Ethanol
It's pretty well established that Bush doesn't think things through, Iraq being the most well known example. But there's other things he hasn't thought through. He gave NASA a mandate that it put a man on Mars. Being an advocate for space exploration, I'd ordinarily say that it was a great idea. But he left out a very important detail: funding. NASA has been forced to cut funding to other space projects in order to meet W's goals.
In last year's State of the Union speech, he declared America was "addicted to oil" and should pursue alternative fuels, primarily ethanol made from corn and switchgrass. Once again, on the surface it seems like a great idea, but once again he (I'd say his advisors, but he's The Decider after all) didn't think it through. Discover did a fairly in-depth article back in August on it. Then there's this piece on Peak Oil that pulls out excerpts from the Atlantic Planners' Institute's "The Ten Principles of Post Oil-Peak Planning". Part 2 is here.
I got a few things out of them. There are technical hurdles, but these will probably be overcome in time. The sad fact is that we can't grow enough corn to meet out automotive needs. Of course that's where the switchgrass and other plant waste comes in. I can't remember if even that's enough, but it's besides the point. Farmers use all that plant waste. They mix it back into the soil and it becomes fertilizer for the next round of crops. Without it, we'd be looking at serious soil depletion.
But ultimately, there's the morality question. With regards to corn as a source for ethanol, can we really look ourselves in the proverbial mirror as we use it to feed our cars while millions of people starve in other parts of the world? There's got to be another way.
\_/
DED
In last year's State of the Union speech, he declared America was "addicted to oil" and should pursue alternative fuels, primarily ethanol made from corn and switchgrass. Once again, on the surface it seems like a great idea, but once again he (I'd say his advisors, but he's The Decider after all) didn't think it through. Discover did a fairly in-depth article back in August on it. Then there's this piece on Peak Oil that pulls out excerpts from the Atlantic Planners' Institute's "The Ten Principles of Post Oil-Peak Planning". Part 2 is here.
I got a few things out of them. There are technical hurdles, but these will probably be overcome in time. The sad fact is that we can't grow enough corn to meet out automotive needs. Of course that's where the switchgrass and other plant waste comes in. I can't remember if even that's enough, but it's besides the point. Farmers use all that plant waste. They mix it back into the soil and it becomes fertilizer for the next round of crops. Without it, we'd be looking at serious soil depletion.
But ultimately, there's the morality question. With regards to corn as a source for ethanol, can we really look ourselves in the proverbial mirror as we use it to feed our cars while millions of people starve in other parts of the world? There's got to be another way.
\_/
DED
posted by DED at 9:05 PM
9 Comments:
"feeding our cars"? will there be any left to feed the farm livestock?
Burning food for fuel is not the answer. Especially when you have to consider the process it takes to produce ethanol. Diesel fuel powers the tractors that tend to the corn fields; natural gas runs the distilleries that produce ethanol; and more diesel fuel is used to ship the finished product to the market. The power you get out of corn ethanol, in other words, might just barely beat the power you put into it. Perhaps "W" is more interested in buying votes in the corn-producing states than trying to save the planet. Although he can't pronounce it correctly, I will give "the decider" a wee bit of credit for mentioning "nuclear" power as a safer and better alternative to oil. Yeah, like you haven't heard me talk up uranium before...LOL
All of that comes out in the Discover article. Ethanol makes for a good fuel additive as a substitute for MTBE, but not as the main ingredient. Maybe if we all drove cars that got 50 mpg, we could consider it, but it certainly isn't viable as things stand now.
Everyone is trying to buy votes out in Corn Land. Iowa's the first state to have the presidential caucus. Every candidate is gonna suck up to them.
And you know that I'm pro-nuclear. But not too many greenies are willing to give the new designs a chance or even bother to learn the facts about 3 Mile Island and Chernobyl. Meanwhile, China's going crazy for 'em.
Agreed. Chernobyl and 3-mile island are 20-30 years in the past and newer, safer technologies exist to minimize the risk of "accidents". Part of the problem also is the large lead time needed to build power plants and it's hard to look 8-10 years or more until one comes into fruition. Although I understand there are plans going on right now for a few new plants down in florida. Americans will never really give much credit to the French, but no one seems to realize they rely on nuclear power for 90% of their energy needs and have been for 30 years or so. And no "accidents" either.
I don't think dubya is capable of critical thinking. Conservation and diversification would seem to be the prudent course. Unfortunately most of our manufacturing base is gone and what is left is not well suited to either.
Jim: Are you sure that the French are getting 90%? I thought that it was 70%. Anyway, yes with all the French bashing in this country no one seems willing to give them any credit for their accomplishments or safety record.
Mort: I agree with your first two sentences. On the third, yeah alot of it is gone but I think that so long as there's enough capital left in this country, the manufacturing sector can be rebuilt. All it's gonna take is some willpower from Wall Street. Which is sadly lacking these days.
DED - Is there any way the nuclear power can fuel cars though?
At first, my reaction was "No way. Not possible. Too many technological and cultural hurdles to overcome." But then I decided to search further.
Ford was working on a nuclear powered car (Nucleon) back in the 50's. Wikipedia is down right now but the link is here.
I suspect that it could be "possible" to build one, but it wouldn't be practical. People have accidents. What sort of shielding is going to withstand an 80 mph impact yet not be so heavy that the car would be rendered immobile due to its weight!
The Air Force wanted a nuclear powered bomber but there was so much shielding weight that the engineers couldn't figure out how to get it off the ground.
Better idea would be to have sufficient nuclear power plants to generate enough electricity to power electric cars.
Use this link instead.
Looks like the Batmobile.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home