Replace or Displace?
Tuesday, February 27th, 2007Friends,
I would like to suggest we ask if a policy of replacing liquid fossil fuels for transportation with ANY form of ethanol makes any sense at all? Does this strategy yield the greatest degree of energy independence?
Consider, even cellulosic ethanol at 5:1 net energy will be burned in an I.C.E. with only 30% efficiency. As a result, the true net energy of the ethanol I.C.E. system is a mere 1.5:1
Given that buildings are the source of 48% of climate changing gases, perhaps we should look at a displacement strategy. That is, if we use solid biofuels for space conditioning we can re-allocate the displaced fossil fuels to transportation.
Our grass-based pellet fuels have a net energy of 14:1 and are combusted in systems with at least an 83% efficiency [USDA FS & PFI data]. As a result, the true net energy of grass fueled space conditioning is on the order of 11.6:1. This is a 673% increase in net energy of the system compared to ethanol.
-- JockGill



