Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, March 23, 2007
Ed Feulner :: Townhall.com Columnist
Ethanol isn't worth getting pumped up about, but oil shale might be
by Ed Feulner
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will Congress pass Obamacare by the end of the year?

Winter is barely behind us, and gasoline prices are already rising. Worse, experts predict more price increases are right down the road.

This poses two problems. First, higher energy prices mean families have less to spend on other necessities. Second, most of the money we spend for fuel ends up overseas, often supporting countries that don't wish us well.

To solve the first problem, we need to solve the second. More than 63 percent of the oil we burn comes from abroad. We must develop new domestic sources and reduce our dependency on foreign oil if we want to get a handle on prices.

There are no easy answers, but we can develop new sources of power. First, though, we need to move past one attempted solution that simply isn't working: ethanol.

Because ethanol comes from homegrown corn (much of it from right here in Illinois) politicians love to pretend that adding ethanol will reduce the need for foreign oil. That's why President Bush recently called for quadrupling the amount of ethanol we use. But ethanol can't solve our energy problems.

For one thing, it's expensive to refine ethanol, and it's difficult to add it to the existing fuel supply. That all costs money, which was reflected in last year's higher prices at the pump.

Also, scientists have shown that burning ethanol actually wastes money. Cornell University professor David Pimentel found that processing corn into ethanol requires 29 percent more fossil energy than the fuel it produces. Others disagree on the exact percentage, but there's no doubt it takes a significant amount of energy to produce ethanol. "There is just no energy benefit to using plant biomass for liquid fuel," Pimentel says.

And, of course, ethanol costs drivers, too. The federal government says that cars burning gasoline mixed with ethanol get fewer miles per gallon. That means more fill-ups, more often.

Fortunately, there's another possibility. If scientists can overcome some technological challenges (as well as environmental objections), oil shale has the potential to provide more than a trillion barrels of domestic oil. Continued...

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | Next >
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Dr. Edwin Feulner is president of The Heritage Foundation, a Townhall.com Gold Partner, and co-author of Getting America Right: The True Conservative Values Our Nation Needs Today .
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Ed Feulner's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Oil isn't the problem
The 150-200 years of oil in oil shale is just what is in Utah and 70% of the state is government owned land and should be mostly available for lease. However, as pointed out, the "greenies" have a fit when we talk about becoming independent of foreign oil because our deficit spending is helping lead us further into "one world government" and socialism on a world wide basis.

Canada is harvesting millions of barrels of oil from their oil sands (little different bonding than in oil shales). We have the ability but not the will.


your whole premise is in error
1. It does not cost more energy to produce ethanol than it makes. It is just not very efficent. On the micro scale it is more effecient than on the macro levels.
2. Most people are looking to supplement oil not replace it.
3. Corn is not currently a very good source because it is starchy and enzymes have difficult time breaking it down. There are other sources of sugar besides corn.
4. In the argument you talk about oil shale as being practical. Your reason is technology has and can improve. I wonder if you think that can happen with ethanol. Maybe develop better enzymes? It allways bothers me when when people write columns about things they know nothing about. It seems a extreemly worth while invesment to research and deveop rich sugar producing crops, ezymes capable of breaking down complex starches, yeast tollerant to high concentrations of alcohol, and methods to improve yeild.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.