/electric instead of products that make global warming even worse

 

[rlodge]

No oil company or car company is kicking themselves for not exploiting any of the new technology. Just do a search for all the patents bought up and shelved or just plain sabotaged by the oil / auto industry. It's a "no-brainer" why this was done. It cuts into their bottom line. Can't have that, now can we?

Also, biofuels are not as engine friendly as everyone thinks. They give less mileage (many truck drivers won't touch it because of this) and the cost is not that much different from regular diesel. We have a 350KW generator driven by a Detroit Diesel engine that simply will not run on biofuel.

Also, I had heard somewhere that if we took all of our agriculture and turned it into ethanol production, we would only make up approximately 10% of our overall fuel consumption.

Before anyone blasts me for being anti-environment, I am not against the development and production of alternative fuels or transportation. The only way that it will happen is if some stuffed suit can make money doing it. Until it actually becomes more profitable than mining fossil fuels and the internal combustion engine, it will not happen.

 

[Spartan Erik]

why dont we use other fuels such as water/electric instead of products that make global warming even worse

Electric batteries have a lifespan of 10 years. We would have to undergo a drastic new change in battery technology to make them any more efficient. Additionally there are plenty of environmental hazards with massive dead batteries afterwards.

A lot of proposals about using water as a fuel have MANY faults. The only one that has potential is that recently it was discovered that directing a certain frequency radio wave to a beaker of salt water caused disruptions in the dissolved salt ions and the water molecules, resulting in hydrogen bubbling up. The Energy Department is testing to see whether it's cost effective to power a generator to make a radio wave to form hydrogen (it is likely that this won't be efficient).

 

[HomerJ]

Lets see,
* If we use biofuels, there will be less food crop available, which means inflation will increase and people will starve...
* If we dont, we will have no fuel left to sustain our selves. We will continue to rely on the ever dwindling oil resources [its hitting $ 122 US a barrel now]

The best solution is to develop hydrogen fuel cell powered cars...

Till then ..... WALK.

The problem with hydrogen-power is the difficulty in extracting hydrogen. By running an electric current through water, it causes the water molecules to separate into hydrogen and oxygen atoms. This is the simplest way to extract hydrogen, at least now. However, it takes more electrical energy to separate the molecule than can be released by burning the hydrogen.

In other words, it is better to use the electricity that would be used in extracting hydrogen to run your vehicle than to produce the hydrogen.

 

[allinone]

ethanol will not be the major source of energy in future coz fuel cells are obertaking it. hence no worries.

 

[like2program]

why dont we use other fuels such as water/electric

Most of the electricity on the earth comes from coal, oil etc. so making electric cars doesn't really solve the problem of pollution, but it will decrease your bill for driving. I also have doubts about fuel cells. By using oxygen and hydrogen(water) we're getting rid of one of the resources our survival absolutely depends on.


Personally I love corn and I would love to eat it for a year instead of filling up my tank.

 

[oi2008]

I don't think that ethanol as a fuel for transportation has a future, for the reasons already pointed out by other forum members.

More likely, in the future we will rely more and more on electricity for transportation; electricity that will be produced by nuclear power plants, renewable energies as the technologies improve, and, of course, still by fossil fuels, mainly coal. This transition to electricity has already begun with the increasing popularity of hybrid engines, whose sales are pushed by high gasoline prices. Soon, plug-in markets will come on the market (Prius 3, Chevrolet Volt...), thus going further in the transition to electricity-powered vehicles, especially for daily commutes of short distances.

However, agricultural fuels will certainly increase in usefulness, with the so-called “second generation” that will be able to produce fuel not only from some parts of the plant, but from all organic matter.

 

[like2program]

More likely, in the future we will rely more and more on electricity for transportation; electricity that will be produced by nuclear power plants, renewable energies as the technologies improve, and, of course, still by fossil fuels, mainly coal.

I'm with you on that one, Nuclear energy is evolving with the times and it is becoming more profitable to use it than fossil fuels. It became so easy to use that one company charges by the month instead of by how much used(This is somewhere in Thailand or something, I can't remember where I read about it).

On a second note, I wanted to reply to another portion of your message...

I don't think that ethanol as a fuel for transportation has a future, for the reasons already pointed out by other forum members.

Can someone please give me a reason why it is a good idea? I would love to keep this discussion alive.

 

[ssdtanay]

Yesterday in BBC, I ahve heard that ethenol will be made by food. I think that this will kill a lot of people in the continents of Africa, South Asia and all around the world. I think that people should live first not have fun. It is not fair for the people who die in one side and people have fun in another side. This should really be changed.

 

[like2program]

Yesterday in BBC, I have heard that ethanol will be made by food. I think that this will kill a lot of people in the continents of Africa, South Asia and all around the world. I think that people should live first not have fun. It is not fair for the people who die in one side and people have fun in another side. This should really be changed.

( I fixed your typos)

How is driving an ethanol powered car fun?
You do have a point though, they would have significantly less food.

 

[oi2008]

Can someone please give me a reason why it is a good idea? I would love to keep this discussion alive.

The major shortcoming of ethanol fuel at the moment is that the production only uses a small part of the corn plant, whereas the second generation will be able to take advantage of all kinds of feedstock, including agricultural waste material.

Therefore, for the moment, first generation fuels are not very interesting, environmentally or economically. If people want to reduce their spending in gasoline, the best way is to change car for a more gas efficient one, and, if possible, drive less.

 

[shaunak]

The problem with hydrogen-power is the difficulty in extracting hydrogen. By running an electric current through water, it causes the water molecules to separate into hydrogen and oxygen atoms. This is the simplest way to extract hydrogen, at least now. However, it takes more electrical energy to separate the molecule than can be released by burning the hydrogen.

In other words, it is better to use the electricity that would be used in extracting hydrogen to run your vehicle than to produce the hydrogen.

Actually the cheapest way to extract hydrogen is by fractional condensation using a joule Thompson condenser, electrolysis would be terribly wasteful....

Outside the US, most of the world still generates electricity from coal/petrol, reusable sources and nuclear fuel generation is terribly expensive...
So it would be more like rob peter pay paul to use electric cars.

Finally, hydrogen needn't be combusted.... a hydrogen fuel cell works on different principles.

 

[HomerJ]

Actually the cheapest way to extract hydrogen is by fractional condensation using a joule Thompson condenser, electrolysis would be terribly wasteful....

Outside the US, most of the world still generates electricity from coal/petrol, reusable sources and nuclear fuel generation is terribly expensive...
So it would be more like rob peter pay paul to use electric cars.

Finally, hydrogen needn't be combusted.... a hydrogen fuel cell works on different principles.

Indeed, but fuel cells have the same problem as hydrogen combustion. It still takes more energy to produce the hydrogen than is released by using it as an energy source. Fuel cells are, however, more efficient than combustion engines.

Electrolysis is terribly wasteful, but fractional condensation cannot be used to produce hydrogen from water. Fractional condensation is a process whereby a mixture with two substances having different boiling points is separated into its components, for example, boiling salt water to separate the water and salt. Since water boils at 100C and salt at a much higher temperature, the water evapourates and floats away, and only salt remains.

Water cannot be broken down in this way, it is a compound, and not a mixture.

Hydrogen has other problems as an energy source too. It's very flammable, and it has less energy by volume than gasoline (meaning a bigger tank is needed to travel the same distance).

As long as I am correct that it takes more energy to separate hydrogen from water, it would still be best to run your car on that electricity. Using 1 kWh of coal energy to produce hydrogen that can release 0.9kWh of energy is less efficient than just using the 1kWh of coal-generated electricity. (those numbers are entirely made up, I don't know the actual efficiency of the process)

 

[shaunak]

@homerJ
I wasnt clear in my last post....
What you have described is "fractional distillation", imm talking of "liquefaction or condensation".
And air is a mixture.....

Industrially, atleast here, hydrogen is directly extracted by liquifying air by means of a joule-thomson compressor as a byproduct of the manufacture of liquid nitrogen.

Agreed that more energy is expended in production, however it is still way better than all the energy lost in T&D losses of electricity distribution. [btw: t&d = transmission and distribution] It is still a more potent solution than using rechargable batteries....

Real efficiency figures:
Coal/oil powerplant using traditional generators: 33~35% [conversion rate from raw material: coal]
Coal/oil powerplant using horizontal high performance graphite contacts: 45~47%
Addtive transmission losses: 27% [<250Kms]
source: BHEL

Platinum fuel cells: 42%
Al-Gd fuel cells: 60% {unconfirmed/speculated}