Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: IronJack
"Any step that reduces our dependence on Mideast oil is a step in the right direction. I don't care if we have to power our cars with burning currency."

From what I have heard from people who know better than I, ethanol is a net energy sink. It takes more energy to get a gallon of corn ethanol than you get from burning it. In the mean time, you might as well be burning money.

There are a number of things that the United States can do to improve our "energy independence". More refineries, more offshore drilling. etc. However, oil is (and will continue to be) a global commodity. IIRC, we get a lot of our our from Mexico and Venzuela; Alaska's oil goes to Japan; Europe gets it from the ME. Even if the U.S. still had "neutral" oil imports, price would be affected by global events.

19 posted on 07/17/2007 9:10:48 AM PDT by Fudd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: Fudd
It takes more energy to get a gallon of corn ethanol than you get from burning it.

That hasn't been true for years. Newer hybrids of both corn and yeast yield more ethanol per bushel of corn. The energy requirements come primarily from the distillation process, which can be fueled by using the biomass -- stalks, husks, cobs, and waste methane from manure. When you take into account the energy required to drill, ship, and refine oil, ethanol is roughly on a par.

And ethanol is renewable. Oil is a dead end.

22 posted on 07/17/2007 9:21:48 AM PDT by IronJack (=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson