Re: Even the best biofuels aren't cost effective

DE Pauley wrote: 
Actually, to achieve a positive result it is necessary to assign a
"energy equivalent" to the residual product (i.e. animal feed). Then it
is possible to claim 115 to 130 units output for 100 input. But to
honestly support this claim, they should show that a market exist for
the product. It consists of about 1400 pounds for 100 gallons of
ethanol. Does a market exist for 1.3 billion tons of animal feed?

Over 100 years ago, the answer would be "yes", as it can feed horses, mules and water buffalo for transportation and cultivation.

I suppose we are still only 'half-way there" for energy independence.

Also, the land needed to produce the corn should be compared to the
arable land. Only 19% of the US is considered as arable.


Now that can be a problem.

Angelo Campanella

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Even the best biofuels arent cost effective
    ... "energy equivalent" to the residual product. ... honestly support this claim, they should show that a market exist for ... Does a market exist for 1.3 billion tons of animal feed? ... arable land. ...
    (sci.energy.hydrogen)
  • Re: Even the best biofuels arent cost effective
    ... DE Pauley wrote: ... > "energy equivalent" to the residual product. ... Does a market exist for 1.3 billion tons of animal feed? ...
    (sci.energy.hydrogen)