You are a master .. really.
OK.. now my take.
Directly to the point. The key value of your analysis is this:
3100 l ethanol per hectarea maize
All the other data can be checked. Oil consumption in cars I think is very realiable. The amount of grain produced in the EU is also well-known. So it all comes down to this figure.
As you say this value gives roughly a ratio of 15% of oil using the whole land dedicated to maize.
Now, let's us going to make the following assumptions. assume the efficiency of cars is doubled..quite an easy target.
now imagine that we use a high tech crop now in development who triples the output of ethanol or equivalent biodiesel.
With this modification this spetial crop could provide all the biofuel necessary for the whole fleet with the same area dedicated to maize.
So my take is that biofuels should be used from new high-energy yield crops that could probably be found in the literature. Those crops should be very easy to process. This, plus high efficiency cars makes biofuels possible. Otherwise, it is not possible.
So we are dealing with choosing the proper crops and the proper incentives to agriculture and to force fuel efficiency.
We therefore have to give this input to the comission. It is not about the crop who would benefit the big agribusiness but about whcih crop could yield 6000/1000 liters per hectarea being a very easy and enviromentally simple/fiendly crop.
Which crop?...that is the big question now.
A pleasure I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude
Still, let's have a go at it. (I feel like a bit of fun!)
The American Coalition for Ethanol is an advocacy group all in favour of ethanol and especially corn(maize) ethanol. This is from its FAQ (pdf) :
How many gallons of ethanol can be made from a bushel of corn? With today's technology, one bushel of corn yields 2.8 gallons of ethanol. And that number is constantly increasing. Just a few years ago, that number was closer to 2.5 gallons per bushel of corn. How many bushels of corn are needed for a typical ethanol plant? How many acres of corn would be needed to satisfy that demand? An "average" ethanol plant today might be able to produce 50 million gallons of ethanol annually. A plant this size would require approximately 18 million bushels of corn. At the 2004 national corn crop average yield of 140 bushels per acre, approximately 128,500 acres of corn would be needed to supply the ethanol plant.
OK. Got it? Oh, maize crop yields are rather higher in the US than in the EU, so we should just revise the numbers down a bit to find an EU equivalent.
What's wrong? Gosh darn, those numbers are in gallons and bushels and acres. So we'll convert them to litres and tonnes and hectares. But watch out! These are US gallons, not imperial! And US bushels, not British! And acres... No, the acre is the same, roughly 40% of a hectare, multiply acres by 2.5 and you get hectares.
So a US gallon is 3.785 litres. Easy. And a bushel weighs... Nah, a bushel is a dry liquid measure! The weight of a bushel depends on the specific weight of what's measured! (I love this, kc, you're going to be able to develop something for the ongoing "myth and relativity of narrative explanations" meme out of that rational unit of measure that depends on what's measured... Though in fact there's nothing unreasonable about it at all...) So we look up "bushel" in Wikipedia and it tells us a US bushel of corn (maize) can be construed to have an average weight of roughly 25 kg!!!
Let's go:
Now, if we have to suppose miracle high-energy maize... Well, advocates hint at it, but the truth is there's nothing anywhere near ready to plant. (It would, of course, immediately be inviting GM research.) Frankly, if such varieties were easy to create, they'd already be growing them, because it would increase the energy value of corn flakes, sorry, animal feed.
The truth is the tropics produce higher-energy crops thanks to the sun. And first-generation biofuel crops in Europe are not all that exciting a prospect. Second-generation, maybe.
No, the acre is the same, roughly 40% of a hectare, multiply acres by 2.5 and you get hectares.
140 bu/acre x 2.5 = 350 bu/ha
The truth is the tropics produce higher-energy crops thanks to the sun.
OK.. the simple question is if first generation plants like rapseed give similar numbers.
Wathc out.. you just need a factor of three to tip the scale. If there is no factor of three in any crop, first-generation out.
Actually I was thinking about second-geneation. I think there should be simple plants or algae allowing for 6000/10000 liters per ha.
So if you can confrim that the others first generation plants give 3000 I would say so in the input requesting inmediately the research and selection of secon generation crops.
This would be my take....becauae I cerainly think that 6000 liters per ha with some non tytpical crop is possible...I do nto know how enviromentally simple though...
That is science fiction, isn't it? Considering that crops (domesticated plants) have been bred for thousands of years to increase nutrient yield, I doubt you can hope for a super corn or anything like that [unless you genetically engineer corn to use all the energy it puts into growing a 2m long stalk into making more kernels...
Really, the question here is whether it is reasonable for the EU to aim for 5% ethanol/biodiesel by the end of the decade. What is the environmental impact? WHat is the land use impact? Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman
Unfortunately, for all I have read, it has only been over a fortnight and there are a large number of aspects I have simply laid aside for lack of time. (Or expert knowledge). So I don't have all the numbers on every crop at my fingertips.
If, by a factor of three, you mean multiplying the energy yield from the sun (not, of course, as a result of adding energy inputs such as more fertilser) by three, I think I can say it's not on in any foreseeable future, and not even with GMs. (GMs generally offer pretty modest advantages, linked of course to chemicals etc). A GM (or X-breed) that would suddenly triple its energy storage without increase of non-solar energy inputs would be a revolution we would be hearing about, and hearing about, imho. Its first application would surely be food, which brings us back to Point A: we should be producing food rather than vehicle fuel.
But I wil not be so sure with algae or with some oter very siple organism..wher the quantity of area needed will be much more lower. this is, the crops we are talking take a lot of space per unit energy.
So... I think that if you number are rigth.. I will be for looking into these alternative organisms...
By the way.. it wa actually close to 15 % a factor of 3 plus doubling efficiency of cars makes it 90%...so enough for a very goof fleat.
Do we include it in the input?
