Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,909 Year: 4,166/9,624 Month: 1,037/974 Week: 364/286 Day: 7/13 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   U.S. Brazil, Ethanol
BMG
Member (Idle past 238 days)
Posts: 357
From: Southwestern U.S.
Joined: 03-16-2006


Message 1 of 17 (387841)
03-03-2007 3:54 AM


I read a short article on the NY Times website.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/03/business/worldbusiness/03ethanol.html...
Article writes:
WASHINGTON, March 2 ” President Bush, hoping to reduce demand for oil in the Western Hemisphere, is preparing to finish an agreement with Brazil next week to promote the production and use of ethanol throughout Latin America and the Caribbean, according to administration officials...
Article writes:
...Administration officials are hoping to complete a memorandum of understanding that calls for cooperation between the countries on research and common standards for biofuels, as well as on helping other countries replicate Brazil’s expertise in producing ethanol from sugar...
... American officials expressed a similar enthusiasm for making ethanol and ethanol-producing equipment on a huge scale. The biggest area of cooperation, they said, will be in helping countries identify and remove obstacles to building their own ethanol production capacity...
..."We want ethanol to become a global commodity, and for that to happen, Brazil can’t be the only producer,” said José Luiz Oliverio, vice president for operations at Dedini Industries, Brazil’s leading manufacturer of equipment for sugar cane and ethanol mills.
This was an intriguing yet troubling article. Ethanol use will lessen the dependence upon fossil fuels, especially petroleum.
It also has the possibility of strengthening the economies of several Central and South American nations. But even this benefit in the face of NAFTA leads one to perplexion.
Also, reading over these statements in particular, and from what I noticed there was no mention of the increase in clearing forests for farm land to grow the sugar cane? or how many acres would need to be cleared to accomplish their goal of ethanol becoming a "global commodity"?
The article was bereft of information concerning the loss of biodiversity.
So, a little searching and up popped this: http://www.aibs.org/bioscience-press-releases/050701_fuel_ethanol_...
So, to put it simply, where do others stand on this issue? Does anyone have any more information regarding this topic? Possibly Quetzal? who I beieve, but may be wrong, is currently residing south of the US border?
Edited by Admin, : Shorten links.

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Doddy, posted 03-03-2007 8:29 AM BMG has replied
 Message 5 by Quetzal, posted 03-03-2007 10:54 AM BMG has replied

  
BMG
Member (Idle past 238 days)
Posts: 357
From: Southwestern U.S.
Joined: 03-16-2006


Message 6 of 17 (388115)
03-04-2007 5:32 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by Doddy
03-03-2007 8:29 AM


The problem is the US reliance on corn to make the ethanol.
No kidding. Of several starting materials to make ethanol from, corn is, I believe, one of the least efficacious.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Doddy, posted 03-03-2007 8:29 AM Doddy has not replied

  
BMG
Member (Idle past 238 days)
Posts: 357
From: Southwestern U.S.
Joined: 03-16-2006


Message 7 of 17 (388120)
03-04-2007 6:19 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Quetzal
03-03-2007 10:54 AM


Re: Microscale vs. Macroscale
” Energy yield. Biofuels yield only a fraction of the energy that an equivalent amount of gas does.
With corn being a rather poor producer of biofuels, it makes one wonder why the US route to "energy independence" was paved by way of corn...
Since at least some land has to be used for actual food production, the only alternatives would seem to be taking over "currently unproductive land" (like rainforests) to produce the needed fuels.
I recall hearing something along the lines of rainforests having fairly infertile and unproductive soil. Assuming this is true, wouldn't clearing rainforests for agriculture be an exercise in futility?
Would copious amounts of fertilizer then be needed to increase productivity? further hampering the environment?
To make a long story short - as long as biofuels projects are limited in scale, there is very little environmental impact, and in fact they can be extremely effective and low cost...
...the examples we have of non-sustainable large-scale commercial production of biofuels doesn't bode well.
Which is why I am a bit apprehensive about the US and Brazil partnering in ethanol use and production.
"Large-scale commercial production" is our nation's bread and butter.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Quetzal, posted 03-03-2007 10:54 AM Quetzal has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by kuresu, posted 03-04-2007 10:39 PM BMG has replied
 Message 9 by Quetzal, posted 03-05-2007 8:10 AM BMG has replied

  
BMG
Member (Idle past 238 days)
Posts: 357
From: Southwestern U.S.
Joined: 03-16-2006


Message 10 of 17 (388436)
03-06-2007 1:21 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by kuresu
03-04-2007 10:39 PM


Re: Why Corn?
We know corn is ridiculous to use for ethanol production, yet it's those important (and powerful, at times) interests that promote corn.
Interesting. This may be straying a bit from the topic but just how "powerful" is the corn lobby?
about the only explanation I can come up with. That, and gov'ts tend towards inefficiency.
An interesting topic unto itself. Have you considered initiating a thread on that thought?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by kuresu, posted 03-04-2007 10:39 PM kuresu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by kuresu, posted 03-06-2007 1:41 AM BMG has not replied

  
BMG
Member (Idle past 238 days)
Posts: 357
From: Southwestern U.S.
Joined: 03-16-2006


Message 11 of 17 (388437)
03-06-2007 1:38 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by Quetzal
03-05-2007 8:10 AM


Re: Microscale vs. Macroscale
In addition, large scale corn production is one of the worst crops as far as leading to nitrification of local watersheds goes. Not only because of the requirement for pesticides and nitrogenous fertilizers, but because of the basic natural history of corn itself.
Would you mind explaining further about the "basic natural history of corn"?
The oil palm plantation I mentioned we're considering will be located in a high-nutrient environment (whitewater varzea).
I hope it is considered and eventually successful. Best of luck.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Quetzal, posted 03-05-2007 8:10 AM Quetzal has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Quetzal, posted 03-06-2007 8:09 AM BMG has replied

  
BMG
Member (Idle past 238 days)
Posts: 357
From: Southwestern U.S.
Joined: 03-16-2006


Message 16 of 17 (388500)
03-06-2007 9:07 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by Quetzal
03-06-2007 8:09 AM


Re: Microscale vs. Macroscale
I could probably dig up a reference on that if you want.
Sure, if it's not too much to ask. I would enjoy that read.
AbE- You've been most helpful on this topic, Quetzel. Much obliged.
Edited by Infixion, : Last line.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Quetzal, posted 03-06-2007 8:09 AM Quetzal has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Quetzal, posted 03-06-2007 4:10 PM BMG has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024