Brazil has shown that biofuels can be a primary fuel rather than just

[JohnWxy]

a gasoline additive.


http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0417-23.htm


Brazil has shown us that biofuels can be a primary fuel rather than simply a gasoline additive.

Here are seven policies Minnesota should adopt to imitate Brazil's success.

1. Immediately request a waiver from the federal government to allow a 20 percent ethanol blend in all vehicles. Gov. Tim Pawlenty has indicated his desire to do so. The request should come from many states, not just one, and the cost of all the required testing should be shared by these states. If all 29 states whose governors have joined the Governors Ethanol Coalition chipped in, the cost would be a trivial $100,000 per state.

2. Aggressively expand the number of Minnesota gas stations that offer ethanol as a primary fuel (E85). Adding $15 million to the state bonding bill would enable every gas station in Minnesota to have at least one E85 pump.

3. Require all governments in Minnesota to purchase flexible-fueled vehicles. Several dozen popular models are already available and on the roads.

4. Develop a 20 percent renewable transportation fuels mandate that mirrors the 20 percent renewable electricity portfolio mandate that many states have passed.

5. Inspire a public discussion about redesigning the federal biofuels incentives so that they are tied to the price of oil. If oil rises above a certain level (say, $60 per barrel) the incentive would completely disappear. If it drops below a certain level (say, $35 per barrel) it would be equal to the current incentive.

6. Focus on converting the state's abundant cellulosic materials into energy. Brazilian biorefineries are virtually energy self-sufficient because they burn bagasse to power and heat the mill and refineries. Bagasse, the fiber fraction of cane, is brought to the mill along with the sugar cane. In Minnesota the corn stover (stalk, etc.) is not transported to the mill along with the corn kernels. The Chippewa Valley Ethanol Cooperative (CVEC) is developing innovative ways to economically transport the stover to the mill. Given the high price of natural gas, and the resulting pressure on ethanol plants to shift to coal, Minnesota should immediately provide the funds to accelerate the use of cellulose in the ethanol plants (first for heating and later for making ethanol itself).

7. Make farmer ownership the state's ownership preference. New ethanol plants are very large and absentee-owned. The ethanol they produce is welcome, but they do not generate the local and regional economic and social benefits that farmer-owned plants do.

[BlueEyedSon]

1. US Ethanol is barely net-energy positive after accounting for all the

oil and petrochemicals that go into the cornfield

[Nostradammit]

2. So we don't use corn then

We use something that doesn't need fertilizers.

[patdem]

4. Yeah, like hemp...like that'll happen!

The most USEFUL CROP ON THE PLANET is banned in the USA..go figure?

[Massacure]

10. if everybody who blindly supported hemp was gave me a penny

I would be a millionaire. Maybe. Algae produces more energy per unit of land than hemp does.

[lapfog_1]

15. You mean like this...???

http://www.unh.edu/p2/biodiesel/article_alge.html

If you look at the tables, pretty much this beats the next best thing (like Oil palms) all to hell, corn (and even hemp) are even close.

[Massacure]

18. I've been looking for that link.

I forgot to bookmark it last time I read it. Thanks.

[lapfog_1]

25. Here is another useful table...

http://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/PDF/biodiesel_sustainable.pdf

on page 4. The interesting part is where corn is compared to, say, oil palms. Of course, the selected algae from the NREL study outdoes even oil palms by almost an order of magnitude.

[BlueEyedSon]

5. Everything needs fertilizer and pesticides, unfortunately

All the US topsoil is artificially pumped up to achieve the productivity per acre that we get

[lapfog_1]

16. No, not everything.

foodstuffs, yeah... but not a lot of other plants, many of which are better at producing vegetable oil than corn. Most need a different climate than upper midwest.

[BlueEyedSon]

17. So go start an ethanol farm if its such an economically compelling

prospect....

[lapfog_1]

23. Nope... I AM starting a bio diesel farm

which I am going to use myself in my trucking fleet. And I'm not kidding, first truck is bought and paid for and doing loads with conventional fuels today. Currently, diesel fuel is around $2.77 per gallon, possibly a little cheaper in some states... but I think it's going up. My bio diesel is going to cost me about $1.10 per gallon. I'm investing around $100,000 in the project, and I'm always looking for investors. At first, we will only be producing enough to be mixed with petroleum products and helps offset the total cost of operation, later I expect to have a couple of fuel depots and run strictly on bio diesel. It's better for the big engines, burns cleaner, and is carbon neutral.

[Ready4Change]

21. Because we farm like idiots.

My grandfather farmed a smallish plot of land in Iowa for most of his life. Smallish, in comparison with the factory farms that grew around him, as other farmers sold out to larger farming outfits.

He used to laugh at those big farms. They'd buy rich, black soiled, super productive fields, like my grandfathers, and in a few years their fields would turn grey and dusty, with fast diminishing yields. The guys running those farms would run to some big farming corporation, which would have a bunch of fresh college graduates run soil analysis. They'd be running around the fields, measuring this and sampling that, a real big deal, and a few weeks later PING! out of some computer somewhere would come the answer which, low and behold, would be that the farmer should buy and use some of the corporations brand new, patented chemical fertilizers.

And sure enough, that would work, for a year or two, after which the soil was yet greyer and more lifeless, and the whole thing would repeat.

Meanwhile, my grandfathers soil stayed rich, dark, and just as productive, up until the day he got too old to work it and sold it off. A few years later, that soil was greyed out too.

The secret?

Crop rotation. My grandfather did it. Factory farms didn't.

My grandfather would stand in the kitchen of the house he built with his farms proceeds, on the bit of land he kept as his own. He'd look out his window over the sink, and shake his head, watching the life draining from his earth. He wasn't bitter about it. He sold the land, it was someone elses concern now. But he just thought it was dumbfounding how people would ignore the past. How they couldn't see how the chemical companies were robbing them blind.

[Dead_Parrot]

22. Ahh, crop rotation...

The Romans knew about it. The middle agaes were full of it, and the Dutch got it down to a fine art...

And we managed to ignore it. So much for progress...

What's even more fascinating is it takes about 10 years to get the soil back to good once you unhook the chemical life support. Can you see anyone getting started? 'coz I can't.

Kudos to your Grandfather for staying sane.

[Ready4Change]

24. Corporations have to short an outlook.

It's a fundamental problem that is ruining us.

Corporations have an impossible time looking 10 years down the road. They usually can't see past the next quarterly report. If they had longer vision, they'd see howit makes sense, for example, to rotate crops and get off over fertilization. But instead, they look at the next quarterly report, see it drooping, and buy more chemicals to prop things up.

Pretty soon you are shipping soil in, because you just don't have any, anymore.

The same it true for so, so much of our industry. The bigger the company, the blinder it seems to be.

[Dead_Parrot]

26. which is a shame...

I think there would be good biofuel money in a soy/sugarbeet/switchgrass rotation, which I'm guessing would work nicely...

Ah well. All hail the quaterly report. :(

[NickB79]

27. If you keep removing biomass annually

You will reduce yields. Whether it be corn, hemp, switchgrass, if you don't return the lost biomass/nutrients through crop rotation, manure, or fertilizer, you will degrade the soil. Plants need more than just sun and rain to grow.

[JohnWxy]

7. NOw you know you were warned about smoking that funny weed too much.

Or maybe you think by saying that over and over it will make it true.

For anybody whose interested here's some science on the matter

A USDA study released in 2004 found that ethanol may net as much as 67% more energy than it takes to produce.

Evidence overwhelmingly shows ethanol has positive energy ratio (while gasoline shows a loss of 19%). More here (if interestesd) : http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=115&topic_id=35670

The real world awaits you if you want to join us.

[BlueEyedSon]

9. It is IMPOSSIBLE for gasoline to be net -19%

so who is intoxicated?

[JohnWxy]

12. You can argue with Dr. Wang - Argonne National Laboratory

www.ncga.com/public_policy/PDF/03_28_05ArgonneNatlLabEthanolStudy.pdf

[JohnWxy]

13. I realize the truth is shocking. It was to me too. But the oil "dealers"

conveniently don't include ALL the energy required to get the gas to your tank.

Beyong what Wang takes into account in his analysis there are other costs, such as the costs of military operations to secure oil fields (like our opoeration in IRAQ).

When you take into account all the "externalities" the true cost of a gallon of gas hs been estimated at anywhere from $5.00 to $15.00 a gallon. Most of these estimates, by the way were done before we went into IRAQ.

[BlueEyedSon]

14. What would be the externalities for a Saudi citizen filling up at the pump

?

[JohnWxy]

30. you were thinking of moving?

[BlueEyedSon]

11. ERoEI for various energy sources (easy-to-read table)

http://www.eroei.com/eval/net_energy_list.html

Ethanol (sugarcane) 0.8 to 1.7
Ethanol (corn) 1.3
Ethanol (corn residues) 0.7 to 1.8

Oil and gas (domestic wellhead)
1940's Discoveries > 100.0
1970's Production 23.0, discoveries 8.0

Big difference (BTW, less than 1.0 is a net energy LOSS).

[JohnWxy]

29. I'll just try this again - (for what it's worth)

link to Argonne National Laboratory Study by Michael Wang is provided in this post:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=115&topic_id=48749&mesg_id=48777

[4dsc]

31. Once again KEY WORDS are MAY HAVE!!

More BS from the ethanol group!!

Where's the all the corn going to come from Johnny?? I ask Minnesota and have ask you in the past.. All with now reply!!

[rfkrfk]

19. liquid fuel energy gain is more than ten to one

http://www.ncga.com/public_policy/PDF/03_28_05ArgonneNatlLabEthanolStudy.pdf#search='ethanol%20btu'
.
the rest could be solar, low value steam, etc

[BlueEyedSon]

20. THANK YOU!

[Selatius]

3. The ultimate solution is diversification off of hydrocarbons

We're talking about solar, wind, nuclear, and water, geothermal, and perhaps even hydrogen fuel someday.

Also, it's time we talk about cutting back consumption. Cutting back consumption is perhaps the least talked about aspect to environmental conservation because it is essentially asking people to put the planet first before personal ease of lifestyle.

[blindpig]

6. Reducing consumption it will hurt sales.

Can't have that. Those two reasons combined assure us of going down the rat hole unless big change happens soon.

[poopfuel]

8. i'll link to this again- what else can I do?

http://www.communitysolution.org/04conf/af1.html

[hunter]

28. Um, um, working on a sugar plantation sucks.

In many places the workers are virtual slaves. In many places sugar cane workers are simply disposable.

Wore out your body? Too bad, move out, there's always more where you came from.