Biofuels have direct, fuel-cycle GHG emissions that are typically 30-90% lower than those for gasoline or diesel fuels. However, since for some biofuels indirect emissions-including from land use change-can lead to greater total emissions than when using petroleum products, policy support needs to be considered on a case by case basis.
The IPCC has released a finalized draft of its Working Group III report. Sourced from Forbes, their analysis: that ethanol is worse than petroleum. The Working Group itself managed to say... Well, after a quick read-through of chapter 8, it appears they managed to keep any actual meaning occluded by a thick screen of political double-speak. So, I guess they said whatever you would like them to have said since nobody can prove any different.
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Tuesday April 22 2014, @08:05PM
Makes a person wonder how massaged the "fuel saving" economics were, eh?
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Tuesday April 22 2014, @08:23PM
Well, the push to ethanol was never about fuel saving, it was always about energy independence.
The sad bit about is that it appears to have failed to meet either goal.
Note also an interesting wiki artical on cellulosic ethanol [wikipedia.org]. It explains the various means of getting from plants to ethanol, as well as some research that is in the pipeline.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Tuesday April 22 2014, @08:28PM
Too bad that using cellulose didn't become a Thing back when we had mountains of used newspaper... wonder if disposable diapers are a prospect.
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.