# Is ethanol as a fuel actually energy effective **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [April 22, 2005, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-ethanol-as-a-fuel-actually-energy-effective/300679 "2005-04-22T22:45:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![scr4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/59ef9b/32.png) [@scr4](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scr4)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2005, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-ethanol-as-a-fuel-actually-energy-effective/300679/41 "2005-05-04T17:08:56Z")
> [@threemae](#): > > So, it’s like you’re putting in 1.74 gallons of CO2 emissions and getting out 1 gallon worth of CO2 emissions in work. For gasoline, this number is much lower. Therefore, I think it’s a quite convincing argument that ethanol is an extremely bad idea for the environment in terms of global warming. Not true. When you use fossil fuels, you are digging carbon from the ground and releasing it into the atmosphere as CO2. When you use biofuel, you are removing CO2 from the atmosphere to produce (grow) the fuel, and relasing the same amount back into the atmosphere when you burn it. Even if you use fossil fuels for the production process, you are getting 1.35 gallons worth of work with only 1 gallon’s worth of CO2 released into the atmosphere. And there’s no reason you can’t use biofuels in the production process as well. It means for every gallon of ethanol produced, 0.75 gallons goes back to power the ethanol production industry, and only 0.25 gallons gets shipped to gas stations. That way there’s no net release of CO2 into the atmosphere. ---
**Author:** ![justwannano](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/7ab992/32.png) [@justwannano](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/justwannano)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2005, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-ethanol-as-a-fuel-actually-energy-effective/300679/42 "2005-05-18T16:00:06Z")
Table of Contentshave noticed less traffic on key interstates as well. Ethanol bill passes Kent Thiesse 05/11/05 The Corn & Soybean Digest Minnesota was the first State in the Nation to require a 10 percent ethanol blend in its gasoline, and Minnesota will now be the first State to require that 20 percent of its gasoline be from ethanol. The compromise version of the so-called “E-20 Bill” (S.F. 4) passed the Minnesota Senate by a 57-8 margin, and the Minnesota House by a 100-32 margin, and will be signed into law on May 10 by Governor Tim Pawlenty. The new E-20 legislation will change the current 10 percent ethanol requirement in gasoline to 20 percent, effective on August 30, 2013. This assumes that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approves the E-20 ethanol blend as an acceptable fuel blend, similar to E-10 and E-85. ---
**Author:** ![Kevbo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e47774/32.png) [@Kevbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kevbo)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2005, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-ethanol-as-a-fuel-actually-energy-effective/300679/43 "2005-05-18T18:43:51Z")
The statedreduction in fuel economy is based on burning ethanol in a designed-for-gasoline engine. If the compression ratio were increased to use ethanol’s high octane rating to advantage, then most, if not all, of the difference could be reclaimed by utilizing the BTUs more efficiently. Furthermore ethanol is much more viable in a fuel cell car than fossil fuels. This provides a path to exceed the effiency limits of heat engines imposed by the Carnot cycle. ---
**Author:** ![BoringDad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ad7895/32.png) [@BoringDad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BoringDad)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2005, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-ethanol-as-a-fuel-actually-energy-effective/300679/44 "2005-05-28T15:03:58Z")
> [@threemae](#): > > Okay, just so that we can be totally clear here, no one at all expects ethanol to return a net gain in energy. That just plain violates the laws of thermodynamics. > > If we put 10 gallons of fossil fuel into a tractor, distilling, etc. and get 8 gallons of ethanol back, that is a waste because we’ve produced even less of what is something that has virtually identical useability. > > If we put 10 gallons of fossil fuel into a process and get back 100 gallons of ethanol, then the process starts to make more sense. Did you not read all the comments prior ot this or did you just ignore them? We do NOT use 10 gallons of fossil fuel for 8 gallons of ethanol. The major fossil fuel used in the production of ethanol is COAL. You cannot put coal in your gas tank. That is why the process was used in Germany during the war as mentioned above: they needed vehicle fuel, and had plenty of coal. America has plenty of coal, but not enough vehicle fuel. That is why all the arguments about how much energy it takes to produce, etc, are meaningless. Ethanol production is a strategic issue, not an environmental or economic issue. It reduces our dependance on oil. It at worst breaks even economically. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-ethanol-as-a-fuel-actually-energy-effective/300679.md?page=2)