Overview of the Renewable Fuel Standard & Why It Is Good 4 the Climate- Center for American Progress

[Bill USA]

5. do you think you've impressed anyone with your 'punk' language? How about a logical argument?

Last edited Tue Feb 4, 2014, 05:33 PM - Edit history (2)

"Red herring?"

I haven't seen you make a case for your proposition that making ethanol from corn has reduced our production of food any (keep in mind US farmers produce more than we can eat all the time. Also,[font color="red"] note that most of the corn crop is raised to feed Cattle - cattle which evolved to eat GRASS. Cattle which are healthier eating grass than they are eating corn - and which provide healthier meat when fed grass. All to provide consumers with cheaper red meat - something which is not necessary only optional.[/font]). The Government has set a limit on how much ethanol can be made from corn. Your approach is to demagogue the issue because you don't have any valid argument. And when countered, you resort to personal attacks rather than any logical argument. .... Doesn't say much for your argument or for you, does it?

(BTW I also mentioned as a way of increasing the supply of renewable alcohol fuel the production of methanol from biomass (this could be any biomass, such as forestry products waste). This would be added to the ethanol being produced and it could be increased in production volume faster than ethanol can. Methanol up to about 10% of the blend would not be that much of a problem - but if it was (like at a higher proportions of the blend), and if we are REALLY interested in fighting GW, then make all ICEs alcohol compatible. This is not a huge, or very expensive, technical challenge. We know how to do it and what it takes - so no technical questions to be solved.)

You say renewable fuels don't do anything to counter GW yet, have not offered any approach to countering GW. [font color="red"] This is why I supposed you are just interested in protecting Oil industry business and profits which ethanol has already cut into.[/font] This is the approach of the oil industry. The oil industry has spent beaucoup bucks to have pseudo studies done & published and mounted an aggressive publicity campaign against ethanol in particular - because ethanol presents a clear and present danger to their profits - by reducing the price of oil/gasoline (Big Oil Goes to College , and on Democracy NOW).


[font size="3"][font color="blue"]I am not actually engaged in a discussion with you, as it is clear that you are beyond reach of rational argument. [/font] I am presenting my comments for those who are able to think for themselves and are open to rational argument and the presentation of empirical evidence.


...and so, with these people in mind:


You say: "Renewable(s) like ethanol are not going to slow the growth of global warming"

Ethanol currently represents ~11% of light transportation fuel consumed. The Argonne National Laboratory's 2012 report puts Ethanol's GHG emissions reduction vs gasoline at 34% (using the 50th percentile - the median. This is a representative number as opposed to the 10th percentile number used by the EPA).

So, 34% of 11% yields ~3.73% GHG Emissions Reduction for the entire fleet of Light Vehicles.

... Not much you say?? [font color="red"]Well, how many Toyota Priuses would it take to get that much GHG emissions reduction?[/font]


So, convert the fleet GHG emissions reduction achieved by ethanol, to vehicles apply 3.73% to the Light Vehicle fleet of 247,900,000 cars and light trucks, which gives you: 9,236,708 vehicles.


Now, ... the Prius gets roughly a 32.6% reduction of GHG emissions per car (vs. a comparable payload and weight car..e.g. a Corolla).

You have to divide the 9,236,708 vehicles by the GHG reduction per car for the Prius... (.326).

9,236,708/(.326) = 28,317,801 Priuses


[font color="red"] So, you would need ~28 million Priuses to achieve the same amount of total GHG emissions reduction achieved by ethanol for last year and almost as much in the four previous years.[/font]

How long will it take to get 28 million hybrids on the road? Estimates vary, because there are a number of variables involved. In that time however, ethanol will be racking up GHG reductions like these every year * (unless the Oil industry has its way). How long it will take to sell 28 million hybrids depends a lot on the state to the economy over that period. When the GOP manages to undermine the economy - either by sabotaging Democrats efforts to build the economy or by enacting more Supply Side - Trickle Down Econocomics measures and Deregulation madness - then sales of expensive hybrids and PHEVs (!) will suffer. When people are worried about job security sales of cars in general suffer. And people worried about job security aren't likely to go out and spend an extra $8,000 (Priuses premium over a Corolla) for a hybrid or an extra $15,000 for a PHEV.


* Actually, the current FFVs we have on the road do nothing to take advantage of ethanol's high octane (relative to gasoliine) property which consigns us to much smaller GHG reductions with ethanol, than than are possible. The Ethanol enabled direct injection turbo-charged engine designed by three MIT scientists gets 30% BETTER mileage than gasoline and very nearly DOUBLES the GHG emissions reductions for ethanol calculated by Argonne Natl Lab (67% GHG reduction per mile vs 34% per ANL) (- this is better than 3 times the 10th percentile value used by EPA). The top engineering student teams competing in the Ethanol Vehicle Challenge - 1998 achieved 13% to 15% BETTER fuel economy than the stock Malibus got with gasoline - and this without downsizing. With this improvement in mileage you would improve the GHG emissions of ethanol,as calculated by ANL, by better than 70%!