[Changleen]

What a nice guy! He has your long term interests at heart after all!

http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyID=2006-10-12T180602Z_01_N12209962_RTRUKOC_0_US-ENERGY-BUSH.xml&WTmodLoc=PolNewsHome_C1_[Feed]-7

Bush worried low pump prices may slow new fuels

ST LOUIS (Reuters) - President Bush on Thursday said that falling gasoline prices are "good news" for consumers, but said he was worried that lower pump costs would stunt development of alternative energy fuels.

"My worry is, however, that a low price of gasoline will ... make us complacent about our future when it comes to energy," Bush said at a government-sponsored renewable energy conference in St. Louis.

The national price for regular unleaded gasoline dropped 5 cents over the past week and 78 cents in the last nine weeks to $2.26 a gallon, according to the Energy Information Administration's weekly survey of service stations.

That's the lowest price since mid-February after prices hit a summer high of $3.04 a gallon in early August.

Bush said the United States was "too dependent" on foreign oil, and that developing alternative energy fuels, like cheaper ethanol, would help the U.S. economy and improve the nation's energy security.

 

[Westy]

Tax the **** back to $3.00, exclude diesel to keep the trains and trucks running cheap and provide refunds/tax credits to those who try to make a difference with more efficient vehicles/public transport/fund bike lanes/Nukular power plants.

 

[skinny mike]

translation: my buddies in the oil business are complaining about not raking in enough of a profit because gas prices are lower.

 

[sanjuro]

Hey's the price of gas is $2.60!!!!!! I am going to destroy my solar panels tonight!!!!!

 

[RenegadeRick]

Tax the **** back to $3.00, exclude diesel to keep the trains and trucks running cheap and provide refunds/tax credits to those who try to make a difference with more efficient vehicles/public transport/fund bike lanes/Nukular power plants.

Good idea, but it won't happen until after the elekshun, if at all.
More than likely on 11/8 we will nuke Iran and the problem of low priced gasoline will quickly resolve itself.

 

[SofaKingBanned]

translation: my buddies in the oil business are complaining about not raking in enough of a profit because gas prices are lower.

another translation: hey, remember how low gas costs (cuz of Republicans) this election.

 

[Silver]

I love the way he worries about things like he is Joe Six-Pack. It's almost like he has no idea he's the president and has control over things like policy...

 

[Westy]

Good idea, but it won't happen until after the elekshun, if at all.
More than likely on 11/8 we will nuke Iran and the problem of low priced gasoline will quickly resolve itself.

It will never happen because there aren't any big NuKular/solar/alternative fuel industries to buy off the politicians. If you think only the Republicans are in the back pockets of the corporations you are deluded.

 

[SofaKingBanned]

It's almost like he has no idea he's the president and has control over things like policy...

atleast Reagan had the courtesy to wait until he left office to lose his mind.

 

[DRB]

It will never happen because there aren't any big NuKular/solar/alternative fuel industries to buy off the politicians. If you think only the Republicans are in the back pockets of the corporations you are deluded.

The corn lobby makes the petroleum lobby look like a bunch of six graders running for office.

 

[Westy]

The corn lobby makes the petroleum lobby look like a bunch of six graders running for office.

No ****. The whole corn based ethanol thing is rediculous. As far as renewable agriculture based fuels go biodiesel seems to be much more promising.

The one horrible summer I spent in Nebraska I noticed all gase had 10-20% ethanol content. Why? not exactly a lot of emmision problems in the middle of f'n nowhere. Damn corn pushers.

 

[ohio]

The corn lobby makes the petroleum lobby look like a bunch of six graders running for office.

I don't buy that. Corn/farm lobby is strong, and ethanol is ridiculous, but there's not way they wield the power of oil. Not that it matters... their interests (for the most part) are not mutually exclusive.

 

[ohio]

No ****. The whole corn based ethanol thing is rediculous. As far as renewable agriculture based fuels go biodiesel seems to be much more promising.

The one horrible summer I spent in Nebraska I noticed all gase had 10-20% ethanol content. Why? not exactly a lot of emmision problems in the middle of f'n nowhere. Damn corn pushers.

Biodiesel is unquestionably a better option. The refining process is FAR more efficient than almost any other option... on the net, it's a beautiful thing. Unfortunately there isn't a single operation in the US that produces it in a scalable manner. My brother in Seattle is part of a startup that will be the first steady-state biodiesel refining op in the country, but its only just about to come online and will only serve industrial and commercial apps for at least the first year, probably two.

 

[DRB]

I don't buy that. Corn/farm lobby is strong, and ethanol is ridiculous, but there's not way they wield the power of oil. Not that it matters... their interests (for the most part) are not mutually exclusive.

I'm not kidding. The petroleum industry is fractured in its lobbying efforts. Its more broken up across various aspects of the process in addition to companies doing their "own" efforts.

A lot of the power of the corn lobby comes from its tactics of not only lobbying politicians but suzy and steve homemaker (literally the names used in a document I saw one day). Then also getting external companies to do their marketing as well (think about the GM ads and Ford is supposedly about to make a big push soon at their behest.) You don't think those companies don't know what y'all know about ethanol but still tons of push.... And if you live in a farm district, you get the push at the voter level big time.

The power of the corn lobby is making many in the petroleum rethink how they do things. The ethanol thing got crammed down oil's throat and their wasn't a single thing they could do about it.

EDIT: And the new ethanol requirements were not something that the petroleum industry wanted to deal with at any level.

 

[DRB]

Biodiesel is unquestionably a better option. The refining process is FAR more efficient than almost any other option... on the net, it's a beautiful thing. Unfortunately there isn't a single operation in the US that produces it in a scalable manner. My brother in Seattle is part of a startup that will be the first steady-state biodiesel refining op in the country, but its only just about to come online and will only serve industrial and commercial apps for at least the first year, probably two.

Linky?

http://www.biodieselmagazine.com/article-web.jsp?article_id=1140

I saw in this article that DamilerChrylser has been delivering Jeep Liberty diesels with B5 and they will be fueling all of diesel Ram's with biodiesel. Its B5 but they are extending warranty coverage to B20.

 

[$tinkle]

Linky?

http://www.biodieselmagazine.com/article-web.jsp?article_id=1140

I saw in this article that DamilerChrylser has been delivering Jeep Liberty diesels with B5 and they will be fueling all of diesel Ram's with biodiesel. Its B5 but they are extending warranty coverage to B20.

been a few months since i followed this technology; have they figured out coking in engines (which rob them of their going-in longevity)?

 

[DRB]

been a few months since i followed this technology; have they figured out coking in engines (which rob them of their going-in longevity)?

I suspect that if they are putting them under the engine warranty then something must be working.

 

[ohio]

been a few months since i followed this technology; have they figured out coking in engines (which rob them of their going-in longevity)?

Not sure what youi mean by coking (because this really isn't my area, and I'm feeling my way by touch), but it was the removal of sulfur that killed the natural lubricity of diesel. From what I understand, biodiesel can restore that lubricity (and associated longevity) without the harmful environmental effects of sulfur. I hear it is likely that future diesel regulations will require a percentage of biodiesel in the blend... similar to ethanol in gasoline.

 

[ohio]

Linky?

It's thin because they literally JUST started up about a month ago.
http://www.planetaryfuels.com/

 

[$tinkle]

Not sure what youi mean by coking (because this really isn't my area, and I'm feeling my way by touch), but it was the removal of sulfur that killed the natural lubricity of diesel. From what I understand, biodiesel can restore that lubricity (and associated longevity) without the harmful environmental effects of sulfur. I hear it is likely that future diesel regulations will require a percentage of biodiesel in the blend... similar to ethanol in gasoline.

i believe i was thinking about SVO (straight veg oil), like how one would get behind carl's jr (or you can look here for a "supplier"). there's a couple old motor heads on a local board who have really taken off with this technology.

there's even some [url="http://www.tucsonweekly.com/gbase/Music/Content?oid=oid%3A76074]bluegrass band[/url] who powers their tour bus on veggie oil. for SVO, a major concern is paraffin build-up, which needs higher combustion to better burn off the residue.

 

[rockwool]

translation: my buddies in the oil business are complaining about not raking in enough of a profit because gas prices are lower.

That is how I read it too. But it's not only buddies but family too.

It will never happen because there aren't any big NuKular/solar/alternative fuel industries to buy off the politicians. If you think only the Republicans are in the back pockets of the corporations you are deluded.

True. The Dems get a piece of that cake too even it's not as big. Go Green Party!

No ****. The whole corn based ethanol thing is rediculous. As far as renewable agriculture based fuels go biodiesel seems to be much more promising.

The one horrible summer I spent in Nebraska I noticed all gase had 10-20% ethanol content. Why? not exactly a lot of emmision problems in the middle of f'n nowhere. Damn corn pushers.

Don't damn them. Sure they are looking after their biz but this time it is actualy giving a positive change to the current situation. You'll be amazed if you saw the figures of what 10-20% of ethanol can do to clean up the emissions but particularly make it more biodegradable. I saw some figures on that but it was about different biodiesel blends. I'll try look it up.

Biodiesel is unquestionably a better option. The refining process is FAR more efficient than almost any other option... on the net, it's a beautiful thing. Unfortunately there isn't a single operation in the US that produces it in a scalable manner. My brother in Seattle is part of a startup that will be the first steady-state biodiesel refining op in the country, but its only just about to come online and will only serve industrial and commercial apps for at least the first year, probably two.

I'm also convinced the diesel engine if far superior, even though NOx and the particles emissions that are to high. Several European diesel car manufacturers offer their cars with a particle filter now days, but I've heard it doesn't work with biodiesel due to it clogging the filters...

Running straight vegetable oil or waste vegetable oil SWO/WVO could be even better since it doesn't have any of the chemicals used in biodiesel to thin the oil. Here's a link to the oldest SVO converting company: http://www.elsbett.com/

Linky?

http://www.biodieselmagazine.com/article-web.jsp?article_id=1140

I saw in this article that DamilerChrylser has been delivering Jeep Liberty diesels with B5 and they will be fueling all of diesel Ram's with biodiesel. Its B5 but they are extending warranty coverage to B20.

VW has been delivering all their d-cars ready for B100 for years. In Sweden all diesel contains up to 5% RME in it.

If you have a diesel car with an expired waranty you can convert it your self by just changing the rubber hoses and seals to ones made of Viton.

 

[Westy]

Don't damn them. Sure they are looking after their biz but this time it is actualy giving a positive change to the current situation. You'll be amazed if you saw the figures of what 10-20% of ethanol can do to clean up the emissions but particularly make it more biodegradable. I saw some figures on that but it was about different biodiesel blends. I'll try look it up.

When you consider the fuel required to make ethanol from corn, the fertilizer and insectacides required to grow the corn the total environmental impact from burning a gasohol mixture isn't as clean as you think.

 

[rockwool]

When you consider the fuel required to make ethanol from corn, the fertilizer and insectacides required to grow the corn the total environmental impact from burning a gasohol mixture isn't as clean as you think.

Ethanol can be made by a number of things of which hemp has been proven the best. Hemp doesn't need fertilizer or insectasides, it grows faster than anything else, it produces more cellulose than anything else, it can grow in colder weather than most plants (like rapeseed that is Europes #1 source) and Monsanto hasn't got a patent on it!

The world needs ethanol, methanol ethylester and ethanol ethylester blends in the fossile fuel to make it become so much more biodegradable. Still looking for that page that explained how long it takes for different fuels to get broken down. Anyways, some things might be worse, dunno, but as a whole it is muy better than petro diesel.

Found this emissions sheet though:
http://www.biodiesel.org/pdf_files/fuelfactsheets/emissions.pdf

AVERAGE BIODIESEL EMISSIONS COMPARED TO CONVENTIONAL DIESEL,
ACCORDING TO EPA
Emission Type B100
B20
Regulated
Total Unburned Hydrocarbons -67% -20%
Carbon Monoxide -48% -12%
Particulate Matter -47% -12%
Nox +10% +2% to
-2%
Non-Regulated
Sulfates -100% -20%*
PAH (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons)** -80% -13%
nPAH (nitrated PAH’s)** -90% -50%***
Ozone potential of speciated HC -50% -10%
* Estimated from B100 result
** Average reduction across all compounds measured
*** 2-nitroflourine results were within test method variability

http://www.biodiesel.org/pdf_files/fuelfactsheets/LifeCycle_Summary.PDF

The overall lifecycle production of hazardous solid wastes from biodiesel is 96%
lower than overall production of hazardous solid wastes from diesel. However, the
overall life cycle production of non-hazardous solid wastes from biodiesel is twice as
great as the production of non-hazardous solid wastes from diesel. The study notes:
"Given the more severe impact of hazardous versus non-hazardous waste disposal, this
is a reasonable trade-off."

This is interesting from another point of view:
http://www.ei2025.org/current_editorial.asp

Compared to a July 2006 international oil price of $70/barrel, we find that a more representative ‘true’ cost of oil is in the $168 to $214/barrel range. At current costs of refining, distribution, and taxes, this environmental, social, and security premium brings the price of gasoline to between $5.48 and $6.55 per gallon.

 

[rockwool]

This is interesting about the Energy Balance/Life Cycle Inventory for Ethanol, Biodiesel and Petroleum Fuels.

http://www.mda.state.mn.us/ethanol/balance.html

"Corn ethanol is energy efficient, as indicated by an energy ratio of 1.34; that is, for every Btu dedicated to producing ethanol, there is a 34-percent energy gain."

The concept of "input efficiencies for fossil energy sources" was introduced as a component of the study. This was meant to account for the fossil energy used to extract, transport and manufacture the raw material (crude oil) into the final energy product (gasoline). According to the study, gasoline has an energy ratio of 0.805. In other words, for every unit of energy dedicated to the production of gasoline there is a 19.5 percent energy loss.

In summary, the finished liquid fuel energy yield for fossil fuel dedicated to the production of ethanol is 1.34 but only 0.74 for gasoline. In other words the energy yield of ethanol is (1.34/0.74) or 81 percent greater than the comparable yield for gasoline.

"Biodiesel yields 3.2 units of fuel product energy for every unit of fossil energy consumed in its life cycle." The report continues, "By contrast, Petroleum diesel's life cycle yields only 0.83 units of fuel energy per unit of fossil energy consumed." According to this analysis, the energy yield of biodiesel is (3.2/0.83) 280 percent greater than petroleum diesel fuel.

This adresses a little bit what Westy said but from an energy point of view:

Another consideration discussed in the 2002 net energy report relates to the specific demand for liquid fuels and the relative abundance of energy sources used to make these renewable fuels. The report explains, "Only about 17 percent of the energy used to produce ethanol comes from liquid fuels such as gasoline and diesel fuel. For every 1 Btu of liquid fuel used to produce ethanol, there is a 6.34 Btu gain."

 

[rockwool]

Found some on this page that might interest some.
http://www.gobluesun.com/biodiesel_vs_diesel.php

The U. S. economy relies heavily on diesel-powered vehicles for transportation and industry.
• Diesel represents 20% of all US transportation fuel consumption, or 56 billion gallons per year.
• Diesel engines provide the power to move 94% of all freight in the U.S
• 95% of all transit buses and heavy construction machinery use diesel.
• Every day, diesel power transports 14 million children to school, moves 18 million tons of
freight and moves 14 million US commuters via bus.
• The diesel engine is 30% to 200% more efficient and more durable by 50% to 300% than the gasoline engine.

estimates the total market potential of biodiesel -- using current technology and agricultural capacity -- to be 1.5 billion gallons. A biodiesel market at this level could replace 10% of current on-road U.S. diesel consumption.

It is estimated that 53% of US dollars spent on crude oil leave the country, contributing to huge trade deficits and jeopardizing our national security through the vulnerability of critical energy supplies.

If the true cost of using foreign oil were imposed on the price of imported fuel, renewable fuels, such as biodiesel, probably would be the most viable option. For instance, in 1996, it was estimated that the military costs of securing foreign oil was $57 billion annually. Foreign tax credits accounted for another estimated $4 billion annually and environmental costs were estimated at $45 per barrel. For every billion dollars spent on foreign oil, America lost 10,000 - 25,000 jobs."

(NBB, 2003)

 

[Changleen]

 

[ohio]

estimates the total market potential of biodiesel -- using current technology and agricultural capacity -- to be 1.5 billion gallons. A biodiesel market at this level could replace 10% of current on-road U.S. diesel consumption.

That's the kicker... there's just not enough arable land to replace diesel with biodiesel. We're talking a fraction of the market even at the most optimistic. However, some is better than none and there's never going to be one single solution to all our problems.

Bio/yeast-based ethanol and methanol production is another interesting one, as it would get around the enormous energy currently required to refine ethanol...

 

[rockwool]

"Nobody want to plant di carn, everybody want to raid di barn..."
I think it's Capelton

 

[DRB]

That's the kicker... there's just not enough arable land to replace diesel with biodiesel. We're talking a fraction of the market even at the most optimistic. However, some is better than none and there's never going to be one single solution to all our problems.

Bio/yeast-based ethanol and methanol production is another interesting one, as it would get around the enormous energy currently required to refine ethanol...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15219871/from/RS.1/

Texas has 52 million acres of mesquite trees, said Montey Sneed, a marketing executive for Pearson Bioenergy Inc. of Aberdeen, Miss., and founder of Texas Ethanol Co. Sneed, of Vernon, sees mesquite is a renewable "feedstock" to make ethanol.

Cutting a mesquite tree down agitates it, and it grows back fiercely. It's renewable at least every 10 years, and it's one of the hardest woods out there — a plus for a biofuel feedstock.

Pearson's process can turn a ton of "waste biomass" into 214 gallons of ethanol, Sneed said. The company has a proprietary method that turns biomass into gas in the first stage. In the second stage, the gas is converted to ethanol.

No one has built cellulosic ethanol refineries in the United States yet, although the technology is in use in places like Japan.

"But it would not surprise me if we saw this beginning within five years from now," Ansley said.

That's going to depend a lot on fuel prices. "If gasoline dips down and stays low, we as a society tend to forget our needs for alternative fuels," he said. "We sort of become lazy again, so any funding to help this out kind of evaporates."

Then when the next crisis crops up, everyone's interested again, Ansley said.

Though the thought of agitated trees makes me nervous for some reason.....

 

[ohio]

Though the thought of agitated trees makes me nervous for some reason.....

That's when they're most unpredictable and dangerous, especially during the rut.

Pretty cool stuff. I don't know much about it, except my old biotech prof was making progress on enzymatic refinement processes and recently got acquired so it must have been promising.

Did you see any figures on potential production volumes for mesquite or total cellulosic ethanol?

 

[rockwool]

That's when they're most unpredictable and dangerous, especially during the rut.

Pretty cool stuff. I don't know much about it, except my old biotech prof was making progress on enzymatic refinement processes and recently got acquired so it must have been promising.

Did you see any figures on potential production volumes for mesquite or total cellulosic ethanol?

Found this (it is in javascript and I don't know mucha dis compewter stuff.. can I dl a program from some where?) about hemp as a crop:

http://www.hempcar.org/hempfacts.shtml

*Farming 6% of the continental U.S. acreage with biomass crops would provide all of America's energy needs.

*Hemp is Earth's number-one biomass resource; it is capable of producing 10 tons per acre in four months.

*Biomass can be converted to methane, methanol, or gasoline at a cost comparable to petroleum, and hemp is much better for the environment. Pyrolysis (charcoalizing), or biochemical composting are two methods of turning hemp into fuel.

*Hemp can produce 10 times more methanol than corn.

*Hemp fuel burns clean. Petroleum causes acid rain due to sulfur pollution.

*The use of hemp fuel does not contribute to global warming.

*One acre of hemp can produce as much usable fiber as 4 acres of trees or two acres of cotton.

*Trees cut down to make paper take 50 to 500 years to grow, while hemp can be cultivated in as little as 100 days and can yield 4 times more paper over a 20 year period.

*Hemp stems are 80% hurds (pulp by-product after the hemp fiber is removed from the plant). Hemp hurds are 77% cellulose - a primary chemical feed stock (industrial raw material) used in the production of chemicals, plastics, and fibers. Depending on which U.S. agricultural report is correct, an acre of full grown hemp plants can sustainably provide from four to 50 or even 100 times the cellulose found in cornstalks, kenaf, or sugar cane (the planet's next highest annual cellulose plants).

*One acre of hemp produces as much cellulose fiber pulp as 4.1 acres of trees, making hemp a perfect material to replace trees for pressed board, particle board, and concrete construction molds.

http://www.hempcar.org/biofacts.shtml

*Biodiesel is the only alternative fuel in the US to complete EPA Tier I Health
Effects Testing under section 211(b) of the Clean Air Act, which provide the most
thorough inventory of environmental and human health effects attributes that
current technology will allow.

*The lifecycle production and use of biodiesel produces approximately 80% less
carbon dioxide emissions, and almost 100% less sulfur dioxide. Combustion of
biodiesel alone provides over a 90% reduction in total unburned hydrocarbons, and
a 75-90% reduction in aromatic hydrocarbons. Biodiesel further provides
significant reductions in particulates and carbon monoxide than petroleum diesel
fuel. Biodiesel provides a slight increase or decrease in nitrogen oxides
depending on engine family and testing procedures. Based on Ames Mutagenicity
tests, biodiesel provides a 90% reduction in cancer risks.

*Biodiesel is safe to handle and transport because it is as biodegradable as
sugar, 10 times less toxic than table salt, and has a high flashpoint of about
300 F compared to petroleum diesel fuel, which has a flash point of 125 F.

*The Congressional Budget Office, Department of Defense, US Department of
Agriculture, and others have determined that biodiesel is the low cost
alternative fuel option for fleets to meet requirements of the Energy Policy Act.

*An important factor that is not usually considered when calculating the costs and
benefits of industrial feedstock materials is the macroeconomic effect associated
with domestically produced, renewable energy sources. Economic benefits of a
biodiesel industry in the US would include value added to the feedstock (oilseeds
or animal fats), an increased number of manufacturing jobs, an increased tax base
from plant operations and income taxes, investments in plant and equipment,
improvement of our trade balance, and reductions in health care costs due to
improved air quality and greenhouse gas mitigation.

*Dr. Hayes concluded that, "If the state of Iowa were to mandate the use of a 20
percent biodiesel blend in its state vehicle fleet where feasible, the total
additional cost of this policy would range from $400,000 to $500,000. If it could
be shown that this policy would result in a new five million gallon biodiesel
plant in the state, then the policy would create more new tax revenues than it
would cost and would clearly be in the best interest of the state."

*Biodiesel contributes jobs to the local economy. Economic work conducted at the
University of Missouri estimated the benefits of producing biodiesel in a
metropolitan region. This study concluded that 100 million gallons of biodiesel
production could generate an estimated $8.34 million increase in personal income
and over 6,000 additional temporary or permanent jobs for the metropolitan
region.

 

[rockwool]

Can anybody help me decipher this javascript?

http://www.hempcar.org/petvshemp.shtml

I've been to their site http://www.javascript.com/ but can't find the propper tool.

 

[DRB]

That's when they're most unpredictable and dangerous, especially during the rut.

Pretty cool stuff. I don't know much about it, except my old biotech prof was making progress on enzymatic refinement processes and recently got acquired so it must have been promising.

Did you see any figures on potential production volumes for mesquite or total cellulosic ethanol?

First of all 1 gallon of gasoline has to be replaced with 1.5 gallons of ethanol due to the energy yields. That's significant.

okay i've got some of this at the office, this is mainly from memory so forgive my inaccuracies.....

All the data I've seen have the numbers all over the place with nothing that seems all that reliable. Sorta when you get 20 answers to the same question.... I think the problem is that the yields vary significantly with the biomass used. But if a common number exists I think is about 60 gals per ton of dry biomass with current technologies. It also seems that over 100 gals per ton starts making the economics work a little better. I note dry because its very prominent in most of the literature.

The only active refineries, that I know, are in Japan and Canada and those are really test facilities with inconsistent results. And costs of upwards of $2.00 a gallon, which simply won't fly. That number really needs to be under a $1.00 to work and those types of numbers aren't expected until 2013 (I think). Some company as been claiming to be setting up facilities in Louisana using left over sugar cane and rice straw and California for the rice straw (I think) but can't remember the details. I also seem to remember that there were some significant capital holes in their proposals, like 15 to 20 million short (and these are small facilities)

Tying yields and refineries together, economic viability required these refineries to process over 7500 tons of biomass a day. That's definately not a small deal nor are those facilities cheap.

I know that any half baked enzymatic processes are being bought up as quickly as they show even mild success. Not saying his is half baked .... you know what I mean. Its really the costs that revolve around these that are the sticking point.

Oddly enough the one thing I don't hear a lot about is the waste issues that these processes incur. It ain't cupcakes and milk that are byproducts of these processes.

I think that its a ways off but certainly there is promise but it ain't going to be cheap especially with oil at $45 a barrel.

Rockwool is providing a lot of fluffy propaganda which the Corn mafia (oh yeah they love this crap as well) puts out thru their machine. Its not necessarily wrong just more optimistic then realistic.

I seem to remember saying something like this to me before

you think the best of your <insert corn mafia> and let you be proven wrong with time. I do the opposite. It has shown to error less often.

 

[rockwool]

Oddly enough the one thing I don't hear a lot about is the waste issues that these processes incur. It ain't cupcakes and milk that are byproducts of these processes.

I think that its a ways off but certainly there is promise but it ain't going to be cheap especially with oil at $45 a barrel.

Rockwool is providing a lot of fluffy propaganda which the Corn mafia (oh yeah they love this crap as well) puts out thru their machine. Its not necessarily wrong just more optimistic then realistic.

I seem to remember saying something like this to me before

Well Dr Dre, sry DRB, I don't know al lto much about the waste issues exept for that the hemp that has been pressed for oil can be used as protein fodder for animals. Chemicals I have no idea, still can it be worse than petroleum if we look at it as a whole?

We're running out of crude oil anyways and it ain't getting cheaper, biodiesel is one of the alternatives we have to look at. Mean while we ought to blend it in B20 for all cars. I know I've been saying this for a while now but I've searced for it and I still havent found it, but the same amount that took 20 days for biodiesel to biodegrade took 1000 days for petro diesel.

Even small amounts of 5% mix made a huge differance in biodegradability. B20 was realy good and the most realistical solution since there isn't enough biomass to replace petro diesel fully.

The diesel engine being ~25-30% more efficient than a petrol engine, but it should more acurately be compared to an ethanol (E85) engined car that is ~30% thirstier than a regular petrol engined car. That means a diesel engined car is about 5litres/100km more fuel efficient than a similar ethanol engined car.

Hidden cost of oil

Critics of the oil industry argue that the true cost (the total costs both visible and hidden paid by western societies to obtain and use oil) of oil and subsquently gasoline are much higher than wholesale oil markets or retail gasoline prices reflect. Some estimates put the real cost of gasoline near $10.00/gallon. The hidden oil/gasoline costs consist mainly of tremendous spending on military protection of world oil supplies.

The argument comes down to this: if such hidden costs were reflected in the wholesale and retail prices, instead of being subsidized by the general taxpayer, oil and gasoline would be far more expensive than they are today. This hidden cost has the effect of providing oil and gasoline a competitive market advantage over other alternative energy schemes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_price_increases_of_2004_and_2005

What I am providing might be optimistic but as you see it still errors less often. Seriously, I've seen other figures pretty recently but can't remember where. It was a longer text that in detail showed all factors. Does anyone recognize this, maybe RenegadeRick has posted something about this?


EDIT: We can also make biodiesel from a lot of the waste oil from restaurants and in that way help nature even more.

 

[rockwool]

Here's an interesting article on BMWs solution to the fossile fuel problem; liquid cryogenic hydrodgen which seems to be far better than
gaseous compressed hydrogen.

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2006/09/bmw_announces_m.html

Still, that is nothing compared to their new 3,0sd Variable Turbo Technology engine that puts out 272hp from half the displacement of the Hydrogen 7.

 

[rockwool]

I got linked from greencarcongress to a page and found this article that might change the way we see everything that got to do with energy and global war/security: http://www.moneyweek.com/file/18243/why-we-must-take-peak-oil-seriously.html

In the future, Dr Bakhtiari predicts oil will cost in the range of $100-150 per barrel in the not-too-distant future. He characterizes as the "Four Phases of Transition" (which he labels T1, T2, T3, and T4) in a world of declining conventional oil output.

"The four Transition periods (T1, T2, T3, and T4) will roughly span the 2006-2020 era. Each Transition [will] cover, on average, three to four years.

"The major palpable difference between the four Ts is their respective gradient of oil output decline - very small for T1, perceptible for T2, remarkable in T3, and rather steep for T4.

"The fact of being in 'Post-Peak' will bring about explosive disruptions we know little about, and which are extremely difficult to foresee. And the shock waves from these explosions rippling throughout the financial and industrial infrastructure could have myriad unintended consequences for which we have no precedent and little experience.

"So the only Transition we can see rather clearly (or rather, we hope to be able to comprehend) is T1. It is clear that T1 will witness the tilting of the 'Oil Demand' and 'Oil Supply' scales - with the former dominant at the onset and the latter commanding toward the close (say, by 2009 or 2010).

This part is realy interesting as we've been talking a lot about Iran:

Dr Bakhtiari wrote this in the context of a discussion in which he estimated total oil reserves in the Middle Eastern group of major oil-producing nations (Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates) as about half, or even less, than what the respective national governments claim.

Dr Bakhtiari noted in the article that:

"As for Iran, the usually accepted official 132 billion barrels is almost 100 billion barrels over any realistic assay. If the higher figure was for real, its oil industry would not be struggling day in and day out to keep output at between 3.0-3.5 million barrels per day (inclusive of Persian Gulf offshore)."

Coming from a former senior official of NIOC, this is an utterly astonishing comment with immense implications. It may explain much about the current Iranian government's view of its options for setting future industrial, economic, political, and military policy, although Dr Bakhtiari certainly did not say this, and I do not want to put words in his mouth.

My World Oil Production Capacity model has predicted that over the next 14 years, present global production of 81 million barrels per day will decrease by roughly 32%, down to around 55 million barrels per day by the year 2020.

"Thus, in the face of Peak Oil and its multiple consequences, which are bound to impact upon almost all aspects of our human standards of life, it seems imperative to get prepared to face all the inevitable shock waves resulting from that. Preparation should be carried out on individual, familial, societal, and national levels as soon as possible. Every preparative step taken today will prove far cheaper than any step taken tomorrow."

Start preparing...

 

[DRB]

I got linked from greencarcongress to a page and found this article that might change the way we see everything that got to do with energy and global war/security: http://www.moneyweek.com/file/18243/why-we-must-take-peak-oil-seriously.html


This part is realy interesting as we've been talking a lot about Iran:


Start preparing...

Edit: nevermind its not even worth discussing with you.

 

[rockwool]

First of all 1 gallon of gasoline has to be replaced with 1.5 gallons of ethanol due to the energy yields. That's significant.

okay i've got some of this at the office, this is mainly from memory so forgive my inaccuracies.....

All the data I've seen have the numbers all over the place with nothing that seems all that reliable. Sorta when you get 20 answers to the same question.... I think the problem is that the yields vary significantly with the biomass used. But if a common number exists I think is about 60 gals per ton of dry biomass with current technologies. It also seems that over 100 gals per ton starts making the economics work a little better. I note dry because its very prominent in most of the literature.

The only active refineries, that I know, are in Japan and Canada and those are really test facilities with inconsistent results. And costs of upwards of $2.00 a gallon, which simply won't fly. That number really needs to be under a $1.00 to work and those types of numbers aren't expected until 2013 (I think). Some company as been claiming to be setting up facilities in Louisana using left over sugar cane and rice straw and California for the rice straw (I think) but can't remember the details. I also seem to remember that there were some significant capital holes in their proposals, like 15 to 20 million short (and these are small facilities)

Tying yields and refineries together, economic viability required these refineries to process over 7500 tons of biomass a day. That's definately not a small deal nor are those facilities cheap.

I know that any half baked enzymatic processes are being bought up as quickly as they show even mild success. Not saying his is half baked .... you know what I mean. Its really the costs that revolve around these that are the sticking point.

Oddly enough the one thing I don't hear a lot about is the waste issues that these processes incur. It ain't cupcakes and milk that are byproducts of these processes.

I think that its a ways off but certainly there is promise but it ain't going to be cheap especially with oil at $45 a barrel.

Rockwool is providing a lot of fluffy propaganda which the Corn mafia (oh yeah they love this crap as well) puts out thru their machine. Its not necessarily wrong just more optimistic then realistic.

I seem to remember saying something like this to me before

The new HQ of the corn mob is located in El Paso, Texas and has "developed a proprietary high density vertical bio-reactor for the mass production of oil bearing algae".

http://www.valcent.net/news_detail.sstg?id=37

While removing large quantities of carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere. This new bio-reactor is tailored to grow a species of algae that yields a large volume of high grade vegetable oil, which is very suitable for blending with diesel to create a bio-diesel fuel.

For purposes of comparison only, an acre of corn will yield approximately 18 gallons per acre per year of oil, whereas Valcent’s new system, using extrapolated data from its own test bed facility, indicates a production yield of up to 150,000 gallons per acre per year. In doing so, up to 90% of the algae, by weight, is sequestered CO2, which will become an additional revenue source, either in the emerging voluntary green credit markets within the USA, or under the Kyoto protocols elsewhere.

Looks good don't it? Found that page from this text:

Palm oil, while more energy dense than most feedstock, produces approximately 635 gallons per acre/year. The numbers coming from photo-bioreactor algae per acre/year indicate as much as 150,000 gallons bio-oil possible. And on unused land not forested or previously used by agriculture.

www.valcent.net/news_detail.sstg?id=37

This process yields bio-oil at ~$20.00/barrel significatnly less than petro or palm. With enough urgency the shift to biofuels can happen over the next ten years.

Twenty bucks while petroleum oil only is going to get more expensive by the year...

 

[rockwool]

Edit: nevermind its not even worth discussing with you.

Man, while I'm critisizing your country for it's policies I am more pro American than any of them vampires you have in office. They are the ones effing up everything that USA stands for, not me.

 

[DRB]

Man, while I'm critisizing your country for it's policies I am more pro American than any of them vampires you have in office. They are the ones effing up everything that USA stands for, not me.

It has nothing to do with American policies, your love or hate for them (I could honestly careless). What it does have to do with is that you read one side of every story and that's it.

Do you even know who Dr Bakhtiari is and why he might be selling peak oil so hard? That he might have an agenda that requires someone to look a little more closely at the "evidence" that he puts forth. He has been selling $100 a barrel for a long time, he just keeps adjusting when that's coming. That adjustment is what makes the Peak Oil zealots so much fun. They keep moving the diaster date out.

The diaster of Peak Oil has been preached as long ago as the late 1880's. Instead of just falling in with the other sheep, why not see why they maybe wrong or why it might not be the immediate and complete disaster they are selling.