3 ms·
The fertilizers used, the soil degraded, and the runoff from it all into water sources, plus the fact that the energy return is barely higher than the energy in
by ArkVark 6y ago
The fertilizers used, the soil degraded, and the runoff from it all into water sources, plus the fact that the energy return is barely higher than the energy investment (or in some cases actually negative) means that Biofuels are already dead - they survive only based on Government subsidies.
- xyzzyz 6y agoI can scarcely believe that EROEI for biofuels is negative. Can you provide source for this?
- ArkVark 6y agohttp://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.468.2464&rep=rep1&type=pdf http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.468... EROEI of 1.07 from this metastudy for Corn Ethanol. Society needs at least an EROEI of 3:1, so corn ethanol, at least, is a boondoggle.
- credit_guy 6y agoI'm not sure how much I can trust that document. It's written by some academics, they might or might not have an agenda. Here's a study done by the USDA, published in 2016 and describing the state of the affairs in 2015 https://mnbiofuels.org/images/2015EnergyBalanceCornEthanol.pdf https://mnbiofuels.org/images/2015EnergyBalanceCornEthanol.p... Bottom line: ignoring any carbon credits, the return on energy using the existing facilities in Iowa is 2.3 (page 14, bottom of 3rd column).
- Animats 6y agoSee [1]. Numbers vary, but ethanol from corn seems to be in the 0.5 to 1.5 range. Which is not very good. [1] https://www.buildinggreen.com/news-article/energy-return-investment https://www.buildinggreen.com/news-article/energy-return-inv...