Using food as a fuel source is not a good long term solution. It causes food prices to go up and we lack the acreage.
There are some very promising experimental alternatives like using cellulase in the fermentation of biomass, like waste corn plants and switch grass, into ethanol. It makes sense to fund that sort of research and development so we don't need to burn our food. They just need to find the most efficient enzymes and methods.
You get a return of about 1000% from the ethanol produced from Brazilian sugar cane compared to 130% for ethanol produced from corn. I worry that politicians who currently restrict importing ethanol from Brazil, probably for political reasons, would try to restrict much more promising technologies to get farmers votes. Conversion of switchgrass to alcohol is potentially as energy efficient as sugar cane and vastly more efficient than using corn.
2007-05-04 21:55:15
·
answer #1
·
answered by bravozulu 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Lots of bits and pieces here. First of all is the fact that sugar cane is a vessel (like bamboo) which holds a great tasting sap. Grain based ethanol and beet based ethanol do not compare. The price of milk and bread will be directly affected because of competitive uses for corn and it's arable lands.
Ethanol is clean burning but contains about 20% less energy than gasoline. Butanol contains 98% of the energy and is can be produce from cellulose. A low energy production method is being developed by Cargyle / ADM. Old russian methods used too much energy.
2007-05-04 22:47:59
·
answer #2
·
answered by Wonka 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
I think you just have to relax and give things time,it's in the works and alcohol(Ethanol) will likely be a large part of the fuel supply,but it cannot replace current sources it's simply not sustainable. However if you could eventually replace say 20% or a bit more of your overall fuel needs with ethanol that alone would be huge. But if you try to rush too much too fast you will end up doing things that are not sustainable and that harm the economy more than they help the environment.
And on a different note,why aren't we building nuclear reactors so we can quit pumping coal smoke into the sky? Shutting down coal fired power plants alone would cut our emissions massively.
AD
2007-05-04 23:33:01
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
The solution is not to use another way to make fuel, its to use more fuel efficient equipment. Same like Computers get smaller and more efficient, doubling their capacity every 18 month, we should run cars with 120 miles to the gallon by now. I drove in 1979 a diesel form VW with 85 miles to the gallon. The exhaust was so clean, you could breath it. Technologically, we could be much, much further, but the car industries, politicians and big oil want to keep the current waist going.
2007-05-04 21:37:05
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
stable question. in the e book of Psalms 37:10-11,29 we study And merely a jiffy longer, and the depraved one would be not extra; and you will actually supply interest to his place, and he won't be. 11 however the meek ones themselves will very own the earth, and that they'll surely locate their beautiful satisfaction in the abundance of peace. (Psalm 37:29) The righteous themselves will very own the earth, and that they'll stay perpetually upon it. additionally here (Proverbs 2:21) For the upright are those which will stay in the earth, and the harmless are those which would be left over in it. (Matthew 5:5) “chuffed are the gentle-tempered ones, considering they'll inherit the earth. The bible does no longer say that every physique will circulate to heaven. in the e book of Revelation it talks approximately 2 communities of persons, a hundred and forty four,000 and the great crowd (which no guy replaced into waiting to quantity). in case you may choose to comprehend extra, please be at liberty to e mail me or click on the hyperlink. Edit..we die by inherited sin from Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve have been going to stay perpetually on earth, until eventually they disobeyed God. God's plan has no longer replaced, all the evil/wickedness we see around us would be accomplished away with. God's heavenly Kingdom will rule of suited mankind. regards Darran
2016-10-04 10:09:23
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Gasohol is the best alternative to the oil as the prime source of energy. The government must adopt projects for a mass production of gasohol to solve pollution and combat the global warming.
2007-05-04 21:32:34
·
answer #6
·
answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
The water motor works on vacuum instead of compression.It runs cold and does not require refueling.The Arabs will have to go back to raiding their neighbors for income.If oil is left in the earth there will be less earthquakes.Economics built on emergency will falter.New factions will surface.New kings will appear.Alcohol is good for race motors,but does not perform well in the long run.Calm down and try to think.
2007-05-04 21:47:12
·
answer #7
·
answered by stratoframe 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
Ethanol drives up the cost of corn. Also, gasoline is one of the more clean-burning and efficient fuel sources available, which is why we use it. If we want something clean, cheap, and practical, then go with nuclear power.
2007-05-04 21:49:46
·
answer #8
·
answered by TheOrange Evil 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Labor is far more expensive in the US. We make Alcohol from Corn. It actually cost more in oil to produce corn than we would recieve in alcohol. We do make up for it a bit, because the byproducts could be use as feed. Brazil makes alcohol from sugar cane. It's more economial their, because they have cheap labor and so ditilling it in brazil is cheaper.
2007-05-04 21:52:09
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
ummm the price of corn is at an all time high because of the demand for ethanol production, it is happening, it doesnt change overnight though.
2007-05-04 21:34:11
·
answer #10
·
answered by sociald 7
·
1⤊
0⤋