Is sugarcane ethanol still a good alternative?
Filed under: Ethanol, South/Latin America
85 liters of ethanol per each tonne (metric) of sugarcane harvested. This is the output of a standard sugarcane ethanol plant. As we know, 45 percent of Brazilian fuel needs are covered by ethanol. Of course, what once was thought as the easy solution to replace fossil fuels is now being blamed for a dramatic rise in food prices (or not), by as much as 86 percent. However, we found an article that states that only one feedstock has maintained prices since 2006: sugarcane.
Then there are the surface constraints. UNICA (the Brazilian association of sugarcane producers) states that only 1 percent of Brazil's agricultural land is used to produce ethanol, yet it supplies 45 percent of the country's fuel needs. UNICA also says that there's about seven times more land available from rough surfaces that can't be used for anything else, not to mention that they can plant different species of sugarcane which produce throughout the year.
Therefore UNICA's answer is "yes," ethanol is still a good alternative
[Source: El Mundo via Madrid+d]
Paris Preview: Chevy Cruze official pics released
ABG First Drive: 2009 Honda Fit Sport
New shots of the production Volt
Breaking: Franz von Holzhausen to Tesla Motors as design director!
ABG First Drive: 2009 Chrysler Aspen/Dodge Durango 2-Mode hybrids
In the AutoblogGreen Garage: 2008 Honda Civic Hybrid
ABG First Drive: 2009 Cadillac Escalade Hybrid
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
7-22-2008 @ 1:00PM
Darrell said...
America (and the world) would do well to increase the price of sugar anyways. Do it!
Reply
7-27-2008 @ 11:31PM
Michael said...
Yeah, lets make sugar more expensive! That's just what we need: more encouragement for food companies to use high fructose corn syrup crap. Yeah, GREAT idea.
Not.
7-27-2008 @ 11:33PM
Michael said...
Sugar is WAY better for you. High fructose corn syrup is pure death.
7-22-2008 @ 1:11PM
Joce03 said...
Making fuel from food, on a planet where 3/4 of the population is underfed, is ridiculous. I'm sorry but, somewhere, someone (much more important and influential than me) needs to make that clear to everyone.
Reply
7-22-2008 @ 1:50PM
dhofmann said...
What if the fuel were used to transport food?
Reply
7-22-2008 @ 4:34PM
jpm100 said...
"Making fuel from food, on a planet where 3/4 of the population is underfed, is ridiculous. I'm sorry but, somewhere, someone (much more important and influential than me) needs to make that clear to everyone"
Not anymore ridiculous than growing flowers, tobacco, or meat.
Not anymore ridiculous than paying farmers to conserve farmland (aka. paying farmers not to grow).
Not anymore ridiculous than a closet full of clothing than you wear less than once a week. How full is your closet?
We do all kinds of things with farmland, other than staple crops that would be considered fivilous by someone starving. Fuel actually serves a purpose for people's income, including growing food one day for less than what it would cost to grow it with oil if the price trend keeps going.
Reply
7-23-2008 @ 1:19AM
tankd0g said...
Lets see, we can't make fuel from food because there are starving people. We can't cover land in solar panels because there are starving people. Well its clear, we have to find some magic black liquid that bubbles out of the ground and doesn't use any farm land.
Reply
7-23-2008 @ 2:18AM
emil said...
All the ethanol bashing is sponsored by Middle-Eastern oil industry.
www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/in-defense-of-biofuels
I'm sorry for the hungry Somalians or Darfour residents - but ethanol has nothing to do with the fact that at least 2/3 of humanitarian aid is looted.
Of course the corn ethanol isn't the perfect solution and few will disagree. But this is an important interim step.
Until a better solution is found -any alternative to oil is good.
Reply
7-27-2008 @ 10:18PM
TX CHL Instructor said...
Ethanol is a mediocre fuel, and the fact that sugarcane is a slightly better feedstock than corn does not change that fact.
Reply