To the editor:I am one of many who are fed up with the misinformation being spread through ignorance and by special-interest groups. Following are the facts comparing gasoline and alternate fuels.
Corn ethanol: 22 percent less emissions, 1-1.3 energy ratio, 300 gallons an acre. In principle, any plant material can be used.
Sugar cane ethanol: 56 percent less emissions, 1-8 energy ratio, 600 to 8000 gallons an acre. The waste can be used to power the distillery.
Biodiesel: 68 percent less emissions, 1-2 energy ratio, 300 gallons an acre. Like corn ethanol, most any plant material can be used.
Cellulosic ethanol: 91 percent less emissions, 1-2 energy ratio. It's made from prairie grasses, household garbage, forestry waste, paper pulp, husks, leaves and stalks.
Algae: 5,000 gallons an acre. It can be harvested daily. In theory, fast-growing scum fed by power plants' exhaust could soak up carbon dioxide.
Forty percent of Brazil's cars and light trucks run on sugar cane ethanol. The winner of last year's Indy 500 used pure ethanol.
Granted, all of the alternate fuels have some drawbacks, but why are so many pushing corn ethanol plant when they seem to be the least efficient of all?
DEAN WINSTEAD, Cape Girardeau
Connect with the Southeast Missourian Newsroom:
For corrections to this story or other insights for the editor, click here. To submit a letter to the editor, click here. To learn about the Southeast Missourian’s AI Policy, click here.