« Back Seat Driver: Chrysler to cut models, dealerships |
Main
| Tasca makes it to second round of NHRA Winternationals »
February 8, 2008
Say it ain’t so!
Granola crunchy biofuels may actually add to global warming, according to The New York Times.
Boy, the bloom is fast coming off the biofuel rose.
Just a year or so ago, biodiesel and ethanol were all the rage; the fuels that were going to save us from both petroleum dependency on the Middle East and global warming.
Well, biodiesel remains the fuel of choice for the Professor Crackpots in their garages. Indeed, production is so low compared to petro-diesel that it barely appears on the radar screen.
Meanwhile, the ethanol “fuel of the future” miracle is looking less credible by the day. It is about 20 percent less efficient as a fuel than gasoline. And it is corrosive and can clog up engines if allowed to sit and absorb water, as it has a propensity to do.
In addition, federal subsidy programs have resulted in excess demand for corn, driving prices up, while limited outlets for ethanol has resulted in a glut, driving prices down.
Now comes the news that the destruction of natural ecosystems, such as forests and savannahs, to make way for corn production is adding to global warming.
Citing the journal Science, the NYT says the destruction of the ecosystems not only releases greenhouse gases when they are burned, but deprives the planet of natural sponges to absorb carbon dioxide.
The news is unlikely to deter production of corn and ethanol, however, as there is too much money at stake. And so we have to swallow an unexpected setback on the road to energy independence and relative climate stability.
Posted by Peter C. T. Elsworth 
at 3:12 PM to Environment
, commentary
| Permalink
Please be civil. Vicious comments, personal attacks and profanity won't be published.
