The public policy blog of the American Enterprise Institute

Subscribe to the blog

Discussion: (3 comments)

  1. curious and thought provoking.

    How much will the Canadian oil destined for the Keystone pipeline cost?

  2. This is not unusual. You often have academia try to advance a narrative that has little regard for reality because there are incentives that reward distortion and outright lying rather than showing things as they are.

  3. The “non food crop” (hahahaha) component of that would shock David Pimentel of Cornell University (a gutter school compared to “Princeton”). He has spent decades looking at the basic facts of energy received, conversion efficiency from sun to biomass, and final collection and conversion efficiency into fuel. If you think the conversion efficiency for corn is poor, wait until you try to collect non food crops…

    Here’s a little more information to help the zombies at Princeton with their basic math….

    However, a change in the renewable energy standards that allows for ethanol to be supplied from something other than biomass would be a huge boon to energy efficiency. There are processes that can convert methane to ethanol (as opposed to methanol, which is a bit more harsh on transportation systems and autos than ethanol) would be a big hit.

    As I remember, there was a reason coal gasification never took off – it was hard – even before the natural gas boom – for coal gasification to be cost effective. Now? No chance.

    So, if they rewrote their paper to talk about natural gas to ethanol and shale oil, I think they would be correct! Only a slight adjustment. Surely that can be taken care of in peer review… Oh, wait, it already went through peer review?

    Man, some of these peers are morooons (as the great Philosopher B. Bunny often would say…)

Comments are closed.

Sort By:

Refine Content:


Additional Keywords:

Refine Results

or to save searches.

Refine Content