[CORed]

[ QUOTE ]
From what I've read, ethanol seems like a scam. We can't seem to make it in such a way as to be energy positive and the amount of land needed to switch from gasoline to ethanol would be incredibly large.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ethanol from sugarcane seems to be fairly effective in Brazil. The ethanol from corn production being done in the US is a complete boondogle, courtesy of the farm and agribusiness lobbies (ADM et al). Depending on whose numbers you believe, the ethanol from corn scheme produces approximately zero net energy. It takes approximately as much energy to grow the corn, ferment it and distill it as you get from burning the ethanol. Where does that energy come from? Oil gas and coal, mostly. Obviously this would have no economic viability without massive government subsidies.

Another problem is that a lot of agricultural production is being diverted to it, putting upward pressure on food prices. This illustrates a fundamental problem with just about any form biomass energy production. It's going to compete for limited agricultural resources with food, fiber or lumber. IMO, photovoltaic or solar-thermal energy on desert land is a much more viable renewable energy strategy than biomass. However, biomass using waste materials (use the corn for food and the stalks for energy), may have some benefit, if the kinks can be worked out. IMO, methane from biomass(possibly convereted to methanol to fuel cars), is likely more viable than ethanol for this.