Stop Biofuel Lunacy: Effects on Global Food Crisis

[mheslep]

Biomass from industrial hemp cultivation can be used to create methanol, and far more than corn can per acre. ...

Cellulosic is still too inefficient and therefore unaffordable. Check back in a couple years.

 

[H8wm4m]

First of all, please excuse my oversimplification of the subject, and my slightly off-topic post.
Your response prompted me to do a bit more research.

Cellulosic is still too inefficient and therefore unaffordable. Check back in a couple years.

Do you mean that cellulosic ethanol cannot compete with corn ethanol prices?

While it is true that cellulosic ethanol is currently more costly for the consumer than corn ethanol,
how does one judge which is the more viable ethanol of the future?

What factors must be weighed?

Can anyone biofuel solely supply the worlds liquid fuel needs?

There seems to be a general consensus that the production of corn ethanol is not economically sustainable.
I am of the opinion that the production of corn ethanol is not environmentially sustainable, especially when compared to the environmental benefits of industrial hemp cultivation.

- Industrial hemp renews soil unsuitable for other crops by breaking it up, choking out weeds, and resupplying it with nitrogen and other nutrients.
- Industrial hemp requires little or no pesticides or fertilizers due to its natural resistance and quick growth, thus reducing pollution.
- Industrial hemp is one of the fastest growing biomasses on the planet, making it the best choice for cellulosic ethanol production and thus saving valuable farmland.
- Industrial hemp can be used made over 25,000 products (as of 1938) so if ethanol demand falls, hemp crops can still be used for construction purposes, plastics, food, and more.

I am interested in hearing responses from others to the above boldfaced questions.

 

[Andre]

Some thoughts

Hemp requires cultivated land to grow. So does crops for food. Biofuels should not compete with food. There are priorities.

Ethanol (C₂H₄OH) is already a partly oxidized product of sugars, hence it's energy production is inferior to other hydrocarbonates.

The energy production of any biofuel is limited to a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of the incoming solar light energy in the order of magnitude of several 100 W/m²

First fraction: The absorbed light used in the photosynthetic process may only be a few W/m²

Second fraction: The part of the crop, suitable to fuel production is limited.

Third fraction: the loss due to conversion, transport and limited efficiency in combustion engines.

It's very likely that the area required to grow biofuel for sustainment of the energy demand exceeds area available by orders of magnitude, while we need all that area to feed mankind.

Finally, crops have a tendency to fail occasionally.

 

[mheslep]

...

First fraction: The absorbed light used in the photosynthetic process may only be a few W/m²

Second fraction: The part of the crop, suitable to fuel production is limited.

Third fraction: the loss due to conversion, transport and limited efficiency in combustion engines.

It's very likely that the area required to grow biofuel for sustainment of the energy demand exceeds area available by orders of magnitude, while we need all that area to feed mankind.

Finally, crops have a tendency to fail occasionally.

I thought this was already discussed over on the Algae thread https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=1586559&postcount=4" where it was shown it depends on the biofuel, but it could be done in a very reasonable land area. In particular a biocrop producing 10,000 gal/acre - year could supply the entire US oil market in 19,000 sq mi. By comparison, Corn ethanol at a gross 400gal/acre-year currently uses ~23k sq miles in the US. Its just not cost effective yet.