Comments on: Biobutanol — Another Biofuel Breakthrough

By: Robert Prather

Robert Prather — Thu, 29 Jun 2006 03:18:23 +0000

I don't really disagree with most of what you say, only that the government should limit itself to basic research and let the better alternative emerge. No subsidies or trade barriers, however. Even a tax on gasoline would be fine because it doesn't prejudice us against emerging technologies. It prejudices against gasoline use.

I would also quibble with your wording: we need energy diversity, not independence, which is unattainable absent a VERY MAJOR breakthrough.

By: Rob

Rob — Thu, 29 Jun 2006 03:09:32 +0000

We need a multipronged energy strategy. Biobutanol looks good but we shouldn't abandon ethanol made from switchgrass. We also need to develop more solar and wind power. We have the technology to be energy independant, we just need to make sure funding goes into a tremendous amount of expansion in these fields instead of toward fighting for someone else's democracy. No one else stepped in and helped us fight for ours, why are our sons dying for theirs?

By: Robert Prather

Robert Prather — Mon, 26 Jun 2006 20:51:13 +0000

Besides, whyTF are you so quick to defend welfare for farmers and AMD? This is a tremendous waste of resources, not only in terms of spending, but in terms of delaying superior technologies from coming to market.

By: Robert Prather

Robert Prather — Mon, 26 Jun 2006 20:48:41 +0000

It's not a political theory, but rather a technological theory, particularly as it relates to corn-based ethanol.

I would be thrilled if Congress simply left biobutanol and other technologies alone. They will prevail over corn if given a chance.

By: yetanotherjohn

yetanotherjohn — Mon, 26 Jun 2006 19:55:15 +0000

Robert,

Which state is the first presidential caucus held? How many senators and representatives want to be president (not how many have a good chance, but WANT to be)? What crops are grown in Iowa?

So you are waiting for us to stop flogging corn based ethanol based on what political theory?

By: Robert Prather

Robert Prather — Sun, 25 Jun 2006 02:16:10 +0000

davod,

I didn't see how energy intensive it is compared to ethanol. That's a good question.

I would hope those a**holes on the Hill let this slip by. It looks good so far and moves aginst it would bode ill for the country. For the life of me, I can't figure out why members of Congress would want to tie us into an inferior energy solution.

By: Alternative Energy Info. » From OutsidetheBeltway.com - Biobutanol better than ethanol?

Sun, 25 Jun 2006 01:17:41 +0000

[...] Outsidethebeltway.com describes a new biofuel from Dupont and BP called biobutanol that sounds very promising. According to the article, biobutanol provides 95% of the energy of gasoline compared to 75% for ethanol. Conventional gasoline engines can use more biobutanol without modifications than the 5-10% blend that is the limit for ethanol. Right now, production of biobutanol is more difficult and expensive to produce than ethanol, but research is underway to solve some of these production issues. [...]

By: davod

davod — Sat, 24 Jun 2006 13:17:03 +0000

It is my understanding that ethanol production is energy intensive. How much energy is required to produce biobutanol. The McCainites will slap a tariff on anything that competes with mid-west ethanol.

By: Blogger: 404 - Page not found

Blogger: 404 - Page not found — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Robert Prather, over at OTB, this mnorning, has an interesting post regarding biobutanol, which, as Robert says: It provides 95% of the energy of gasoline and is not ethanol. That means that, for the time being, it can be imported without the hideous tariff and could possibly