"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Ken Finney" wrote in message
...

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Louis Ohland" wrote in message
...
Hey Dan, please throw the dog a bone and give us some cites of the
efficiency of ethanol?

Ethanol Production Using Corn, Switchgrass, and Wood;
Biodiesel Production Using Soybean and Sunflower
http://www.oregon.gov/ENERGY/RENEW/B...hanol.2005.pdf

The research includes 2001, 2003 and 2005. Is that current enough?

Not to mention that it cites nine other studies that indicate ethanol is
a net energy loser.


The Ethanol Forum
http://www.oregon.gov/ENERGY/RENEW/Biomass/forum.shtml

National Corn Grower's Association
http://www.ncga.com/ethanol/main/energy.htm
"Ethanol opponents frequently cite a study by Cornell University's Dr.
David Pimentel, who concluded that it takes 70 percent more energy to
produce ethanol than it yields. Pimentel's findings have been
consistently refuted by USDA and other scientists who say his
methodology uses obsolete data and is fundamentally unsound."

Did you read the NCGA "refutation"? It's not impressive.


Amazing, the USDA thinks ethanol is wonderful. As Hillary might say,
this requires one to suspend disbelief...

The USDA thinks ethanol is wonderful. The DOE thinks it's wonderful.
George Bush thinks it's wonderful. The whole friggin' government thinks
it's wonderful. Politically, it's a can't-lose situation for them.

Compared to "the hydrogen economy", it is wonderful.

WHAT "hydrogen economy"? I haven't seen one.


Nor, do I expect, will you ever see one. But that doesn't mean billions
won't be spent on it.