Is Ethanol Good or Bad?
One of the most confusing aspects of the alternative energy industry has to be the story about ethanol. Simply put, is ethanol good or bad? Does it help or harm the environment?
The confusion and controversy stems from evaluating the net effect on CO2 emissions of ethanol production and use, relative to the production and use of the incumbent fuel, gasoline. Largely, this is driven by questions concerning the energy balance of ethanol -- how much energy is really required to fertilize, grow, harvest and process the ethanol, and what are the CO2 emissions associated with these steps. The proper quantification of these factors has seemingly been a matter of dispute between those who favor ethanol and those who see ethanol promotion as merely a means of subsidizing the agricultural sector.
A Reuters summary of an article in the January 2006 issue of the journal Science, written by several researchers from UC Berkeley, indicates that the current corn-based means of producing ethanol is in fact a dubious environmental proposition. However, the use of emerging technologies to convert cellulosic matter -- the tougher fibers as found in trees, bark, woody wastes, etc. -- in ethanol should be net environmentally positive.
Not surprisingly, the downside is that cellulosic technologies are now on the costly side. But, perhaps with additional clarification of the type on the net environmental benefit (along with the energy supply benefit) that can be generated by cellulosic ethanol, this controversy can be put to bed. With the concerns more definitively allayed, more effort and capital might flow to this potentially important source of energy.
Labels: alternative energy, cleantech, energy, greentech
Check it out on Cleantech.org
Join us on LinkedIn
posted by Richard T. Stuebi @ 10:15 AM
4 comments
4 Comments:
One of the factors that few people consider in evaluating the viability of ethanol programs is whether all that material can be grown. A number of studies have shown that topsoil is rapidly depleting in the United States, and water supplies are as well. In addition, ethanol still requires things such as farm equipment and fertilizer. Certainly cellulosic sources will be better than corn in terms of resource utilization, but can we support the land infrastructure to produce so much biomass?
Jacob, I agree that there are aspects of ethanol that are not being considered as much as they perhaps should be. I personally do not feel ethanol is good or bad, but feel it does make sense to work into current energy policy, especially cellulosic ethanol, and especially in regions where the ingredients are most readily available. Ethanol will never be able to replace petro entirely, but could help balance our current ridicululous energy portfolio and help in the transition to a sustainable future.
I really think that ethanol is overrated. TV and radio regard it as some sort of miracle fuel that is good for the environment, good for your wallet, and renewable all at the same time. Ethanol turns out to be just like any other fuel - it runs out and doesn't fall from the sky. Let's not forget that ethanol gets us only 66% the distance of petrol, and... even so, that's a lot of corn. We're talking about 12,000 miles on average for the American driven every year, and 4,000 Lbs. of corn for every 3,000 of those miles. That's 16,000 pounds of corn on a fuel-efficient car. In terms of farmland, that's about two and a half acres of corn and nothing else. For the millions of people in the United States who own at LEAST one car to reserve two acres+ of cornfields to power these vehicles for a year simply isn't practical. Let's not forget the chickens and the cows and the farm animals who depend on the nutrition of the very same corn we are stuffing in our pumps. As vague as it may seem, the prices would come back to haunt us within both the ethanol itself AND on TOP of that, GROCERIES. Ethanol is an impressive step towards finding a better fuel for the world, but I think it wouldn't be wise to view it as a conclusion. There are still many flaws within the ethanol concept, and if we keep up the good work I think we can find something even better.
I understand everything said. But my husband works at the ethanol plant, and the ethanol plays a very small role in the grocery rise. The corn may come to them, but they take the ethanol out and then the farmer gets it right back, and can feed it to the animals as if nothing happened. It's not doing anything to the grocery price rise, its the economy doing that.
Post a Comment
<< Home