48 Miles per kernel of corn?
 

There is a BASF ad in the most recent Popular Science that shows an ear of corn with the caption "48 Miles Per Kernel".
I find it hard to believe. How much ethanol can one kernel produce?

Suppose they were talking about a car that gets 48mpg, and suppose we give them the benifit of the doubt and they were talking about E10 gas. That is still .1 gallons per kernel. or 12.8 fluid ounces per kernel. It seems to violate conservaton of mass.

It gets worse with lower MPG cars or higher percentages of ethanol gasoline.

Or were they thinking of converting matter directly to energy?

Re: 48 Miles per kernel of corn?
 

hmmmm, looks to me as though its corn 10 feet long
powering a matchbox car
heres the link for those who dont have pop sci
http://www.basf.com/stories/

Re: 48 Miles per kernel of corn?
 

Silly Silly People......
:confused::confused::confused::confused::confused: :confused::confused::confused::confused::confused:
It's only a play on words of course.
Were you really wondering, or were you also kidding around?

It means 48 miles per gallon of ethanol.
1 gallon of ethanol weighs about 6.7 pounds IIRC.
Just slightly more than gasoline,
But has slightly less energy per pound than gasoline,
but because of it's slower, more complete combustion, you get more power per gallon. Ethanol's Octane rating is about 110, which make it a fantastic choice for sports cars, and high end cars with high compression engines that can take advantage of such a high octane.

If regular gas is 87 Octane, and Premium is 93 Octane,
Can you say Super Ultra Extra "Premium" at the pump???

-Cheers
-John

Re: 48 Miles per kernel of corn?
 

Europe has 121 octane gasoline or something like that, so it's nothing new. You know how corn syrup is used in lieu of sugar in the overwhelming majority of foods sold at supermarkets in the U.S.? Know the reason? Corn subsidies. Purely because of them, and some import tariffs, corn syrup is cheaper than sugar in the U.S, but nearly everywhere else sugar is cheaper (not to mention better-tasting and healthier) so it's used instead.

Hence some of the interest in corn-based ethanol. It's not actually good. Saying ethanol doesn't pollute because it's carbon-neutral is like saying forest fires don't pollute.

Re: 48 Miles per kernel of corn?
 

Forest fires do not pollute in the ways educated people are concerned about. Smoke is a particulate... one that settles out, and does not have lasting effects. Smoke is not a chemical pollutant.

Burning ethanol reduces both airborne chemicals and particles.
You can drink ethanol.
Ethanol does not harm oceans and streams.
A turned over load of ethanol on the freeway can be just washed down the storm drain. 5 parts water mixed with 1 part ethanol makes it virtually harmless, and non-flammable. I don't think you want to do that with any other liquid fuel.

Ethanol has many more pluses than minuses.
And ethanol does not need to come from corn.
It can come from a nearly unlimited number of feedstocks.
Ethanol is GROWING fuel for your car.
Ethanol is SOLAR power for your car.
Whatever you use today, will grow back tomorrow.
It is perfect? No. But is a very good choice at this time.
There may be better choices in the far future.
But for now, it is a good choice.
There are 9 or 10 positive reports for every 1 negative one.
9 out of 10 scientists say ethanol is a good thing.
9 out of 10 scientists say global warming is real.
So if you believe ethanol is not good, then you must believe global warming is not happening either. Is that the case?
-J

Re: 48 Miles per kernel of corn?
 

Ethanol...is not the answer. subsidies are good for a very few. Energy useage to grow, fertilize, harvest, refine, and transport ethanol is good for the oil industry. Yes, ethanol is the answer...for big oil.

Re: 48 Miles per kernel of corn?
 

The "jacobson" report was a poor April Fools practical joke.
Unfortunately, you cannot get something off the internet, once you post it, so unfortunately, it persists. It's funny to those who know, but not to everyone else. Also, you may see a "Pimentel" report that says ethanol takes more energy to produce than it creates. However, that report was was done in 1980, and just like computers, ethanol technology has improved 10 fold in 28 years. Today, in a modern facility, built after 2000, it takes 23,500 btu of fossil fuel to put 100,000 btu of ethanol into your tank. That includes the fossil fuel used by the tractor harvesting the corn, and the train taking the corn to the distillery, and the truck taking the fuel to the gas station. Funny, people never calculate the energy ( btu) it takes to move crude oil from Iraq or Kuweit to the U.S. and then refine it into pure gasoline. I've heard it takes 100,000 btu of fuel to get 100,000 btu of foreign oil into your gasoline tank.

So the real question is, are you patriotic? Or not?
How many soldiers died this year patrolling corn fields?

Re: 48 Miles per kernel of corn?
 

nice

Re: 48 Miles per kernel of corn?
 

Water useage? soils degradation? Land mass requirements?

Big picture? no more combustion...Plug-in electric drive vehicles powered by solar: darelldd.com. He's the hero.

Re: 48 Miles per kernel of corn?
 

Switch fields usage year to year to avoid soil damage?

Good irrigation?

Land mass = image how much of the third world we could employ


Now imagine how many people solar power would provide a life for.

Corn helps the enviroment and the people.