2007-10-28 05:57:12 · 5 answers · asked by chance612000 1 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Agriculture
No, it is not true that it requires more fuel than you get from making ethanol. The actual facts are that you get about a 2 to 1 gain making ethanol. Also, this is not considering there are many useful byproducts from the process. Much of the energy required to produce the corn could be absorbed by these products, thus making ethanol production even more efficient. Also, not all of the food value of corn is lost making ethanol. The distillers dried grain is still an excellent feed. If you want some facts and not just posturing by some conservationist extremes, read this article.
http://www.carbohydrateeconomy.org/library/admin/uploadedfiles/How_Much_Energy_Does_it_Take_to_Make_a_Gallon_.html
2007-10-28 07:30:21 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
As the other answers show there is considerable arguments over this question.
The basic question is which fuel do you count? Is it just the fuel used to heat the mash for distillation? Do you count the fuel used to transport the corn to the distillery? What about the fuel the farmer used to plant/cultivate/harvest the corn?
Do you count the fuel used to make and transport the fertilizer?
As you can see there are too many variables to make a simple answer.
The big problem is the source of the data used for the comparison. If you use whiskey distilleries as the source of the data then ethanol is very inefficient.
However, if you use a more modern (and more efficient) process then the figures aren't so bad.
However, it is becoming clear that grain-based ethanol is probably not a reasonable alternative to gasoline due to the competition with food.
The good news is that other non-food materials are being found that can be used as ethanol sources.
It's another case of people with agendas using selected data to support their arguments.
We've got to do something and pointless arguments are wasting time and energy.
2007-10-28 13:07:36 · answer #2 · answered by wildturkey1949 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, you have not only the processing of corn/ and grains into alcohol, but if you factor in the fuel required to till and seed, the chemicals used (fertilizer and pesticides) then harvesting, it is very inefficient.
Also you must consider that you are occupying large swaths of land for the process, which could be utilized for food crop production.
2007-10-28 06:19:01 · answer #3 · answered by Bri 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
YES THIS IS TRUE WHEN ALL THINGS INVOLVED IN PRODUCTION OF ALTERNATE FUELS ARE ADDED UP IT COSTS MORE TO PRODUCE THAN IT SELLS FOR.
2007-10-30 12:09:27 · answer #4 · answered by Loren S 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
on face valve the answer is yes!!!
2007-10-31 12:32:42 · answer #5 · answered by mister ed 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋