Hi guys!!!

this guy is producing a soundbite that evades the issue he is creating a straw man critic

Right! I have the same hair as this dude! So it has got to be true. Donald Trump just announced about it.

This is a complete non-answer. If you don't want to play games a good start would be to say what part of ethanol production should be excluded from the energy calculation.

The anti-ethanol study conducted by Tyler Lark and associates titled "Environmental outcomes of the US Renewable Fuel Standard" is nothing more than a rehashing of the nonsensical reports written by a bug professor from Cornell, named David Pimentel, and an associate from UC Berkeley named Tad Patzek. Those anti-ethanol studies were sponsored by the oil industry, and they were roundly attacked and refuted almost immediately after their publication. The attacks came from many sides including other academics and their schools. One of the harshest rebukes came from Mr. Patzek's own institution, the University of California at Berkely. Interestingly, Mr. Patzek left Berkeley soon after the disputation and joined the staff at the University of Texas at Austin - you know, Texas, as in the home of the so-called "American" oil industry. Patzek is now Professor of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering and Director of the Upstream Petroleum Engineering Center at the King Abdullah University of Science and Technology in Saudi Arabia - you know, Saudi Arabia, as in the home of the global oil industry. Tyler Lark and his associates added nothing new of any value. In response to the Tyler Lark study, I have just published an in-depth rebuttal on my website. It's titled "SLAM! Shutting the File on the Tyler Lark Anti-Ethanol Study." It can be found at: www.theautochannel.com/news/2022/03/13/1117416-slam-shutting-file-tyler-lark-anti-ethanol-study.html.

1) By reflecting away 30% of ISR the albedo, which would not exist w/o the atmosphere/GHGs, renders the earth cooler than it would be without that atmosphere like that reflective panel set behind the windshield. Remove the atmosphere/GHGs and the earth would become much like the Moon and Mercury, a barren rock with a 0.1 albedo, 20% more kJ/h, hot^3 on the lit side, cold^3 on the dark. Nikolov, Kramm (U of AK) and UCLA Diviner mission all tacitly agree. 2) the GHG up/down welling, “trapping”/”back” radiating/delaying/intercepting, 100 % efficient, perpetual warming loop requires "extra" energy which according to RGHE theory comes from 3) the terrestrial surface radiating "extra" energy as a LWIR ideal black body which 4) cannot happen because of the non-radiative heat transfer processes of the contiguous atmospheric molecules and as demonstrated by experiment, the gold standard of classical science: principia-scientific.org/debunking-the-greenhouse-gas-theory-with-a-boiling-water-pot/ 1+2+3+4 = 0 Greenhouse Effect + 0 Greenhouse gas warming + 0 man caused climate change. Version 1.0 032721

0:21 dirk-girl.com

One of the professors I actually hope I get to work with. I'm impressed by his works on alternative fuels in IC engines.

Essentially, yes. In the big picture, it's our job to decide what's in our best interest as to what energy process we use. I choose methanol given modern science tools, but fully recognize and accept the similar benefits package of Ethanol. Henry Ford recognized Ethanol as the better choice, nearly 100 years ago. With Cellulose ethanol, we likely would have never had the greenhouse problem. If humanity ever has a die-off, Cellulose ethanol will be very useful. -For example, if the big cities were removed, we would have 1/3 the fuel needs of today. I don't want to say we need a die-off, but if we breed people that need X systems and y energy sources to live, without any self control, a die-off is basically guaranteed, I.E. we will do it to ourselves by our own failures.

not bad

The Sugar cane mills and the Palm oil mills are energy sufficient and excessive by themselves including covering energy for fertilizers and farming machinery, as such further downstream of getting cellulosic ethanol is a further net gain in energy which are actually originated from the sun.

Hi Celeste, Thank you for your interest in this activity! There is currently a version of the bioprospecting lab activity for educators available on our website at glbrc.org/education/educationalmaterials. We are also working on an updated version of this activity; please contact Leith Nye at [email protected] if you would like more information.

Hello - Would love to use this lab if you are willing to share, please contact me

Very good description of a complex question. It is good to see cellulosic ethanol research and production moving forward.

This is the best explanation of biodiversity that I have ever come across, thank you so much!