Talk:Ethanol fuel energy balance

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It looks like the accompanying article is embedded with arguments, so I'd say it needs a discussion page.

Here are a few points I'd like to raise:

• There seems to be an assumption that energy inputs for the process need to come from fossil fuels. I see this as being false, because this energy could be provided from nuclear, solar, or wind generators, either through the electrical grid or located on site. For example, the tractors need not be diesel powered but could potentially be battery powered with recharging stations located around the field.
• I don't see ethanol as an energy source inasmuch as an energy carrier. Because nuclear, solar, and wind power are not suitable for most transportation purposes, it would be necessary to convert the energy from these sources into a liquid fuel. This is not unlike using electrolysis to produce hydrogen fuel or recharging batteries on an electric vehicle, except that some of the energy is provided by photosynthesis.
• Note that electric vehicles have been shown to be economically advantageous despite the losses incurred from charging and discharging (a negative energy balance) when compared to gasoline or diesel.
• Based on the above, I feel that ethanol production is certainly practical. The big question is if this is cheaper than other energy carriers, such as biodiesel or batteries. Is it cheaper to grow carbohydrates and use microbes to produce ethanol, or synthesize it from syn gas produced by burning biomass?

Smilla0 14:50, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Consider bio-ethanol produced from corn. If both distillers grains and corn stover are converted to chemicals, fuels or fertilizer, the greenhouse gas balance becomes completely different. Focusing only on energy balances is simplistic. We need to consider the quality of the product. For example, adding 5 or 10% ethanol to gasoline has major benefits, allowing gasoline to burn more cleanly and increasing the octane number. In this case, the energy requirements for bio-ethanol should be compared to the energy requirements for the production of similar safe additives (MTBE, for example, has been banned in several states).--Cbriens 06:51, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Corn Ethanol will become a viable and energy eficant comodity in the future.

Currently it takes about 1 unit of petroleum to growe and process 1.5 units of corn ethanol but I’m pretty sure that with the

1. Advent and promotion of cheaper non-petroleum fertilizers and herbicides.
2. Increased corn acreage and conservation from new methods of farming.
3. Farming equipment and machinery that runs on E85.
4. Renewable sources of electricity for power and transport.
5. New more efficient and coast effective production processes and manufacturing methods being developed.
6. The discovery of new and better Enzymes for chemical processing,
   

The creation of corn ethanol will become a much more energy efficant and coast effective process leaving a greatly reduced environmental footprint.

All these technologies are curently being developed and progressing, and corn ethanol will become a much more viable product, and a great boon to our economy, our environment and our society.
With all these technologies under development, in just 30 years it will take just 1 unit of petroleum to growe and process at least 5 units of corn ethanol.
Making corn ethanol in the furture a truley enviermentoly frendly and energy efficant alternitive to petrolium and gasolien, and turning corn ethanol into truley an energy sorce and not just an alternitive means of procecing or storing oil energy. --J intela 01:29, 11 February 2007 (UTC) Besides it beets being a pupet to the oil comanies.

Currently, it takes oil to run tractor, it takes oil to produce fertilizer. Thus, it takes oil to grow corn. It is only fair to ask how much oil it takes to produce ethanol, and whether the oil can be used directly in place of ethanol. Though one day it will not take oil to grow corn, that day has not arrived yet. PoohbearGA 17:41, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

The point of asking the "energy balance" question in the first place is to determine whether ethanol can be used as a renewable energy source (not just a carrier). If it is net-positive (ratio > 1) then it would be viable to set up a farm and production plant where the tractors and everything run on ethanol.

It does seem that the page itself is being used as a debate forum, riddled with opinions. To clean it up, the arguments should be summarized from cited published works or deleted, IMHO. -- 19:44, 06 March 2007 (UTC)

I would include energy balance for cellulosic ethanol, using solar power and trucks with ethanol engines to transport it from production facilities to fuel-stations. --Altermike 08:02, 4 April 2007 (UTC)