<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" > <channel> <title> Comments on: WSJ: The Cellulosic Ethanol Debacle </title> <atom:link href="https://junkscience.com/2011/12/wsj-the-cellulosic-ethanol-debacle/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /> <link>https://junkscience.com/2011/12/wsj-the-cellulosic-ethanol-debacle/</link> <description>All the junk that’s fit to debunk.</description> <lastBuildDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2015 17:38:48 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod> hourly </sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency> 1 </sy:updateFrequency> <generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.7.2</generator> <item> <title> By: A. Scott </title> <link>https://junkscience.com/2011/12/wsj-the-cellulosic-ethanol-debacle/#comment-6011</link> <dc:creator><![CDATA[A. Scott]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2011 01:24:25 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://junksciencecom.wordpress.com/?p=7610#comment-6011</guid> <description><![CDATA[Rich - repeating incorrect statements doesn't make them any more incorrect. Since you can't remember what the actual data says I suggest you research it again - you'll look a lot less silly. Unless you are Pimentel or Patzek, or one of their supporters, whose alleged "studies" have been repeatedly and thoroughly debunked and refuted, even corn based ethanol has a net positive energy balance. And cellulosic offers a substantially higher net energy return. According to many published and peer reviewed reports corn based ethanol generates a net energy balance of approx. 1.6 BTU of energy created for each 1 btu of energy expended in production. Cellulosic generates well over 5 btu's for evey 1 btu expended in production, and is expected to go significantly higher as production processes mature. In addition - per Argonne Labs: "... 1 bushel of corn used for ethanol ALSO produces 1.5 lbs. of corn oil, 18 lbs. of high-protein animal feed (called DDGS), and 2.6 lbs. of corn meal." Corn oil can be used for food or as a petroleum replacement - making plastics and similar. Distillers Dried Grain Solids are a high energy, high value replacement for the feed corn used to produce ethanol. The 2007 total corn crop was a record 13.1 billion bushels. Appx. 23%, or a little over 3 billion bushels, were used for ethanol production. As a byproduct of that ethanol production approx. 575 million corn equivalent bushels of distillers dried grain solids were also produced. But those DDGS have higher protein and fat content than straight corn. When adjusted for the higher feed value that 575 million bushels become appx 2,133 million adjusted corn equivalent bushels of DDGS produced. Doing simple math shows the equivalent value of the high quality distillers dried grains produced replaces 71% of ALL corn used to produce ethanol. Put another way - for 3,013 million bushels of corn used for ethanol, if I did my math correctly the following was produced: - appx. 6.8 billion gallons ethanol - appx. 4.5 billion lbs corn oil - appx. 7.8 billion lbs corn meal AND - appx 2,133 million bushels equivalent feed value in Distiller Dried Grains (71% of the total bushels of actual corn used for ethanol production.) Additionally, DDGS have proven to be a lower cost product for feed than corn, plus it is more easily digestible for the animals with lower starch content. A VERY large part of the reason ethanol has not proceeded quicker is the near collapse of the economy in 2008 along with the higher gas prices. Driving miles dropped dramatically at the same time funding for any type investment all but disappeared. At exactly the worst time for the ethanol industry. They were in a highly capital intensive "start up" phase - building plants and infrastructure, and cellulosic was still in the "smaller than commercial scale" development stage. In both instances there was little revenue yet and significant expenses. When capital disappeared they simply went under. I am not in any way involved in the industry, and I do believe we should be using our fossil fuels - however it is inevitable we will eventually someday run out, and as such we should be looking for realistic alternatives. Ethanol from CORN and other sources is not a full replacement but it has put a far more meaningful dent in our reliance on fossil fuels and more importantly imported fossil fuels, than any other technology. I believe its extremely important to have the facts - and not trumped up inaccurate hype.]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rich – repeating incorrect statements doesn’t make them any more incorrect. Since you can’t remember what the actual data says I suggest you research it again – you’ll look a lot less silly.</p> <p>Unless you are Pimentel or Patzek, or one of their supporters, whose alleged “studies” have been repeatedly and thoroughly debunked and refuted, even corn based ethanol has a net positive energy balance. And cellulosic offers a substantially higher net energy return. </p> <p>According to many published and peer reviewed reports corn based ethanol generates a net energy balance of approx. 1.6 BTU of energy created for each 1 btu of energy expended in production. Cellulosic generates well over 5 btu’s for evey 1 btu expended in production, and is expected to go significantly higher as production processes mature. </p> <p>In addition – per Argonne Labs: “… 1 bushel of corn used for ethanol ALSO produces 1.5 lbs. of corn oil, 18 lbs. of high-protein animal feed (called DDGS), and 2.6 lbs. of corn meal.”</p> <p>Corn oil can be used for food or as a petroleum replacement – making plastics and similar. Distillers Dried Grain Solids are a high energy, high value replacement for the feed corn used to produce ethanol. </p> <p>The 2007 total corn crop was a record 13.1 billion bushels. Appx. 23%, or a little over 3 billion bushels, were used for ethanol production. As a byproduct of that ethanol production approx. 575 million corn equivalent bushels of distillers dried grain solids were also produced. But those DDGS have higher protein and fat content than straight corn. When adjusted for the higher feed value that 575 million bushels become appx 2,133 million adjusted corn equivalent bushels of DDGS produced. Doing simple math shows the equivalent value of the high quality distillers dried grains produced replaces 71% of ALL corn used to produce ethanol. </p> <p>Put another way – for 3,013 million bushels of corn used for ethanol, if I did my math correctly the following was produced:</p> <p>– appx. 6.8 billion gallons ethanol<br /> – appx. 4.5 billion lbs corn oil<br /> – appx. 7.8 billion lbs corn meal AND<br /> – appx 2,133 million bushels equivalent feed value in Distiller Dried Grains (71% of the total bushels of actual corn used for ethanol production.)</p> <p>Additionally, DDGS have proven to be a lower cost product for feed than corn, plus it is more easily digestible for the animals with lower starch content.</p> <p>A VERY large part of the reason ethanol has not proceeded quicker is the near collapse of the economy in 2008 along with the higher gas prices. Driving miles dropped dramatically at the same time funding for any type investment all but disappeared. At exactly the worst time for the ethanol industry. They were in a highly capital intensive “start up” phase – building plants and infrastructure, and cellulosic was still in the “smaller than commercial scale” development stage. In both instances there was little revenue yet and significant expenses. When capital disappeared they simply went under. </p> <p>I am not in any way involved in the industry, and I do believe we should be using our fossil fuels – however it is inevitable we will eventually someday run out, and as such we should be looking for realistic alternatives. </p> <p>Ethanol from CORN and other sources is not a full replacement but it has put a far more meaningful dent in our reliance on fossil fuels and more importantly imported fossil fuels, than any other technology.</p> <p>I believe its extremely important to have the facts – and not trumped up inaccurate hype.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title> By: Rich Kozlovich </title> <link>https://junkscience.com/2011/12/wsj-the-cellulosic-ethanol-debacle/#comment-6010</link> <dc:creator><![CDATA[Rich Kozlovich]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2011 23:12:10 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://junksciencecom.wordpress.com/?p=7610#comment-6010</guid> <description><![CDATA[We already know that corn based ethanol is an economic non-starter. Cellulosic ethanol is even worse. It will NEVER be economically viable. I can't remember the figures off hand but the costs in energy to produce it makes it a completely worthless undertaking....that is unless the ones promoting and producing it can keep feeding at the public trough.]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We already know that corn based ethanol is an economic non-starter. Cellulosic ethanol is even worse. It will NEVER be economically viable. I can’t remember the figures off hand but the costs in energy to produce it makes it a completely worthless undertaking….that is unless the ones promoting and producing it can keep feeding at the public trough.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title> By: Gamecock </title> <link>https://junkscience.com/2011/12/wsj-the-cellulosic-ethanol-debacle/#comment-6009</link> <dc:creator><![CDATA[Gamecock]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2011 22:24:34 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://junksciencecom.wordpress.com/?p=7610#comment-6009</guid> <description><![CDATA[Michael is mistaken about "The governments problem is that it is expecting immediate results." They did get immediate results: the votes of midwest corn farmers. That's all this was ever about. Alcohol is gasoline is an inert filler.]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Michael is mistaken about “The governments problem is that it is expecting immediate results.” They did get immediate results: the votes of midwest corn farmers. That’s all this was ever about. Alcohol is gasoline is an inert filler.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title> By: Big John </title> <link>https://junkscience.com/2011/12/wsj-the-cellulosic-ethanol-debacle/#comment-6008</link> <dc:creator><![CDATA[Big John]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2011 21:15:29 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://junksciencecom.wordpress.com/?p=7610#comment-6008</guid> <description><![CDATA[A famous DOctor once told me that ignorance can be cured, but stupidity can't. Michael is incurable.]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A famous DOctor once told me that ignorance can be cured, but stupidity can’t. </p> <p>Michael is incurable.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title> By: Rob </title> <link>https://junkscience.com/2011/12/wsj-the-cellulosic-ethanol-debacle/#comment-6007</link> <dc:creator><![CDATA[Rob]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2011 20:43:20 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://junksciencecom.wordpress.com/?p=7610#comment-6007</guid> <description><![CDATA[Cellulosic ethanol is only five years from commercial success. The problem is that is has been "only five years away" for at least 10 years now (since I first heard Iogen in Canada come up with this number). Not sure when wind/solar first started saying "five years from commercial success", but that could be even longer. I am very supportive of cellulosic ethanol and biodiesel research as they are the best options for high energy dense fuels needed for transport - once oil and gas really do start running out. However, this "running out" has been "five years" away for even longer (the 1970s) and I still don't see any evidence for it.]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cellulosic ethanol is only five years from commercial success.</p> <p>The problem is that is has been “only five years away” for at least 10 years now (since I first heard Iogen in Canada come up with this number).</p> <p>Not sure when wind/solar first started saying “five years from commercial success”, but that could be even longer.</p> <p>I am very supportive of cellulosic ethanol and biodiesel research as they are the best options for high energy dense fuels needed for transport – once oil and gas really do start running out. However, this “running out” has been “five years” away for even longer (the 1970s) and I still don’t see any evidence for it.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title> By: Ben of Houston </title> <link>https://junkscience.com/2011/12/wsj-the-cellulosic-ethanol-debacle/#comment-6006</link> <dc:creator><![CDATA[Ben of Houston]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2011 19:19:10 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://junksciencecom.wordpress.com/?p=7610#comment-6006</guid> <description><![CDATA[In reply to <a href="https://junkscience.com/2011/12/wsj-the-cellulosic-ethanol-debacle/#comment-6003">Michael</a>. Why would big Oil spend their time and money building an ethanol plant? Petroleum engineers aren't farmers, and roughneck drillers don't know switchgrass from ragweed. Anheisser Busch is more qualified than Exxon in this matter.]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://junkscience.com/2011/12/wsj-the-cellulosic-ethanol-debacle/#comment-6003">Michael</a>.</p> <p>Why would big Oil spend their time and money building an ethanol plant? Petroleum engineers aren’t farmers, and roughneck drillers don’t know switchgrass from ragweed. Anheisser Busch is more qualified than Exxon in this matter.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title> By: Don </title> <link>https://junkscience.com/2011/12/wsj-the-cellulosic-ethanol-debacle/#comment-6005</link> <dc:creator><![CDATA[Don]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2011 18:48:27 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://junksciencecom.wordpress.com/?p=7610#comment-6005</guid> <description><![CDATA[The Oil industries core business is Oil of all things. Imagine that. It is not their responsibility to produce ethanol from any source. Why is it that renewable energy sources always seem to be promised for future years as apposed to the present. It could'nt possibly have to do with all the promise of subsidies for failed "technology" that will never produce anything except a bill to the taxpayers and a dribble of energy. Good ideas promote themselves. Bad ideas historically die. Unfortunately subsidies are providing life support for some time to come.]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Oil industries core business is Oil of all things. Imagine that. It is not their responsibility to produce ethanol from any source. Why is it that renewable energy sources always seem to be promised for future years as apposed to the present. It could’nt possibly have to do with all the promise of subsidies for failed “technology” that will never produce anything except a bill to the taxpayers and a dribble of energy. Good ideas promote themselves. Bad ideas historically die. Unfortunately subsidies are providing life support for some time to come.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title> By: Brian Higgins </title> <link>https://junkscience.com/2011/12/wsj-the-cellulosic-ethanol-debacle/#comment-6004</link> <dc:creator><![CDATA[Brian Higgins]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2011 17:55:23 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://junksciencecom.wordpress.com/?p=7610#comment-6004</guid> <description><![CDATA[The ethanol lobby's problem is it wants the government to interfere in a market matter. The government can and should coordinate big science, like space exploration, nuclear weapons, etc., but its involvement in consumer driving behavior smacks of interference, or, perhaps, try "micro-management," an old buzz word for meddling.]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The ethanol lobby’s problem is it wants the government to interfere in a market matter. The government can and should coordinate big science, like space exploration, nuclear weapons, etc., but its involvement in consumer driving behavior smacks of interference, or, perhaps, try “micro-management,” an old buzz word for meddling.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title> By: Michael </title> <link>https://junkscience.com/2011/12/wsj-the-cellulosic-ethanol-debacle/#comment-6003</link> <dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2011 15:55:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://junksciencecom.wordpress.com/?p=7610#comment-6003</guid> <description><![CDATA[The governments problem is that it is expecting immediate results. It took years for the farmers of Minnesota to start the corn based ethanol industry and get it so that we finally had viable plants in the late 1980's. It is going to take time to get cellulosic going. POET Bio-refining has had an experimental cellulosic plant operating since 2008. The first commercially viable corn stover cellulosic plant will be opened by POET bio-refining in the coming year. As far as punishing big oil, I'm all for it. They are the only ones who really had the money to get a cellulosic plant running. They have been getting government subsidies for years. They can give some of that money back.]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The governments problem is that it is expecting immediate results. It took years for the farmers of Minnesota to start the corn based ethanol industry and get it so that we finally had viable plants in the late 1980’s. It is going to take time to get cellulosic going. POET Bio-refining has had an experimental cellulosic plant operating since 2008. The first commercially viable corn stover cellulosic plant will be opened by POET bio-refining in the coming year.<br /> As far as punishing big oil, I’m all for it. They are the only ones who really had the money to get a cellulosic plant running. They have been getting government subsidies for years. They can give some of that money back.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>