<Update on S. 2821 and Bartlett's Similar House Legislation (no H.R. number yet as I can tell)The Oil DrumDrumBeat: May 8, 2008>
<Energy Strategy for ETH Zurich: A Critical ReviewThe Oil Drum: EuropeThe ASPO-Italy conference in Torino>

183 comments on Countdown to $200 oil (3) - no gas tax needed...erm, right...

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

SwordsOfDamocles on May 8, 2008 - 5:50pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Yes, cars get more efficient but that has nothing to do the eroi of corn ethanol. Also keep in mind the average life of a car in the US is about 16 years. Isn't that what they refer to as a red herring?

I don't understand your cattle feed calculation.?

the average yield last year of 151 bushels * 2.8 the gallons of ethanol per bushel = 422.8, far short of 675 gallons.. I don't know how you got this? could you elaborate.

New cars will do better with gasoline too, Also we never included the transportation cost of the ethanol from the farm and too the plant and from the plant to the refinery?

All this considered I still don't get 4.5 to 1?

If you could show me this id be glad to listen

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Joe Average on May 8, 2008 - 7:28pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Strewth! If you guys can't agree, what hope do we mere mortals have?

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
kdolliso on May 8, 2008 - 7:45pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Sure, keep in mind: this is a real-world, for all practical purposes type calculation.

First: I used 2.96 gallons/bu. If you noticed in my link some refineries are reaching this level. I'm sure many, many more will be in the future.

Now, to the "Cattle Feed." Remember, almost 90% of all field corn goes to feed livestock, mostly cattle. This is a very important concept to keep in mind.

When you process a bushel of corn you get back 17.5 lbs of distillers grains. This is, for all practical purposes, corn with the starch, and CO2 removed. All of the vitamins, nutrients, and protein is still there. A ration that's 65% corn, and 30% dgs will actually yield 10% More weight on a cow than a ration with 95% corn.

For that reason, I, normally, figure that we've used 60% of the corn to realize our 2.96 gallons of ethanol, and retained 40% - .30 + .33(.30) of our cattle feeding ability.

*in the above calculation I used 33% instead of 40% because I knew that 17,706 btus signified that it was the Corn Plus Plant, and that they gassified some of their "syrup" thus cutting back, slightly, on the "feed" returned.

Anyway, let's take 3 gal/by (it's easier than using 2.96) and multiply by 3/2 (remember, we only used 2/3 of our corn for the ethanol) to get 4.5 gal/bu. Now, we'll multiply that by 150 bu/acre, and come out with 675 gal/acre.

Now, I adjust the tilling, planting, harvesting, and fertilizer production, and seed drying inputs accordingly; but I don't mess with the Refinery inputs since that process would never be undertaken absent the need to make ethanol.

Here's where I, really, take a "Liberty." I've given several links of real, honest to goodness, real-world tests that show that ethanol in ten, twenty, or thirty percent blends are basically mileage-neutral compared to gasoline. So, for a little "shock" value I used the 116,000 btu content of gasoline, not the 76,000 btus of ethanol. It's shady, of course; but, it's also "real-world" accurate, inasmuch as ethanol's 30% Higher Octane compensates where it really matters - at the gas pump.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.