|Quoting Khobar (Reply 1):|
Just a quick check reveals much of the problem to be corn. Ethanol supporters say the answer is cellulosic ethanol. They say it doesn't require forced irrigation or fertilizer, but I have to wonder - where would they then grow all the sugar cane or sawgrass without changing the existing environment?
|Quoting KL577 (Reply 2):|
It is impossible to satisfy our energy (and aviation fuel) needs from biofuels, and somebody needs to tell these politicians (and Branson) quick before the last pristine forests are cut to produce ethanol to fly a VS B787.
|Quoting Exusair (Thread starter):|
Also found an interesting article regarding ethanol. Brace yourself because it is not what it is hyped up to be.....
|Quoting Flighty (Reply 3):|
Ethanol is a complete and utter joke. It does not save the environment and it does not save money. It does, however, make corn growers rich the more we use it. So of course they will go on and on about it.
How can coal release fewer hydrocarbons and co2 than kerosene? Seems unlikely. If it were so easy, we wouldn't bother with oil anymore at $70/bbl.
|Quoting TristarSteve (Reply 9):|
Ethanol is very popular in Sweden as a car fuel. Especially because you don't have to pay the congestion tax in Stockholm if you drive an ethanol car.