Biofuels Cause More Global Warming Than Fossil Fuels!

[luchog]

Surely, using the whole plant is better than using just the grain. So what? If you eat the grain, you could still use the rest of the plant for whatever purpose it's good for. Why not eat the grain and burn the stalk?

Because burning the stalk would not yeild sufficient energy. Since it's a solid, it cannot be used as a vehicle fuel. It could be used as a power-generation fuel, but has a very low energy to mass ratio compared to fossil fuels, or even fast-growing soft woods.

The best bet for using the corn plant itself as a fuel would be a method of cracking the cellulose to simpler sugars for ethanol production. There is research into cellulose-cracking processes; but so far nothing has been developed which is commercially viable.

 

[portlandatheist]

Studies on hempseed shows it to be better than soy for producing oil as it contains 30-35% of its dry weight as oil, vs 20% for soy; and given that seeds account for roughly 50% of the dry weight of the entire plant at cultivation vs... IIRC it's about 30% for soy, it's also considerably more productive per acre. It will grow effectively in marginal soil, requiring a smaller load of organics and fertilizers. So, it can be cultivated without replacing existing old-growth forests or food crops, and therefore does not displace existing major carbon sinks, and is itself an excellent food crop. The one disadvantage is that it doesn't fix nitrogen like soy does; so some form of crop rotation with a nitrogen-fixing legume or other plant that also grows well in marginal soil (such as clover), is necessary for sustainable farming.

Which of course is in stark contrast to corn. Corn is very demanding on the soil, requires premium land, and more inputs. Corn is a loser.

 

[BenBurch]

Because burning the stalk would not yeild sufficient energy. Since it's a solid, it cannot be used as a vehicle fuel. It could be used as a power-generation fuel, but has a very low energy to mass ratio compared to fossil fuels, or even fast-growing soft woods.

The best bet for using the corn plant itself as a fuel would be a method of cracking the cellulose to simpler sugars for ethanol production. There is research into cellulose-cracking processes; but so far nothing has been developed which is commercially viable.

If you don't plow the stalks and etc back into the soil, you have to fertilize more and the soil is less well aerated.

Corn kernel isn't quite as inefficient as a fuel if burned DIRECTLY as a fuel. Corn furnaces do this.

 

[luchog]

If you don't plow the stalks and etc back into the soil, you have to fertilize more and the soil is less well aerated.

Yeah, forgot about that one. Corn is, ultimately, probably the worst choice for a biofuel feedstock.