Snapper wrote:
>In reply to John_H's comment below...
>
>> > AFAIK the largest manufacturer of ethanol in Oz is currently CSR,
>> > using mol***** from sugar (which is a crop)... their Sarina plant
>> > (south of Mackay) has a capability of around 300ML pa. Manildra run
>> > second at 60ML.
>
>I just ran some figures through the calculator.
>
>Based on Victoria having 4 million cars and each of them using 70l of
>petrol a week, to run the fleet on E85 we would need around 2,184
>megalitres of ethanol a year, just for Victoria.
Shows it for the farce it is (as an oil substitute)!
>How much land would you need to set aside to grow crops to cater for that
>sort of production?
No land is ever likely to be set aside from human food production for
ethanol, either here or anywhere else. Nor has it been.
Consider sugar. There's currently a world glut, all down to Brazil's
increased production in recent times. Because of the resulting
depressed prices most sugar producers would gladly grow something
else... if they could. Sugar producing land is typically good for
bugger all else (which is why Brazil grows it in the first place).
Consider maize (corn)... the US source. They've got a heap of
farmland that's good for very little else, plus the fact maize isn't a
human food source in developed countries. It's main use is stockfood.
Same goes for sorghum in Oz (which is set to become the mainstay of
local ethanol production). Both sorghum and maize are grown in summer
rainfall areas which don't favour winter cereal production (eg wheat
and barley). What ethanol production does is put a floor under what
are otherwise wildly fluctuating commodity prices (in the not too
distant pass the Japanese were using Australian sorghum as a carbon
source for case hardening bearings). This suits both GovCo and
primary producers.
Currently escalating food grain prices (eg wheat) are a direct result
of increased demand from developing countries and decreased production
due to drought, which has SFA to do with ethanol.
>And what sort of energy requirements would you need to plant the crops,
>grow the crops (and water, fertiliser, etc.) and then to harvest the
crops
>and finally to process the crops into ethanol?
In spite of what those such as David Pimentel have claimed (and whose
figures have been thoroughly debunked) the energy returns are well and
truly positive (especially when the main energy input comes directly
from the sun). If they weren't no one could afford to grow the crops,
particularly in Oz where agricultural production isn't subsidised.
What's far more relevant is the price the ethanol producers are
prepared to pay (which is currently well below food grain prices).
>When you look at how much oil we must need in order to supply the world
>markets, the gross figures must be HUGE. How the **** would we cope once
>oil production drops to the point where we're forced to look for
>alternative fuels, whether it be ethanol, H2 cells, solar/electric or
>whatever?
Nuclear power of course! :)
--
John H
|
