[Gasification] [Terrapreta] new studies on GHG footprint of biofuels darkens the picture

[Harmon Seaver]

Richard Haard wrote:
> Also not a big money maker
> 
> Yesterday Robert Rapier posted this essay
> <http://www.theoildrum.com/node/3591#more> on the economics of
> corn/ethanol on oil drum. It seems with current feedstock prices and a
> production ratio of 2.7 lbs of corn per gallon of ethanol producers are
> only making 15 cents per gallon over cost. Even if efficiency claims are
> as high as 2.8 it make me wonder if it all worth it since we use 150
> billion gallons of gasoline and 60 billion gallons of diesel yearly yet
> if we replaced 15 % of this fuel demand with 100% of our corn crop we
> would be starving as well as the animals we feed for meat and the people
> in other countries who depend on our corn exports. 

   Nonsense! The basic mistake in all these studies is the assumption
that grain/ethanol utilizes food. The fact is there is just as much food
left over after the fermentation/distillation process as there was
originally, and, in fact, it is much better food -- much higher protein,
much less sugar and starch, and, I might add, a very digestible protein
besides. You don't lose anything but the sugar, which is bad for
everyone, especially livestock, which is where 99% of the corn goes, and
you grow lots of nice yeast.
   Follow the money on these studies and you'll probably find that many
are funded by the oil industry. We know for a fact that Pimental, for
instance, was actually drawing a regular salary from Mobile Oil when he
did his studies, and one of the huge flaws in his figures is that he
said the spent mash went to the landfills. Spent mash is not only great
food, it is also great fertilizer.
   The same goes for biodiesel, to a lesser extent -- you aren't growing
yeast in the biodiesel process, but the bulk of the oil seed is still
left over and it's great livestock feed, or at least if the seed was
edible in the first place.



-- 
Harmon Seaver