Six Letters Re: The Ethanol Debate

Sir:
Regarding ethanol, the amount of fossil fuel or equivalent slave labor wage work make ethanol driving a exclusive privilege of the wealthy. Brazil has the world’s highest percentage ethanol from sugar cane for motor fuel. US use of current corn ethanol processes are petroleum negative and only feasible due to massive taxpayer subsidies.

If the readers of SurvivalBlog are expecting to have motor power in the age of ethanol I realistically suggest keeping down to a small displacement engine motorbike and maybe a chainsaw.
Electricity is much higher watt per acre from water solar or wind and bicycle horse or donkey cart is the best mile per acre fuel utilization. Just because a person grew up in the day of (almost) free petroleum does not mean this is a normal situation. Realistic economic study shows that the growth since the industrial revolution was due almost completely to the addition of (almost) free energy (fossil fuel) and using that power in machines that multiplied the possible man hours of work per hour a person could accomplish. Without a rising supply curve of available energy, I can see no realistic way for our 200 year level of progress to continue or to exist again.- David in Israel

 

Jim,
Engineer Steven Den Beste dealt with “alternate energy” theme some time ago. See this article. And this one.
Bottom line: Unless we’re willing to seriously reconsider reprocessing nuclear fuel and set about building breeder reactors on a monumental scale (as in a project of the magnitude of the ’60s “space race” extended for several decades) we’re not going to rid ourselves of our need for foreign oil. (I’m aware of the need for liquid fuel for transportation. Given sufficient energy, methanol may be reduced from water and carbon dioxide. But, this requires something on the scale of a nuclear reactor to make the process worthwhile.)
Biodiesel, ethanol, solar, wind, geothermal and other marginal sources of energy are fine for limited, small-scale uses. (If you need to fill a stock tank from a desert well 20 miles from the nearest power line, a windmill’s a great idea. Biodiesel is a great way of getting rid of french fry oil.) They are not worth considering as a primary means of powering our civilization. They simply cannot scale to that level. Yet, the problem is not that we are running out of energy. It is that we are deliberately choosing to freeze in the dark in the midst of plenty.
Think I’m exaggerating? Take a look at the nation’s most populated State. Regards, – Moriarty

 

Hi Jim,
I had a big conversation with a local liberal about Ethanol a few months back. She was all gung-ho about how it would save us and the environment until I presented her with the facts below. Now she rarely talks to me. Oh well.

While it is true that ethanol can be made out of the stalks, etc of the crops that have already been harvested, most of the energy of the plant is directed toward making the seeds – which is where most of the sugars, etc. that are needed to ferment into alcohol are. From what I understand, using the “waste” you get an even lower return on investment (ROI) than what I list below.

From my “conversation”:

Ethanol has some good points but it has many bad points as well. First, pollution – Ethanol, when burned in an internal combustion (IC) engine, produces less carbon monoxide (CO) but it produces more nitrogen oxide which is the main element of smog and because it has a lower latent heat of vaporization it evaporates more rapidly than gasoline which also leads to more pollution. Second, Gasoline has more energy per gallon than ethanol – about 50% more in fact. So you car that gets 30 mpg on gas can get only 20 mpg on ethanol – IF it can run on ethanol. Very few cars can run on more than 10% ethanol. Third – and worst of all – is that it takes a lot of energy to grow the crops used to brew up the ethanol. In some cases it takes up to 6 (yes six!) times the amount of energy to create the ethanol as it actually provides. In virtually ALL cases it takes more than a 1:1 ratio to produce it so ethanol will actually INCREASE our use of fossil fuels.

See this Energy bulletin article.

This accounting includes every step of the process from shipping the grain to its place of planting, plowing, planting, fertilizing and use of pesticides (both of which require fossil fuels to create), harvesting, transportation to the site of distillation, then the fuels required for that process and finally transportation to its site of final use.

Bio-diesel is better in the ROI department with it returning about 3 times the energy it takes to grow it. However this is appallingly low compared to gasoline which supplies 30 times the amount of energy it takes to produce. If you think gasoline is expensive these days, try bio-diesel which is likely to cost 10 times as much.

Now, if you drive your 30 mpg car 10,000 miles in a year using ethanol (now it is 20 mpg) you would need 500 gallons of ethanol to get you through the year. According to this site: (http://science.howstuffworks.com/question707.htm)
that would require 1.84 acres of corn. Since there are about 200 million cars in the US, if even a third of them drive 10k miles per year then we would need 122 million acres of crops just to provide fuel for our vehicles. Since the US has about 360 million acres of farmland and only about 43 million acres of that is considered prime farmland where will we grow all this fuel?
Ethanol sounds wonderful, but it is NOT a reasonable substitute for fossil fuels. Regards, – Tim P.

 

James:
This link contrasts other reports that ethanol is energy negative. – Bill in Indiana

 

Dear Jim:
Lately, politicians have been extolling the virtues of ethanol as the cure to our energy woes. For the heck of it, I decided to look into this (energy in vs energy out), after all I am a scientist. Ethanol production makes some interesting assumptions. It assumes that we can produce enough to make it worth our time.
The answer is ‘yes and no’.
As long as the crop, fermentation facility, distillation facility (processing) and end user are next to each other (to negate losses in transportation), it looks iffy, but possibly ok. This ignores the COST of production, only the energy surplus from the crop. However, a bad year may wipe out any energy gains, same for long transportation distances, etc. There was a study done some years ago that looks at several bio- fuels and biodiesel looks to be the most promising to me. NOT ethanol. A synopsis of the study can be found here and here.

This tells me we are putting our time and money into a marginal process with ethanol and that biodiesel looks more promising, at least on paper – implementation may be just as bad. But just based on this study, you would need to burn 3 billion barrels of ethanol to produce 4 billion barrels, giving you a net gain of 1 billion for use in the populace in general. What is wrong with that picture?
Another trouble I for see is the Sierra Club, Earth First, Congress, and similar organizations screwing things up, even if it were feasible and cost efficient. Suddenly we will need to put a LOT more farmland into production; and this may mean such sundry items as forests may need to be cleared, water diverted for irrigation, and vast capital invested into big, oily plants. The iron and synthetics to build those plants need to come from somewhere, perhaps where there are spotted owls…..
I work in the chemical industry, supplying specialty chemicals for pharmaceutical research. I am well aware that petroleum is a finite resource and an extremely useful one:
http://www.ioga.com/special/petroproducts.htm
http://www.anwr.org/features/oiluses.htm
I can see the need to get going on nuclear plant construction and development of these other energy sources. I think ethanol will not be worth it until they can get cellulose ethanol up and running. Even then, depending on costs, it may not be worth it. Right now they have to use expensive sugars (starch), which could be used for something else. Cellulose just gets plowed under each year. And as I stated before, we are just looking at energy surpluses, NOT COSTS. I don’t think anyway wants to burn ethanol if it costs $10/gallon to produce… Then there are other issues, such as the current drought from Texas up into the Mid-west that would also impact your gas tank. And of course you need fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides to farm corn.
The problem has never been a lack of an available solutions, only that politicians are seldom legislating based on common sense, looking at cost/benefits, but instead are usually legislating based on who pays their bills. Regards, – Jim

 

Mr Rawles:

If you can make sugar from something, you can make ethanol. Cows eat hay, which is for the most part cellulose, which is made up of starch. Enzymes in a cows stomach(s) break down the cellulose into molecules of starch, which are further converted into glucose, which is then used by the cow for energy. All animals which eat hay do this. The enzyme responsible for most of the cellulose breakdown is called “cellulase”. See this article for some scientific background on cellulase enzyme research. – H.L.

Odds ‘n Sods:

I have once again updated and expanded the SurvivalBlog Glossary. Let me know if I missed any terms or if you spot any errors. Thanks!

o o o

Reader “The Rabid One ” mentioned this article from The Guardian, about search engine privacy. He notes: “The story is of Google’s storing of search data and the user’s IP address. It also references a couple search engines that do not keep such data.” I agree with the advice to stop using Google. They log not only IP addresses but also your search phrases. Taken out of context, in a courtroom someday far in the future, those search phrases might be misconstrued. I also recommend that anyone concerned with their privacy use a secure browser interface such as Anonymizer or  StealthSurfer.

o o o

Don’t miss the article “The Secret Price of Gold” by Kevin DeMeritt, posted over at Gold-Eagle.com. Here are a few quotes from DeMeritt’s piece:
“After peaking in 2001, world gold production has been steadily slipping.”
“In terms of today’s dollars, gold reached $2,176 in 1980.”
“Back in 1980, the price of an average new car was $7,609, while, according to Car and Driver magazine, the average cost of a light vehicle today is $27,800.”

Note from JWR:

The high bid is still at $75 in the SurvivalBlog benefit auction for a copy “Rawles Gets You Ready” preparedness course, (Normally $149, retail.) The course was kindly donated by Jake Stafford of Arbogast Publishing. Please submit your bids via e-mail. This auction ends on September 15th.

Letter Re: Uses for CONEXes at a Retreat

Jim,
Here are a couple more thoughts on CONEX containers . . . or shipping containers in general.
If you are using them for storage, be aware that uninsulated containers (more abundant) tend to sweat and cause moisture damage to the items being stored. My solution was to buy only insulated refer trailers, which can sometimes be purchased for even less money than 40 ft. shipping containers. In either case, it’s very important to waterproof the roof as much as possible. Sometimes a secondary roof is advisable.
Another method to secure as much as storage space for the dollar is to place two containers parallel to each other about twenty to twenty-five feet apart, then build a roof structure in between. In fact, some of these new metal roof structures that are available can be specially ordered to fit whatever dimensions you may need. – C.B.

Two Letters Re: EpiPen–Another Item for the Retreat Medical Kit

Jim:
I also wanted to send you a comment about the Epi pen. The injection of epinephrine (“Epi”) is in large part an informed decision that with a little experience or training is an easy call to make. Epinephrine or adrenaline is only to be used when there is a directly life threatening emergency so most of the concern with cardiac stress is overruled by the overriding need to have a open airway. Children can survive amazing amounts of epi without stressing their hearts so in a life or death airway case give the pen. Benadryl is also on the top of meds to have in your bag, chewed or crushed it absorbs almost as quickly as injected does and is indicated after the epi starts to work (your patient will need water as the epi will stop all saliva flow.)
Benadryl (Diphenhydramine Hydrochloride) has almost no bad side effects and (after consulting your doctor) is very safe even for toddlers.
Benadryl is also good for sleep aid and motion sickness.
As always my comments assume that the reader has either years of advanced medical training and field experience or a qualified instructor at hand to consult. – David in Israel

 

Jim,
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. So is a lot, in the wrong hands, but you’re still likely to be better off with it than without it:
emedicinehealth.com

AAFP on Anaphylaxis

emedicine.com on Anaphylaxis

BTW, diphenhydramine (Benadryl) does not “treat the cause” of anaphylaxis. It reduces the effects of histamine release, which is triggered by an immune response. It is a useful adjunct to epinephrine. It will not prevent airway compromise or vascular collapse! In no way is Benadryl alone an adequate treatment for anaphylaxis, nor will it reliably prevent a life-threatening recurrence after initial treatment with epinephrine. (This latter seems to have found its way into the folklore of “bee sting allergies.”)

OBTW, if you get an EpiPen, get a “2-Pak.” (They’re now being packaged that way.) Although epinephrine can be life-saving, more than one dose may be necessary. (Discuss this with your physician.) One pen is not sufficient.

Persons with a history of anaphylaxis should see their doctor and inquire about desensitization treatment. The best way to treat anaphylaxis is to prevent it.

I cannot overemphasize the necessity of obtaining competent medical advice before using epinephrine and the need to obtain competent medical care after using it. Failing to administer epinephrine in a timely manner can be lethal, but using it incorrectly will make you just as dead. Regards, – Moriarty

Odds ‘n Sods:

It is nice to see the prices of both silver and gold bouncing back. I holding by my prediction that after the current summer doldrums the precious metals will see a strong rally this Fall. For those of you that took my advice and sold your spec or vacation house at the top of the market and invested the proceeds in silver: hang on! By late 2007, the dollar will go down versus many foreign currencies, silver will go up substantially, and house prices will go down substantially, especially in the most overheated markets. Those simultaneous moves will be a “win-win.” I think that you might be able to buy two comparable houses with the cash generated when you liquidate your silver in late ’07 or early ’08. I’m not kidding.

   o o o

By way of “vlad” from The Claire Files Forums, here is a link to a discussion about Tire Balls. (A product recently mentioned on SurvivalBlog.)

   o o o

Pat Buchanan’s new book predicts demographic doom–the death of the west.

   o o o

Ham operators: Dust off your 6 Meter Rigs and warm them up. You are in for a treat Fred The Valmet-meister reports: “This evening [from the San Francisco Bay Area] I worked Alabama, Tennessee, Georgia and Florida!!! This is most incredible [6 Meter propagation] opening I have ever heard of.”

Jim’s Quote of the Day (230 Years Ago, Today):

"The hour is fast approaching, on which the Honor and Success of this army, and the safety of our bleeding Country depend. Remember officers and Soldiers, that you are Freemen, fighting for the blessings of Liberty – that slavery will be your portion, and that of your posterity, if you do not acquit yourselves like men." – George Washington (General Orders, 23 August, 1776)

Four Letters Re: Uses for CONEXes at a Retreat

James:
We used some CONEXes to build a workshop. We built a wall halfway down the box with a door in it, insulated the front half, and put in power and air conditioning. It works fine, [but] the back half gets really, really hot. I’d recommend painting the container a heat reflecting color, try to put it under some trees out of direct sunlight, build some kind of roof over it or something to cut the heat like trellis planted with vines. We use the Rough Neck RV roof mounted air conditioners. I would recommend cutting a hole in the side and mounting a regular window mount air conditioning unit. – Mosby

 

Jim:
The main site for the use of buried ConEX containers for survival purposes is Undergroundcontainer.com/. It is also fun to see other this that have done with these such as housing like at this British site or this one in New Zealand or this “fabprefab.co” site in the U.S. They are also used warehousing. See “a warehouse on wheels” and this site in New Zealand. Also remember, this idea isn’t completely new, people have been using other means such as culvert (as suggested at Walton Feed) and old school busses. All in all, ConEx containers seem to be a good choice.

Following the teachings of Mike Oehler (also a survivalist at heart) – I think it is important to keep in mind that flat roofs leak, especially if buried. Therefore, keeping in mind the weight limitations (dirt and by 30 to 114 pounds per cubic foot depending upon makeup and moisture), you should put down hard insulation foam board, plastic or rubber roof over it and drape all the way over the edge and down and out, the put down some clean (nothing sharp to puncture) dirt on top, maybe 18 inches in the center and 6 inches on the side creating a pitch – and then plastic over that. Now put the final dirt over that again, leaving at least a slight pitch as ground level for drainage away from the center of the underground structure. Your uppermost plastic sheet (or rubber roof material) should fan out at least 3 feet past the sides of buried structure to get water further away from it. Remember, with a 40’ footer (and get the hi-cube variety if you can) – you may need to brace with the weight at the center as these were not made to be buried, they were made to be stacked – so the strength is in the corners. This is all done presuming the area you put it drains well – and is not in a floodplain or in any danger of flooding. The one thing an underground bunker can not protect you from is a flood.

As for cutting them open and making modifications, joining them, just like with a steel building or pole barns, cut straight, and cover edges with “C” channel, and then secure (probably weld in this case) and seal water and weather tight with silicone or whatever works for you. I have thought about making mobile homes on steroids this way as well. However, there is a lot of steel work involved and I personally lack the skills, equipment, etc. Still – there may be economic opportunity here for someone who has an “in” to make this work. Here’s the idea – since ConEx containers stack – put one down to be your basement or cellar, and put the next one, the ground level mobile home right on top of it. You still move the upper one and put another one in its place (but it might take a crane). Secure the upper one to the lower one with cables, etc., so that extreme forces will not separate the two, no matter what. Maybe even weld them together at the corners. The amount of work to cut in windows, and insulate is substantial though – but look what you would get – a mobile home that would be the last or only one standing after that tornado, or whatever else comes through, with a storage basement. Note that a standard stairwell is a space killer in tight areas – you may want external main entry and a simple latter an hatch in a closet for emergencies. Note, you could even earth berm up to the bottom of the windows of the upper unit, and then put a little insulation and siding over the exposed parts, and still have an earth roof on it. This could make for a great cheap retreat. – Rourke

 

Sir:
There are some really architectural and elegant solutions using these containers for homes on this site. There are also many other pre-fab ideas that are fertile ground and food for thought in retreat building throughout this very creative site. Many ideals are very thrifty and unusual architectural uses of common materials. Jim, please keep up the impeccable work and folks, if you are reading this, please sign up for the Ten Cent Challenge! Really… I’m serious! – ANETPROPHET

 

Jim:
Here are two good sites with info/photos and ideas for modifications of shipping containers to be used as housing or storage.
Containerbay: Database of various conceptual projects or real world examples.
Global Portable Buildings Inc.: Supplier of pre-modified units, good pics and info on various options…
Regards, – S.H.

Letter Re: Canned Coffee Beans

Hi Jim
I have gone through the “Rawles Gets You Ready” preparedness course twice now and find it to be very good data and will be using it extensively in my preps.

Since I am a coffee drinker, I started thinking about how I could store coffee and where I could purchase whole beans in cans. I then thought of a friend of mine that owns a espresso cafe that I go to daily
and it turns out that for her espresso and espresso drinks, she uses Illy coffee from Italy. Illy is about as good as it gets and it turns out that she buys it in 6.5 lb nitrogen packed cans that come with a
screw-in top. The stuff lasts for years. They also pack it in a much smaller can, around 14 oz, but it is not sealed nearly as well as the large can. I will be placing an order with her for my coffee beans.

I told her about your blog and she said that she would be happy to take orders by e-mail. Her name is Janice Cooper and her e-mail address is caffecoop@aol.com Illy is not cheap, but it is one of the
best espresso roasts that you can get. I have no financial connection with this business, other than I patronize it regularly.

I also drink a lot of tea and I have found the best place to get good, cheap tea in cans is Chinese grocery stores. The tins are not airtight, but I imagine that they could be sealed with paraffin or repacked with nitrogen or oxygen absorbers. I have had tea, packed like this, for years and the flavor keeps very well. Thanks, – Kurt

Odds ‘n Sods:

Mark Steyn in Australia comments on global demographics: It’s breeding obvious, mate.

   o o o

Regarding the recent question on Ethanol blends long term storage–here is part of the answer. SurvivalBlog reader Shawnee contacted the makers of PRI-G gas stabilizer to ask about how it works with ethanol blends. This was their reply: “Our initial experience with ethanol blended gasoline has been very positive. PRI-G not only provides enhanced stability to the blend, but protects on lubricating value as well.”

   o o o

The USDA has not replied to the query about small farmers and NAIS submitted by Walter Jefferies of NoNAIS.org. It has been four months since he sent it in.

Two Letters Re: The Ethanol Debate

Jim:
Regarding the following snippet in Odds ‘n Sods:

As quoted by our friend Bill Bonner at The Daily Reckoning: writing in Fortune magazine, Lester Brown notes that ethanol is not only a waste of money, if taken up widely, it would actually mean starvation for many of the world’s poor people. “The grain required to fill a 25-gallon tank (with ethanol) would feed one person for a year,” Brown writes.

I was under this impression too. Don’t get me wrong I think its a waste of time and resources, but ethanol doesn’t have to be [derived from] the grain. Ethanol can be made from the stalks and leavings AFTER grain harvesting. I don’t have any resource to direct you to as I can’t remember where I read it. Sorry 🙁 I do remember also….to compensate for the oil from ONE refinery, you would need an area a little bigger than Texas committed to growing said ethanol crops. So if you do the math every field in America would be needed almost committed to said
function for [the replacement of the output of] all the oil refineries that we have. – Cruzan

 

Mr Rawles:
Making ethanol from corn uses the starch of the grain but leaves the oil and the protein, so “starvation” isn’t really as much of an issue as some make it out to be. Regards, – Jim K.

#1 Son Replies: There is some interesting research going on, using enzymes produced by microbes living in the digestive system of termites to turn cellulose (wood, straw, etc.) into sugars that could be used for making ethanol. See this article in Wired News.

Letter Re: An Amazing Tale of Survival: Nine Months Adrift in the Pacific

Dear Jim,
I think this would be a good story to link to on SurvivalBlog. Three fishermen survived on a 25 foot boat for nine months at sea, doing drastic things to ensure their survival. Two of the men on the boat died because they didn’t have the will to live (there were originally five on the boat.) As a sea kayaker who takes safety very seriously, it is a sobering story. Take care, – C.R.