Fortune reports Pres Bush will promote ethanol even more, but wonders if it matters.

While it's noteworthy he is addressing energy this seriously, the route taken seems more political than problem-solving.

 

People complained that oil companies were getting tax breaks while making record profits. Now it's the large agro corporations' turn.

 

Stay tuned ... there has been a pretty healthy growth in the biodiesel business too. I made a comment yesterday and think the time is near that we'll see the momemtum move us in the renewables direction.

 

I have yet to say a valid study on ethanol. Everything that I've read about it makes it sound anything but "green." The only study that I like so far is biodiesel from algae.

 

Let's look at it this way ... there is a window of time between a hydrogen based system and our heavy reliance on petroleum. Like the melting ice caps and global change, we're not going to correct things all at once ... if at all. (and some debate there is a petroleum / environmental / climate change problem at all?)

My point is that ethanol and biodiesel is something we're already producing and capable of running. It is renewable and cleaner than petroleum and does't require 'as much' importation of oil. The domestic economy is improved, jobs are kept in the US and any excess crops, waste or recycled product can now be used. Key word 'now.'

You mention the promising 'vision' of algae ... and I'm all for devoting some research toward developing these rapidly growing oil produce bio-feedstocks. Its not a far fetch idea that we'll use a variety of different fuels ... and I believe they along with improving technology like the hybrids you all are driving will pave the way toward a cleaner and more plentiful energy source.

 

W didn't mention biodiesel at all last night. It was all ethanol. Curious.

 

Who knows ... I suppose it fell into the 'other alternatives' catagory? There is pretty fast growth at the moment in biodiesel and the word 'diesel' is not on the average Americans lips unless they see the black cloud spewing from the bus ... : ) its sort of a 'commercial grade fuel' for most individuals. Oh well ... I accept that for the most part it is a speech and it is only lip service. (but from the bully pulpit and to quite a few watchers ... it would have been nice to have him include the word 'biodiesel.')

 

W wouldn't mention any other bio-diesel... the lobbyists are forcing ethanol down our throats and it's the wrong way to go. Show me a study that says ethanol in the long or short turn is better for us, compared to bio-diesel.

I stay clear from any gas station that uses ethanol blends, my car runs like crap when I do.

 

I'm all for Biodiesel ... but am not planning to protest Ethanol either.
==========
Discovery Channel News - Jan. 31, 2006 — A new study on how much energy goes into making fuels from corn and other plants shows it's a better deal than previously reported.

In recent years, "biofuels" like ethanol and "biodiesel" have been accused of requiring more energy to produce than they yield. Not so, say California researchers who have taken another look at the numbers.

"The (past) studies that reported a negative net energy assumed one should ignore co-products," said biofuel researcher Alexander Farrell of the University of California at Berkeley.

But co-products, like the leaves, stalks and husks of a corn plant, for instance, can be sold and either burned as a fuel or made into other products. "There's no good argument for just ignoring them," Farrell said.

That's especially true as biochemists are discovering ways to reduce even the woodier parts of plants into usable fuels and other products, Farrell explained.

 

This is probably why he threw in husks and "switchgrass" when he was talking about ethenol.