4 ms·
>This may change in the future, but the current reality is no better than a 1-to-1 transformation of fossil fuel into biofuel. I was with you until this. a bri
by gr3yh47 9y ago
>This may change in the future, but the current reality is no better than a 1-to-1 transformation of fossil fuel into biofuel.
I was with you until this. a brief thought experiement makes it seem impossible that it would be 1 to 1, but rather that some smaller amount of fossil fuel used would yield a much larger amount of biofuel
- Retric 9y agoRemember, biofuel costs significantly more. Pump prices include taxes, so difference in pre-tax vs pre-subsidies of 1.80 $ is huge. The value of biofuels is simply cushion in case of poor harvests.
- AcerbicZero 9y agoHow so? If the market is manipulated via farm subsidies or biofuel subsidies it's entirely possible groups might not be overly worried about the efficiency of the process and expend the same amount of fossil fuel (or more) to obtain an equal amount of biofuel.
- nate_meurer 9y agoThis topic is way too complex to be experimented upon by mere thought. For example, take a gander at this discussion on corn ethanol EROEI a few years back. Lots of data, detailed analysis, vigorous debate, and a headline conclusion of an EROEI of 1.07. There's a lot of debate about this, with numbers varying due largely to differing assessments of inputs and credits for byproducts, but I have never seen a convincing EROEI for corn ethanol over about 2. EDIT: I forgot to include the link! Here it is: http://netenergy.theoildrum.com/node/6760 http://netenergy.theoildrum.com/node/6760