![]() | France and Italy: is nuclear power the way for energy independence? | The Oil Drum | Public transport: making the right mobility choices | ![]() |
63 comments on From Botswana to New England - a different story
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
63 comments on From Botswana to New England - a different story
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Support The Oil Drum
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Campfire
TOD:Europe
- Unique Times -- and the Future
- Peak Gold, Easier to Model than Peak Oil? - Part I
- Carbon Capture and Storage
TOD:Canada
- In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
- The Round-Up: October 24, 2008
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
TOD:Australia/NZ
- The Bullroarer - Friday 27th November 2009
- International Energy Agency calls 'Peak' on OECD Oil Demand
- Australian Senate: Peak Oil motion defeated 31:6
TOD:Net Energy
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- From the Wilderness
- Life After the Oil Crash
- Peak Oil Crisis
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Matthew Simmons
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- EcoGeek
- Eco Street
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- Early Warning
- The Energy Blog
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Calculated Risk
- The Crash Course
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
Peak Oil Primers
Beware email scams!
Beware email scams claiming to be from this site. We do not have any job openings. If anyone contacts you about a job at The Oil Drum, do not reply to them, and definitely do not give them any personal information or send them money. Read more here.
“Men argue; nature acts.”
—Voltaire
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Nate Hagens, Gail the Actuary, Prof. Goose
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Heading Out, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Sam Foucher, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Campfire: Glenn, Jason Bradford
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:Canada: benk, Libelle
- TOD:ANZ: Big Gav, Phil Hart, aeldric
- Emeritus: Stuart Staniford
- Technician: Super G
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.










GAIA Host Collective
There is a fixation on natural gas usage for ethanol on TOD which does not make much sense and may reflect on the U.S. in general. Electricity production uses more natural gas than ethanol. When EROEI is applied (erroneously IMO due to unlike and unlike) it is lower than ethanol. Not only that, ethanol's usage of natural gas largely just replaces the usage of natural gas for MTBE before its phase out.
Electricity is almost a sacred cow even though most of it is produced from fossil fuels. It is hard for me to see the energy gain in switching to electric powered cars with the current infrastructure. True there may be an environmental gain as pollution may be easier to control at central plants, but there is a big loss of energy in electricity production unless it comes from solar or wind. And there is not enough of that currently.
I have to agree with Franz, it is difficult for Americans to apply logic. Being an atheist I think it is because the U.S. prides itself on being a religious nation. Logic and religion do not mix.
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." Albert Einstein
Your ethanol drivel is as logical as Pat Robertson's sermons are religious.
Recommended reading:
"I Don't Believe in Atheists", Chris Hedges, Free Press, 2008
and for people interested in an informed analysis of the best use of land and insolation in the (non-food) bio-energy domain:
http://www.reap-canada.com/library/Bioenergy/BIOCAP_REAP_bioenergy_polic...
The linked study deals specifically with the comparative effectiveness of various energy production incentives for greenhouse gas mitigation, but is nonetheless very useful in understanding why ethanol production is a tragic waste of resources.
"Logic and religion do not mix."
I disagree with that statement personally, but unfortunately, for the majority of Americans, it is all too true.
http://www.oilcrash.com/articles/tomorrow.htm
About 1/3 of Americans believe that Jesus will come and save them within their lifetime, so there is no reason to conserve energy/invest in renewables/worry about peak oil/think at all.
Luckily, Britain isn't quite as 'retarded' (to quote the above poster), but our politicians are almost as short-sighted.
What evidence can you provide that support your linking these two assertions?
If you just replaced all cars with plug-in hybrids and used eletricity (derived from the gas the cars wold be burning) to power short trips, you'd reduce fuel consuption by nearly half. (Engineer-poet already made those calculations.) That is because big generators are more efficient than car motors.
And, there seems to be no viable route to renewably powered cars except by eletrifying them, since most renewable (and nuclear) are good for generating eletricity, and hydrogen (the second best candidate) has a very big set of problems. Ok, maybe hydrogen-eletricity hybrids are more viable, but those still count as eletrical cars.