R&D is critical. 

Corn based ethanol doesn't appear to be the answer, but that doesn't mean we should just throw up our collective hands and go back to oil.  Corn was a good start, now we need to take it to the next level, which is where R&D comes in. 

But for that, we need funding.  Which all leads back to the homophobic, sex obsessed, economically blind, flat earth Republicans leading Virginia.  If they'd stop screwing around with our personal lives and use a little foresight, they might figure out that such R&D investments could pay off huge for the Commonwealth in the future.

Brazil as a country took the lead in Bio Fuels and today their dependance on Foreign Oil is small.
Iowa is far ahead of the rest of the country. I understand there are quite a few new Millionaires in Iowa, let allow employee ownership which is good for their retirments.

Beyond the Jobs, Economy, Self Reliance, Polution and a bunch of other good reasons for Bio Fuel, I see this as the as the biggest weapon agianst the WAR on TERROR.

We are daily funding the terrorists when ever we fill up our gas tanks. Just how stupid can we and out legislators be?

achieved energy independence by a combination of: 1) increasing its oil PRODUCTION (think deep-sea drilling technology); 2) sugar cane-based ethanol (totally not possible on a large scale in the United States), and 3) the fact that Brazil is a miniscule energy consumer compared to the United States.  In other words, Brazil is not a country that is appropriate to use as a model for the United States in any way, shape, or form. 

In contrast, the United States consumes 25% of the world's energy (and emits around 25% of its anthropogenic carbon dioxide).  In large part, this is due to a massively inefficient transportation sector (think Hummers) combined with a "sprawl" pattern of development.  Not smart, and also not at all like Brazil.  Anyway, our best bet here in the US is to double or triple auto fuel efficiency (plug-in hybrid technology, anyone?), to push "smart growth" strategies (see Arlington for a great example), and to rapidly implement/adopt "green building" solutions (again, Arlington is moving in this direction).  Simultaneously, we should be subsidizing wind and solar big time, taking the money out of absurd subsidies for super-wealthy Big Oil.  In fact, the latter is what the Dems are moving to do in Congress right now, but we'll see how far they get and how far they're willing to go.

May I point out that most of us know what the size of Brazil's land and population is and use of gasoline is far less then the USA, but they are one fine example of what any country can do if they put there minds together.

Cutting the import of oil is a large concern of mine. The first is funding the terrorists and the second is that the POINT when reserves in the ground surpasses the worlds CONSUMPTION. If we have not reached that point now, it is projected the world will meet that point between now and 2012. So yes, any thing we do to cut the uses of oil reserves of what we have in the ground, and save for the oil to feed machinery to keep bearings, Etc. in working order.

Talking about what else to use besides sugar cane. How about POTATOES. For all the grown products that can be used try the site at the end of this posting and while your there make a contribution.

Yeh, I guess I got a little insulted that someone would point out the draw backs of my posting. Maybe I should have done a dairy about it, but since I am no expert, I have left it to the people who are.

One other comment. The Democrats are talking loud right now about bio fuels, but I still wonder when OIL COMPANY money will buy off some of them. Remember the oil embargo. The D's were in power then and held it for another 20 some years. To date only some states have done anything, while the National programs have falling by the way side. I keep wondering about the subsidy Car Manufacturers are getting to make some E-85 efficent cars. Was that a money gave away to car manufacturers or an effert to get to all E-85 vehicles. Since not much was done about Manufacturing Plants on the National Level, one can only wonder. 

http://www.ppvir.org...

May I point out that most of us know what the size of Brazil's land and population is and use of gasoline is far less then the USA, but they are one fine example of what any country can do if they put there minds together.

Cutting the import of oil is a large concern of mine. The first is funding the terrorists and the second is that the POINT when reserves in the ground surpasses the worlds CONSUMPTION. If we have not reached that point now, it is projected the world will meet that point between now and 2012. So yes, any thing we do to cut the uses of oil reserves of what we have in the ground, and save for the oil to feed machinery to keep bearings, Etc. in working order.

Talking about what else to use besides sugar cane. How about POTATOES. For all the grown products that can be used try the site at the end of this posting and while your there make a contribution.

Yeh, I guess I got a little insulted that someone would point out the draw backs of my posting. Maybe I should have done a dairy about it, but since I am no expert, I have left it to the people who are.

One other comment. The Democrats are talking loud right now about bio fuels, but I still wonder when OIL COMPANY money will buy off some of them. Remember the oil embargo. The D's were in power then and held it for another 20 some years. To date only some states have done anything, while the National programs have falling by the way side. I keep wondering about the subsidy Car Manufacturers are getting to make some E-85 efficent cars. Was that a money gave away to car manufacturers or an effert to get to all E-85 vehicles. Since not much was done about Manufacturing Plants on the National Level, one can only wonder. 

http://www.ppvir.org...

A lot of people see the problems we face as simply a supply issue.  We just need "more", and then we can relax.  The problem is this - if you start to run the numbers about how much you can produce - even with the cellulosic ethanol once they have finished the R&D (and even then assuming that the problems *can* be solved), you realize that we use a *HUGE* amount of fuel, and replacing significant fractions of it with anything grown doesn't appear to be possible with conventionally grown crops of one sort or another.

In my opinion we ought to be also talking about the demand side of the equation.  More efficient vehicles, and reducing the amount of travel.  Unfortunately folks don't want to hear that message - they just want the status quo to continue.  Ultimately though it will be simple economics that will force the issue - if the price of fuel goes up high enough, then people will demand more efficient vehicles.  Any existing vehicles in the national fleet that get poor fuel economy will end up getting written off, and someone is going to end up taking a loss on the things.

And let me get a dig in here at Detroit - they are pushing flex-fuel cars that can run on E85.  Ever notice that these all seem to be the huge gas-hogs?  Wonder why they don't make flex-fuel small cars?  There is a loophole in the CAFE rules whereby flex-fuel gas-hogs aren't penalized like a gasoline-only gas-hog.  Thus they are just pushing this to avoid penalties for making too many gas guzzlers.

More production, whether of conventional fuels, biofuels, or whatever, will NOT be sufficient to solve our energy and environmental problems.  It's also not the "low hanging fruit" in cost/benefit terms.  What IS the "low hanging fruit?"  No question, it's energy efficiency, combined with selected use of renewable, clean energy sources like wind and solar.  One of the best works on this issue is "Winning the Energy Endgame" by the Rocky Mountain Institute.  Also, see the Apollo Alliance and specifically its Ten Point Plan for Good Jobs and Energy Independence:

1. Promote Advanced Technology & Hybrid Cars
2. Invest In More Efficient Factories
3. Encourage High Performance Building
4. Increase Use of Energy Efficient Appliances
5. Modernize Electrical Infrastructure
6. Expand Renewable Energy Development
7. Improve Transportation Options
8. Reinvest In Smart Urban Growth
9. Plan For A Hydrogen Future
10. Preserve Regulatory Protections

Note that most of these recommendations revolve around energy efficiency and "smart growth," with some expanded renewable energy development as well.  I couldn't agree more.  Frankly, it's a no-brainer.

So, why haven't we done this yet?  Several reasons, such as this and this.  Why SHOULD we do this?  See here.  What are we waiting for?  Leadership.  What don't we have right now in the White House?  See previous answer.  What do we need in the Congress, the states, the counties and cities?  The leadership we're lacking in the White House.  What else do we need?  To elect someone President in 2008 who "gets it" on energy security and the environment.  If not, this generation will be cursed by our children, grandchildren, and generations to come...

Absolutely, the path forward should be holistic:

* What do we want to do? And, restraining this through conservation choices.
* How efficiency are the systems using energy?
* What are our sources of power?

Energize America (www.ea2020.org) recognized the holistic requirements, with measures for efficiency and for renewable energy -- along with the Sustainable Development Agency to coordinate government action and, perhaps, foster conservation.

Absolutely better fuel economy has to be a big part of the solution.  Recently, the big carmakers seem to be using hybrid technology to increase horsepower while maintaining fuel economy at current levels instead of maintaining horsepower while improving fuel economy.  That seems rather dumb to me.

In terms of the amount of fuel that can be produced, we may be able to produce more than is currently calculated.  Some of the new fuel crops that are being developed are capable of growing two crops per year (like winter wheat). That should mean almost twice as much fuel per acre.

I have a major problem with using farmland to grow fuel for SUVs rather than food for people (or, heaven forbid, turning it back to forest, prairie, etc).  The obvious answer is energy efficiency, combined with environmentally sound renewables like solar and wind.  Again, I ask, why aren't we doing this? 

Will we are trying to build new cars, cut back, etc. there needs to be a committee to find out why "Miles Per Gallon" is dropping. I have 2 cars on the road now, had 4 last year. I keep those cars well amintained and tuned. Since Katrina hit I have noticed a drop in fuel economy. With My Hyundai I always got 34-35 MPG, now I am only getting 28-30. With the Astro Van, which I seldom drive the MPG was 20-22, now it is around 17 MPG. But that is not only myself noticing that problem, I have discussed with others and they say the same.
Bio Fuels will have a drop in MPG, but gas has had 15% since the oil embargo in the past. At one time Citgo was the only company not using the additive. My MPG is from before Katrina.
Why has the middle grade dropped in Octane? Has all grades dropped in octane?
More fuel efficient cars are great, but lower the octane where MPG is drastically reduced, accomlishs nothing.

Haven't noticed that with my car, but I'll ask the people I know at the US Energy Information Administration.

Gordie

The drop you are reporting sounds extreme, some of it may have to do with the 10% ethanol that was added to most gasoline about a year ago.  I think the ethanol may result in a small drop in mpg, but it should not be as drastic as you report.

but I was told the percentage was 15% and it was done back further then a year ago. I remember reading on gas pumps that ethanol was in most gasoline more then 6 years ago. I was told by a dealer in '02/'03 that citgo was the only gas without ethanol.

Yes, new enzymes are being developed.  They are actually small bugs that literally pee crude oil.  Oil companies have been testing breeding for these creatures for many years.  I wish it was more simple.

Dan

I think you're talking about microbes not enzymes.  The small bugs are microbes -- actually bacteria.  I think that their main use is actually not in the production of biofuels, but in the clean up of crude oil spills.  The bacteria actually digest the crude oil and convert it to carbon dioxide (I think).

The enzymes I mentioned break down the plant material into smaller compounds that are more easily fermented into ethanol or converted into biodiesel.

Lowell

I totally agree that conservation is essential.  On the other hand, even if we had only high efficiency vehicles, I think there are some advantages to growing our energy instead of importing it from the middle east.