which are shipped around the country to be burned, injecting carbon into the atmosphere.
While I broadly agree with your comment, this line is a stretch. The carbon released is only from transportation and fertilizer production. The carbon inside the ethanol itself is actually pulled from the environment, so that part is actually carbon neutral.
The big problem with ethanol production is that it takes 5 gallons of fuel to produce 4 gallons of ethanol. It’s literally just pissing away time, money, and resources just to subsidize farmers.
And EV’s are even better at it. And public transportation.
Overall, we need to work towards on mass public transport, EV’s in smaller vehicles, and hydrogen fuels for larger vehicles. Ethanol could still be produced for the things that absolutely can’t work as an EV or fuel cell, but the scale we make it at is way larger than needed for that
Basically nobody in the current era is suggesting ethanol as an alternative to any of the things you are mentioning, and realistically ethanol is not being used as a primary fuel source. Most cars can’t even take E85 without modifications. It’s used as a fuel additive, for which is has significant public health benefits, and for industrial uses like a perfumery ingredient or a solvent
I should say that the corn is carbon neutral but the other inputs, such as the fertilizer and the machinery used to irrigate and harvest it do product net positive carbon. In addition, the opportunity cost is that we’re not using that water and land to grow food creating secondary affects for the people that need to eat food.
In addition, the opportunity cost is that we’re not using that water and land to grow food creating secondary affects for the people that need to eat food.
Eh, the US is a net calorie exporter regarding food. We make enough to feed everyone.
A bigger problem is the additional land needed to grow the corn for ethanol. That demands expansion of agricultural land, which means destroying forests and wetlands which are extremely important for sustaining ecosystems.
You know how people are going on about ecological collapse and how the drop off in insect populations are the biggest warning sign? That’s caused by humans tearing down their ecosystems for farming and land development.
Also, the reason I didn’t include fertilizer and other fuel costs in pointing out that the ethanol itself is carbon-neutral is because the other parts of the process can potentially be changed to be carbon neutral as well. Not right now, but the tech is being worked on
While I broadly agree with your comment, this line is a stretch. The carbon released is only from transportation and fertilizer production. The carbon inside the ethanol itself is actually pulled from the environment, so that part is actually carbon neutral.
The big problem with ethanol production is that it takes 5 gallons of fuel to produce 4 gallons of ethanol. It’s literally just pissing away time, money, and resources just to subsidize farmers.
It’s valuable for reducing smog and makes great fuel for performance cars
And EV’s are even better at it. And public transportation.
Overall, we need to work towards on mass public transport, EV’s in smaller vehicles, and hydrogen fuels for larger vehicles. Ethanol could still be produced for the things that absolutely can’t work as an EV or fuel cell, but the scale we make it at is way larger than needed for that
Okay? How is that relevant?
Basically nobody in the current era is suggesting ethanol as an alternative to any of the things you are mentioning, and realistically ethanol is not being used as a primary fuel source. Most cars can’t even take E85 without modifications. It’s used as a fuel additive, for which is has significant public health benefits, and for industrial uses like a perfumery ingredient or a solvent
@nBodyProblem @mnemonicmonkeys at a 40% efficiency hit yes. It is great for turbos!
Yeah it isn’t the strongest point, I’ll admit.
I should say that the corn is carbon neutral but the other inputs, such as the fertilizer and the machinery used to irrigate and harvest it do product net positive carbon. In addition, the opportunity cost is that we’re not using that water and land to grow food creating secondary affects for the people that need to eat food.
Eh, the US is a net calorie exporter regarding food. We make enough to feed everyone.
A bigger problem is the additional land needed to grow the corn for ethanol. That demands expansion of agricultural land, which means destroying forests and wetlands which are extremely important for sustaining ecosystems.
You know how people are going on about ecological collapse and how the drop off in insect populations are the biggest warning sign? That’s caused by humans tearing down their ecosystems for farming and land development.
Also, the reason I didn’t include fertilizer and other fuel costs in pointing out that the ethanol itself is carbon-neutral is because the other parts of the process can potentially be changed to be carbon neutral as well. Not right now, but the tech is being worked on