Ethanol takes more oil to produce than it saves.

[chaska]

Yes or no? Does anyone have any solid evidence on this?

Ed Shultz is promoting ethanol, and it smell a little funny to me, like he wants to help the farmers (ADM - Superpork to the world) out.

I know that Michael Ruppert "Crossing The Rubicon" has said that ethnol is not good for the very reason stated in the thread title, but he is my only source.

I recently read an article that said that the Europeans have developed an ethanol made from animal feed wastes, I believe, that genuinely saves substantial amounts of oil.

[Squatch]

1. How much ethanol does it take to produce ethanol?

[liam_laddie]

2. energy cost to make ethanol?

I've read somewhere - will try to locate source - that the therms
(an energy unit related BTU) required to produce ethanol total
more energy than the ethanol can yield. So it's a negative answer on the energy-in / energy-out equation. The only stated advantage is maybe cleaner air, post-combustion.
Unless I'm naive, solar, wind and tidal energy are the only
"free" sources, that is, need not be "renewable." Could be mistaken here as I'm not a scientist / engineer. HTH...

[wuushew]

I think that for the whole process

in terms of liquid fuel used to run the farm equipment in the field the return is at least 4:1. Does it really matter if the whole process is slightly negative? As long as you make up the energy with other sources you get a highly useful liquid fuel which unlike oil is at least sustainable and not quickly headed for depletion.

[chaska]

3. At best ethanol is a stop gap measure....

We need better solutions.

Anybody????

[skids]

4. Ethanol sucks.

It's only good use is in reducing emissions. Unless the bio-engineered bacteria are used to produce it (not what happens with corn subsidies) it is not a good alternative for fuel.

Likewise biodeisel is cute, but not practical.

Methanol is where it is at. It is produced not from fermentation but from "cracking" raw plant matter cellulose in a pyrolytic reactor. It is also the hydrocarbon of choice for many fuel cells.

[chaska]

5. Methanol makes a darn fine fuel for my homemade backpacking stove. :^)

[wuushew]

18. Methanol has a lower energy density than ethanol

8,600 BTU/lb vs 11,500 BTU/lb

Gasoline = 18,000 BTU/lb

Also I think there a number of enviromental concerns with methanol that make ethanol a more attractive transportion fuel.

http://www.leeric.lsu.edu/bgbb/7/ecep/auto/m/m.htm

[ProfessorGAC]

23. The Environmental Concern Is Twofold

First, methanol has a 10 degree lower boiling point than ethanol, so the ability to contain the higher vapor pressure to avoid air emissions is a problem vs. ethanol.

Secondly, methanol is toxic to animal life if spilled. Ethanol biodegrades very quickly in the ecosystem, while methanol takes about 4 times longer. So a spill of methanol can do far more negative things to a local environment than an ethanol spill.

It's not from the burning of it, it's the issues of methanol before it's used up as fuel.

Lastly, the lower caloric value you referenced means more needs to be burned for equal output of energy. There are some mitigating elements of having one carbon to combust into CO2, rather than two, so it's probably pretty close to wash. I haven't done the molar calculations. I can if you want. PM me if you 'd like them.
The Professor

[chaska]

7. So Skids (et al) is ethanol a good stop gap solution? Is there something..

better out there to get us by until the next big thing comes along ... assuming methanol is not quite doable at this stage?

[skids]

12. Ethanol is a great additive, that's all.

The best "stopgap measure" is to reduce consumption through conservation. There is no alternative liquid fuel who's infrastructure can be scaled up quickly enough to act as a stopgap. Even methanol, the only one that could be produced in large enough quantities, requires a lot of small pyrolytic reactors to be built, and would require engines to be refurbed (injectors remixed, computers reprogrammed, and any rubber parts removed from contact with the methanol.)

[htuttle]

6. I can make ethanol without using ANY oil whatsoever

Take your kitchen trash, mix in some high-carbo grain or vegetables, add water to create a mash. Let ferment for as long as necessary, distill over a heat source of your choosing (wood, trash, probably even a solar still would work), let the ethanol drip out the other end. Just like Grandpa did during prohibition (though you don't need to care what it tastes like).

People were making 'ethanol' to drink for thousands of years before oil was even used for anything but lamps in the Middle East.

Sure, you CAN use a lot of petroleum to make ethanol, but you don't NEED to. Just takes a bit longer without it unless you get smart about it.

Regarding the 'methanol' mentioned above -- methanol is made by cracking petroleum, isn't it? Doesn't seem like it would be possible to make any methanol without petroleum.

[chaska]

9. But how does this translate in commercial terms?

Is there a way to do it on a large scale? From what I hear, the first step is to get away from corn.

[htuttle]

16. Ever been to a brewery or distillery?

Big assed fermentation tanks, huge distilling apparatus, lines of trucks driving the product away.

On the other hand, if I want, I can also brew up a few gallons for my own use in my backyard.

There aren't many fuels that scale from very small to very large, but ethanol seems to be one of them.

[ProfessorGAC]

10. Sorry, tuttle, But No

Methanol is made from any cellulose containing plant. It's why it's commonly called wood alcohol. The fermentation process of high cellulose structures causes decomposition down to the single spaces between carbon (usually double bonds, easily cracked due to the lower energy).

Yes, ethylene can be cracked to make methanol, as well as used, upon oxidation to make ethanol. But, any alcohol up to C4 is very easy to make with standard fermentation/distillation processes, as used in the liquor manufacture.

BTW: You are right about the making of ethanol with no petro products. The cost of the petro is mostly coming from the transportation of corn and the use of fossil fuels to generate the electricity that goes into it. However, the same thing can be said of gasoline. I've yet to see any credible scientific study that shows that the net energy consumption of ethanol is significantly different of that of gasoline.
The Professor

[htuttle]

14. Thanks for the methanol info

It seems like it would be desirable to make methanol from crop waste, among other things.

Is there a low tech way to make methanol? I've read that methanol and lye can be used in the esterfication of vegetable oil to turn it into biodiesel.

[ProfessorGAC]

17. Two Questions: Two Answers

Yes, the making of wood alcohol probably goes back at least 3000 years. It's no more difficult than making ethanol, like in fermenting mash. I do think it requires a little more heat (i'd have to check on the bond energies of cellulose) and the right yeast would have to be found to get the right enzyme to kick off the fermentation. But, there's probably dozens of books in any public library that describe the process.

With any alcohol production though, the real key is the distillation. The reaction never goes to 100% completion and the desired product is unlikely to exceed about 70%. So, you've got the starting materials to remove and any side-reaction products to distill away. (Again, the same as cracking petroleum.) But, we also know that moonshiners did distillations with a piece of copper tubing! Not very high tech, that!

Also, you are correct about biodiesel. The reaction involves any oil, usually soybean, and methanol in molar abundance. Any alkaline material will kick the reaction. Most commercial applications use sodium methylate (25% solution in methanol) because it doesn't freeze and is easy to handle. (It's made by direct fusion of sodium metal with methanol. That's a fairly exciting process, though. Not for amateurs.)

The alkaline inserts itself into the carbonyl between the single bond oxygen and the acyl carbon. In the presence of a bunch of methanol, the sodium is replaced by the CH3O group, and the sodium goes back to make new lye or methylate. So, it's really not used up. (Like a catalyst is supposed to work!) The result is what's called a methyl ester. That's what biodiesel is. The next step involves decanting away the free glycerin, and then water washing.

You don't want too much excess glycerin or glycerides in the biodiesel, because if it doesn't burn compeltely, you make acrolein, which is another name for methyl formaldehyde. That is a very noxious gas that would come out the exhaust of the engine. Not good.

If you have any other technical questions, PM. I don't want to belabor this in the open forum.
The Professor

[htuttle]

20. Thanks again!

Been working on a personal post-petroleum cookbook for my own use (and for my sons and neighbors). I've been trying to learn the basic processes to produce a lot of different things -- 'just in case', I guess. It couldn't hurt -- especially if I get stranded on a desert island someday with a movie star, a millionaire and his wife, etc... :)

You've been very helpful. I'm going to look up some methanol recipes.

[jmowreader]

29. No, there's oil in that

There was oil used to produce all of that biomass.

To haul it to the packing plant that sold it to the distribution center that put it into the store you drove the stuff home from.

I could go on, but you get the idea: unless you Amish-farm the biomass, you've got oil in the process.

Regarding methanol: they call it "wood alcohol" for a reason.

[Tommymac]

8. Ethanol is Making Brazil Energy Independent....

If only WE had started this 30 years ago....maybe Iraq would not have had to happen.

http://americas.org/item_19824

Brazil sees biofuel as key to energy independence
Published by the Dallas Morning News, 6/9/05
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/bus/stories/060905dnbusethanol.12b966752.html

11:33 PM CDT on Wednesday, June 8, 2005

By JIM LANDERS / The Dallas Morning News

Next year, Brazil expects to say goodbye to oil imports. Sugar cane is a big reason why.

"Ethanol is an option the government has adopted so we will not be hostages of the oil-producing countries," said Mario Canabarro Abad of Brazil's Ministry of Development, Industry and Foreign Trade.

<snip>

Government subsidies were crucial to getting biofuels to market. But thanks to the rising price of oil, ethanol (or grain alcohol) distilled from sugar cane is more than $1 a gallon cheaper than gasoline at Brazilian service stations. Motorists will use 5 billion gallons of it this year.

The fast-growing U.S. biofuels industry calls Brazil a model for what could be accomplished if Congress can overcome the resistance of the oil companies.

[rurallib]

11. I am from Iowa where gasahol is a religion

Been using it for @30 years or so myself. Last year I heard someone refute that claim saying it was actually 50% efficient. Seeing your post I decided to google 'manufacturing ethanol.
This took me to The Straight Dope. Wow! Straight Dope is a column by a guy named Cecil Adams. I had read his books up until @2001, having seen no more. I thought maybe Cecil had died. So good to see he's still kicking. He always gives the best 'no bullshit' answers I have ever seen.
All that being said, here is a link to his answer, which is basically 'depends on how you count it'.

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/031128.html

[rurallib]

15. Let me add that if ethanol gets real big

we cannot possibly produce enough corn (or whatever) to replace oil. At best it can be used to extend the oil we have.

[kansasblue]

13. it seems to be economically feasible.

private companies in Kansas and Nebraska are building new plants that receive no subsidies.

you may want to check your sources. Was it sponsored by Exxon Mobil? hee hee.

[PurityOfEssence]

19. You can make it with very little oil, if you want...

Distillation is what uses the most energy, but this isn't the only way to concentrate ethanol. Any of you who've ever made applejack know about this: take whatever liquid that's fermented and put it outside in sub-zero weather in the winter, stirring occasionally. The water will freeze, and the liquor will become more concentrated.

[Syncronaut Seven]

22. An alternative to distillation, Cool!

Learn something new every day! I also understand that if you run alchohol at 70% thru dessicated crushed corn cobs? that the water is absorbed and you can aproach 95% 99% alchohol.

I imagine you could then ferment the used corn cob meal.

[wuushew]

21. kick

:kick:

[Strelnikov_]

24. No, EPR IS Positive

And could be better if we utilized more co-generation options for process energy. Cellulosic ethanol, if if pans out, would be even better in that perennial crops grown on marginal land could be utilized.

The Energy Balance of Corn Ethanol: An Update / AER-813
United States Department of Agriculture - July 2002

http://www.usda.gov/oce/oepnu/aer-813.pdf

The above publication indicates that the EROEI (EPR) of corn ethanol is 1.34 to 1.85 dependant on how the value of coproducts (DDGS, germ, etc.) is accounted for. What I found interesting was Table 6 that indicates 2/3's of the energy consumed is in the conversion process. This indicates opportunities for utilizing co-generation or renewables (wind) for some of this process energy.

Just east of Ames, IA an ethanol processing plant is being built. In the brief for the project they advertised how the new plant will use the same coal supply delivered to the Ames, IA municipal electric plant 4 mi. to the west, thus resulting in savings. With co-generation, this plant could have been located such that waste heat from the coal fired electric plant could have been utilized by the ethanol process. In addition, the Ames power plant burns local garbage, therefore waste material from the ethanol process could be burned (resource recovered, as they call it).

The problem is, there is no way biomass/renew ables will replace the Quads of liquid fuel energy we currently consume. This does not have to mean the end of personal transport. But it does mean the end of the age of 6000 lb. 4 wheel living rooms flying down the highway at 75 mph.

The following report indicates that 1 b Ton/yr of biomass would be required to replace 30% of current petroleum consumption.

Biomass as Feedstock for a Bioenergy and Bioproducts Industry: The Technical Feasibility of a Billion-Ton Annual Supply, April 2005:

http://www.eere.energy.gov/biomass/pdfs/final_billionton_vision_report2.pdf

The purpose of this report is to determine whether the land resources of the United States are capable of producing a sustainable supply of biomass sufficient to displace 30 percent or more of the country’s present petroleum consumption – the goal set by the Advisory Committee in their vision for biomass technologies. Accomplishing this goal would require approximately 1 billion dry tons of biomass feedstock per year.

The short answer to the question of whether that much biomass feedstock can be produced is yes. Looking at just forestland and agricultural land, the two largest potential biomass sources, this study found over 1.3 billion dry tons per year of biomass potential — enough to produce biofuels to meet more than one-third of the current demand for transportation fuels. The full resource potential could be available roughly around mid-21st century when large-scale bioenergy and biorefinery industries are likely to exist. This annual potential is based on a more than seven-fold increase in production from the amount of biomass currently consumed for bioenergy and biobased products. About 368 million dry tons of sustainably removable biomass could be produced on forestlands, and about 998 million dry tons could come from agricultural lands.

Better be sooner than mid-21st century though.

[wuushew]

26. That first study is pretty good

I have read before and enjoy it because it discredits Pimentel.

It also states how much fuel you gain when just counting the liquid fuel component.

one Btu
of liquid fossil fuel, used in combination with other
forms of energy, can produce 6.34 Btu of fuel ethanol.

This is also key


Others argue that although energy balance is of some concern, it is not the major issue for addressing energy security. What really matters is that the production of ethanol can achieve a net gain in a more desirable form of energy (U.S. Department of Energy,1980;Anderson et al., 1988). In other words, abundant domestic feedstocks such as coal and natural gas can effectively be used to convert corn into a premium liquid fuel that replaces imported petroleum. This approach reduces the energy balance issue to just
looking at the energy value of the liquid fossil fuels used in the production of corn-ethanol.

In an ideal world though this extra energy would not be from fossil fuels rather wind or solar. I certainly would prefer to continue to use internal combustion engines based on their numerous advantages over purely electric vehicles.

The real issue is the vast vast amounts of land that would be required to completely replace gasoline. Even with draconian conservation measures, sustainability in terms of energy means eventually limiting or reversing population growth to make possible our current levels of per person energy consumption.

[enid602]

25. Brazil

40% of all passenger cars manufactured in Brazil this year have gas tanks which have been modified for ethanol use. Brazil claims to be energy independent.

[Strelnikov_]

27. I Am Really Hoping A Flex-Fuel (E85) Pluggable Hybrid

is produced in the near future.

The flex-fuel part should not be that big of an issue.

[hunter]

28. Large scale agriculture is not benign.

"Growing" fuels destroys the natural environment.

I personally don't see anything sacred about farming, especially very large corporate farming of the sort required for large scale ethanol production. There's is not much that distinguishes large scale ethanol producers from "Texas oil men" like George Bush or Dick Cheney. Often they are one and the same.

The ethanol program in Brazil is not a positive thing. Many of the workers who grow the crops made into ethanol are living in hell, and the natural environment is destroyed in the process. Comparing this to the human and environmental damage done by fossil fuel production is a study in the lesser of two evils.

Anyone who is interested in this subject might also study the MTBE fiasco. MTBE is a synthetic fuel made from natural gas that is added to gasoline much as ethanol is.

http://www.epa.gov/mtbe

It is claimed that MTBE reduces air pollution, but MTBE was probably not added to gasoline for that reason.

The "money trail" of MTBE is not entirely clear, not so clear as it is in the case of ethanol, but the use of MTBE has been profitable. The original intent may have been to boost gasoline octane and reduce air pollution, but very soon the profits were more important than the environmental concerns.

In a similar fashion ethanol is not added to gasoline to decrease U.S. oil imports. It is added to gasoline for entirely political purposes. Political powerful people benefit from the use of Ethanol. Ask Bob Dole.

As a side note related to other posts on this thread, methanol is a terrible fuel. It is corrosive and toxic. Various methanol fuel demonstration projects have turned out poorly. Methanol is better used as a feedstock for other sorts of fuels such as biodiesel. (By the way, MTBE is most often made from methanol, and on very large scales.)

Methanol can be made from agricultural wastes, but it is much easier to make it from natural gas. If a very large market for methanol was developed, it would probably be tanked in from remote places; places where LNG exports are currently being considered.

"Saving oil" or protecting the environment is not the goal of the majority of our politicians. Their game is all about money and power. In many discussions about ethanol as a fuel you must be prepared to wade (and swim!) through oceans of bullshit.