|
|
Don Lancaster wrote:
Don Lancaster wrote:
Bob Eldred wrote:
I don't by that. I think you are right that is the implication but it
makes
little sense. It's basically saying that even with all of the solar
input it
still takes more energy to produce than you get out. Why should that be?
Bob
For obvious openers, diesel fuel, electricity, and crop loans.
Ethanol from corn under US farm conditions makes no sense whatsoever.
It is simply a twelve billion dollar vote buying scam.
http://www.tinaja.com/glib/energfun.pdf
Oops.
Should have said "Ethanol for energy uses from corn under..."
But, at some point it will become useful. Once the standard of living
plummetts a little ways, and we are back to the horse and carraige for
all but the upper class, you can bet that manual labour will be used to
supply the rich with ethanol fuel...
and americans will suddenly stop being 60% overweight.
|
|