Comments on: 1,000 Gallons Water Per 1 Gallon Ethanol – How Green is That?

By: Randy

Randy — Fri, 23 Dec 2011 19:53:03 +0000

You can argue anything you want, but clean water usage in a age where water shortages are becoming a problem, groundwater levels are being droped faster than they can replentish is very unresponsible. We can live without the ethanol, but not clean water. Corn grower lobbyests and speculators are somehow keeping the EPA from seeing the obvious. In turn using one of our top food comodities as a fuel derivitive has to be one of the worst ideas ever. Win win for farmers though, causes grain prices to rise causing meat, eggs, produce, and milk to high levels while collecting gov’t money(subsities). Wake up America!!

By: Electric cars may not be so Green - Smart Car of America Forums : Smart Car Forum

Tue, 14 Jun 2011 05:50:36 +0000

[...] Monetary costs are an effective way to look at environmental impact. Gasoline production occurs on such a large scale that the economics of scale come into effect, thank goodness. The cost of natural gas production can be reduced by using a technique called "fracking" and the environmental impact of fracking is probably lower than more traditional methods of natural gas extraction. Fracking causes natural gas to be cheaper and at the same time may be lowering its environmental impact. For instance, now that the US is booming in gas production, the US no longer has to import any gas from anywhere, thereby saving the destructive environmental impact of liquefying, transporting, and regasifying it. Also, everybody knows that the US produces gas much more environmentally sensitively than just about anyone else on Earth, especially nat gas imports from Algeria, Nigeria, or Egypt. Therefore, when we frack domestically, we help save Holy Mother Gaia. Furthermore the price of many forms of energy is greatly impacted by the way the energy is traded. Always traders are largely responsible keeping oil prices stable and stocks available. Of course, they have no impact on the environmental impact of drilling for oil. The cost of ethanol has increased because so much of it is wasted on gasoline tanks, this increase in price does not reflect a change in the environmental costs of ethanol production, which are legion. For instance, did you know that each gallon of ethanol requires 1,000 gallons of water? How sick is that? No wonder ethanol fuel is so much more expensive than gasoline fuel. Source: 1,000 Gallons Water Per 1 Gallon Ethanol – How Green is That? – Gas 2.0 [...]

By: marlin

marlin — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 01:38:10 +0000

liars figure and figures lie on both sides of this silly “ethanol” issue. Fact – energy can nether be created or destroyed, meaning: rearrange the molecules however you like, rename them to your own phycological delight and the end of it all human non-intrinisic motion requires energy inputs and they all come from the same place – da sun. Ethanol for cars? the question should be – why cars? Ethanol renewable? – that too is a poor argument – why do farmers carry crop insurance? because when wind and hail damage their corn crop they CAN’T get it back – renew it – its gone. with each crop the anhydrous and all the diesel used to plow, till, spray, truck and store the stuff is consumed – not renewable.

By: marlin

marlin — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 01:38:00 +0000

By: dave

dave — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 17:23:42 +0000

Adam, corn is going to be raised one way or another, people used irragation long before ethanol.

By: dave

dave — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 17:23:00 +0000

Adam, corn is going to be raised one way or another, people used irragation long before ethanol.

By: dan s

dan s — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 22:14:29 +0000

http://www.swhydro.arizona.edu/archive/V6_N5/feature4.pdf has slightly different statistics than you are pulling out of your arse

96% of corn used for ethanol production is not irrigated

and then in the conversion to ethanol a ratio of 4:1 or 3:1 water per ethanol

Sure ethanol isn’t a solution for our energy needs, but you sir need to put down the crack pipe

By: dan s

dan s — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 22:14:00 +0000

http://www.swhydro.arizona.edu/archive/V6_N5/feature4.pdf has slightly different statistics than you are pulling out of your arse

96% of corn used for ethanol production is not irrigated

and then in the conversion to ethanol a ratio of 4:1 or 3:1 water per ethanol

Sure ethanol isn’t a solution for our energy needs, but you sir need to put down the crack pipe

By: LonnieB

LonnieB — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 17:15:20 +0000

To ChuckL,

I respectfully disagree with your assessment of the efficiency of ethanol (E85). The inefficiency you cite is a result of the engines on the road today not being set up for ethanol useage. E85 requires a compression ratio of approx. 13.0 to 1. Most cars and trucks barely break 9.0 to 1, if they do that. Even my high performance Mach 1 only has 10.0 to 1. It isn’t difficult to gat the ratios E85 requires. Far less expesive and complicated than CNG conversion.

Drag racers have been using alcohol blends for decades and the Indy Racing League mandated E85 useage, exclusively. NASCAR is under pressure to do the same. The first internal combustion engines were powered by ethanol, the same fuel Henry Ford used in his first cars, like the original Model T’s.

Corn is the least efficient fermentation stock. Sugar cane, sugar beets and best of all, Jerusalem Artichokes are far better, don’t require the amount of water to grow and refine and are not food commodities that threaten the world’s food supply.

E85 is an excellent “bridge” fuel, until more efficient alternatives come on line. No drilling required and no supertankers to belch out pollution along the world’s coastlines or to be fought over.

By: LonnieB

LonnieB — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 17:15:00 +0000

To ChuckL,