Study Shows Ethanol Produces Worse 'Global Warming' Pollution Than Gasoline

[Origanalist]

WASHINGTON (AP) — Biofuels made from the leftovers of harvested corn plants are worse than gasoline for global warming in the short term, a study shows, challenging the Obama administration's conclusions that they are a much cleaner oil alternative and will help combat climate change.

A $500,000 study paid for by the federal government and released Sunday in the peer-reviewed journal Nature Climate Change concludes that biofuels made with corn residue release 7 percent more greenhouse gases in the early years compared with conventional gasoline.

While biofuels are better in the long run, the study says they won't meet a standard set in a 2007 energy law to qualify as renewable fuel.

The conclusions deal a blow to what are known as cellulosic biofuels, which have received more than a billion dollars in federal support but have struggled to meet volume targets mandated by law. About half of the initial market in cellulosics is expected to be derived from corn residue.

continued...http://townhall.com/news/politics-e...-from-corn-waste-not-better-than-gas-n1826933

 

[ClydeCoulter]

Sure does take a lot of money to confirm common sense.

 

[thoughtomator]

This was known before the program even started - the energy math on ethanol never added up without completely ignoring the fact that ethanol-mix gas has less energy than plain old gasoline.

 

[Christopher A. Brown]

All or nothing thinking does not work with renewable energy issues.

Gasification to methanol is one that is not utilized which could add a significant amount in some states dealing with wood fiber waste. International Harvester had a small scale plant on the drawing board in the late 1980's, but I do not know what happened to that.

We can safely burn a certain amount of petroleum, but conservation measures simply are not embraced by the corporate world, so consumption of fuel is high for a number of artificial reasons.

When it really gets down to it, citizens need to take a hard core stand against the current infiltrated government and the corporate structure it begat following the civil war when the infiltration really dug in deep.

If we get beat down much further, we might not be able to resist much at all. The rest of the planet is adopting our wasteful ways quickly because of WTO practices that also tend to increase populations artificially.

It comes down to the fact that the intent of founding documents naturally and logically integrated into the 1787 constitution does not allow us to destroy vital elements, no matter how much profit we think there is in it.

To ignore this is to act against our greatest instincts, and very much against the species long term interests.

To respect that, we need to exercise our first constitutional right, to "alter or abolish". First action, clean up states.

http://algoxy.com/poly/principal_party.html

A step by step process in a forum which stands un opposed because it is fully lawful and logical.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...V-convention&p=5433668&viewfull=1#post5433668

 

[Original_Intent]

Not only that, but it causes food prices to rise for any corn-based (or corn-fed) food products. Just crazy that it takes a $500,000 study to confirm that a $1 billion subsidized program is causing more problems than it is solving. Where was the $500,000 study in advance that would have stopped the $1 billion subsidy from happening?

Of course, we all know the answer, the subsidy was a "done deal" and so they had to implement the program no matter what the science said. Or what passes for science these days.

 

[mello]

I read a story years ago stating that using hemp or sugar cane was more efficient than using corn.

 

[Original_Intent]

I read a story years ago stating that using hemp or sugar cane was more efficient than using corn.

They probably don't grow those in Iowa though...

 

[Christopher A. Brown]

Not only that, but it causes . . .

farmers to plant GMO corn that produces slightly more alcohol. Try getting grits that are not GMO.

 

[angelatc]

All or nothing thinking does not work with renewable energy issues.

Sure it does. As soon as we start to run out, prices will rise. When that happens other forms of energy will emerge. But governments subsidizing inefficient methods of energy production is.....inefficient.

 

[HVACTech]

If we get beat down much further, we might not be able to resist much at all. The rest of the planet is adopting our wasteful ways quickly because of WTO practices that also tend to increase populations artificially.

It comes down to the fact that the intent of founding documents naturally and logically integrated into the 1787 constitution does not allow us to destroy vital elements, no matter how much profit we think there is in it.

To ignore this is to act against our greatest instincts, and very much against the species long term interest

nice.

 

[angelatc]

If we get beat down much further, we might not be able to resist much at all. The rest of the planet is adopting our wasteful ways quickly because of WTO practices that also tend to increase populations artificially.

It comes down to the fact that the intent of founding documents naturally and logically integrated into the 1787 constitution does not allow us to destroy vital elements, no matter how much profit we think there is in it.

To ignore this is to act against our greatest instincts, and very much against the species long term interest

nice.

Using fossil fuel for energy isn't "destroying vital elements." It's maximizing efficiency. And apparently your instincts are different than mine, so the word "our" isn't quite right.

War on profits - now THAT is something that goes against my greater instincts. Because profit is only a measure of efficiency. That's why solar companies go bankrupt despite getting money for nothing, while the oil and gas companies continue to make an incredible amount of profit despite being regulated, micromanaged and harassed.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

herp tee durr durr

 

[GunnyFreedom]

You want good biofuel, sorghum bicolor. And not any real contamination worries. I boggle at cannabis activists going for hemp biofuels when that is just about the surest way to see GMO hemp everywhere. Check it out, sorghum bicolor is almost a 'biofuel panacea.'

 

[specsaregood]

They probably don't grow those in Iowa though...

http://www.globalhemp.com/1942/01/hemp-a-war-crop-for-iowa.html

Iowa farmers have been asked to produce 60,000 acres of hemp in 1943 as their share of the 300,000 acres to be grown in the United States. Other states participating in the hemp program are Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana and Kentucky.

 

[Feeding the Abscess]

http://www.globalhemp.com/1942/01/hemp-a-war-crop-for-iowa.html

Any sources that aren't 70 years old?

 

[specsaregood]

Any sources that aren't 70 years old?

Point is, they could grow it and have a history of growing it. Last I was there, there was still wild hemp growing around IA.

 

[juleswin]

I remember this story comiing up during the democratic primary between Kerry and Howard Dean. I think this story shows that even the alarmists politicians that push these kind of laws cannot even be honest with themselves talkless about being honest to the voters

 

[RonPaul4Prez2012]

You want good biofuel, sorghum bicolor. And not any real contamination worries. I boggle at cannabis activists going for hemp biofuels when that is just about the surest way to see GMO hemp everywhere. Check it out, sorghum bicolor is almost a 'biofuel panacea.'

I have no problem with GMO hemp that is only used for fuel.

 

[RonPaul4Prez2012]

I read a story years ago stating that using hemp or sugar cane was more efficient than using corn.

Hemp and sugarbeats produce much more energy than corn. Plus you can grow hemp just about anywhere its a fuggin giant weed for fucs sake.

I'm calling BS on that "news article"

 

[PRB]

While biofuels are better in the long run, the study says they won't meet a standard set in a 2007 energy law to qualify as renewable fuel.

this study doesn't say it's a worse pollutant. Pollution is not measured by CO2 emissions.