I am not endorsing this but it made sense...at least on first cut. Saw this on PBS somewhere:
Bio D takes more fuel to produce than it yields and that makes it a net polluter. They counted everything including the gas the farmer used in his pickup. I didn't hear them say anything about BD yielding less energy per gallon and getting fewer MPG.
BD inflates the price of grain. Our grocery bills are going up where grain is an ingredient.
Increased grain prices are putting the hurt on cattle feed lots and driving the cost of beef up and upsetting the industry with all the unknowns.
Foreign countries are not getting aid because the grain is being consumed domestically.
Third world countries are exporting their grain into the world market because of the upswing in prices.
It went on and on.......
I guess you could file this under "Always a down side somewhere".
A "net increase in pollution?" Does anybody have data on this?
Thought this would be of interest considering all the latest chatter on "alternative fuels".
Thanks all,
John
The biggest clincher is the claims that if they are going to rely on seed/fruit/grain to produce ethanol or biodiesel, everyone will have the choice of driving or eating, not both.
Of course if they can get the fermentation process to work efficiently on green waste, that will help a lot - although then the use of fertilisers will need to increase and that will take more oil so that will require more alternatives to replace it -- round and round. The cycle needs to be broken, not just tinkered with around the edges.
I propose that in the interests of the world at large, we bus nuts each make up a set of ramps, drive our bus up on to them --- and leave them there forever. Think of the fuel saved.
And the food supply issue has another twist - all of these estimations on how we can "break our petrolium addiction" assumes a reatining of the status-quo.
Now what happens as the climate changes? Some areas which were previously rich for agriculture become desert wastelands - making the over-all supply of grains to product fuel and food from, much smaller.
I enjoy watching the bio-fuel people do their "it's this easy!" demos where they take a pre-processed product, like vegtable oil - and add a catalyst based on petrolum (methenol) to get the biofuel. The energy it takes to harvest and process that vegtable oil is more than it takes to process the crude oil we currently use.
It's similar to a clever sales person telling you how much fun you can have by spending the million dollars (without spending too much time on the getting the million dollars part ;D).
Biofuel has fewer BTUs per gallon than regular petrolium fuel does. This is why it is less efficient to use biofuels than petrol. You end up using more biofuel than you would petrolium to do the same ammount of actual work. Some of the crazy biofuel people try to side-step this shortcoming by showing "how this super-efficient engine can get you that 'work' back" - without consideration that the same super efficient engine with petrolium is still the same percentage more powerful. (conservation of mass)
I saw a similar documentary on the work some kids are doing out at UC Santa Cruz (I think that was the school). They realized that in nature, a process usually has multiple input streams and multiple outputs, to maximize the efficiency. What the set out to do is take care of a drinking water problem and a fuel supply problem - by having green alge feed on grey/black waste water (cleaning the water without chemicals), and then farming the green alge for bio-mass fueling (this has more BTUs than liquid biofuel) which can boil water and turn a turbine - then sending the steam under the lake heating the water the alge is in (alge likes warm water) and returning the water to the filter and returning the ash of the consumed alge to the filter fields for even better purification.
A process like this only needs dirty water and a starter batch of alge as fuel - this is something we don't have a shortage of... The whole concept is very efficient and cyclical - and doesn't consume much other than waste. The result is a clean burn, and clean water (fair trade?).
The problem with fuels in the country though, stems from the fact that as the fuel industry made people money - the govenment started cashing in on that trade with taxes. It's in the government's interest to continue the fuel industry since a lot of business in the US is fuel related (all industries in one way or another buy fuel), so the taxable income of our country would be threattened if the industry all of a sudden went away.
Throw that complication to a group of people who are having enough trouble fixing Social Security - and they won't even want to think about losing the fuel industry (they'd probably fight to the death - or go to war...).
-Tim
P.S. Pardon my if I'm a cynic - I like hyper efficient systems, but it's hard to find one these days. In the end, you can't beat nature. -T
there have also been studies that show that in the US, if all farmable land was converted to grow Fuel Grain...that is would still not meet the demand of the trucking industry alone, let alone POV cars, boats trains and planes.
WVO on the otherhand has some rational thought.......but as soon as that starts to go mainstream.....that stuff will cost money too
Your list is a direct copy of the reasons for not producing methanol and is probably just as accurate but the message doesn't seem to be getting through.
The whole thing is a tax subsidized gimmick for increasing the price of corn-trouble is that the whole country pays through the nose.
I'm a big opponent of the current bio-fuel frenzy. The only persuasive argument I have heard in favour of bio-fuel is that any new technology takes time to hit peak efficiency. There may be some truth to that. What I fear is that north america will destroy its livestock industry chasing bio-fuel and, once the taxpayer wakes up and says "WTF are we doing?" it will be too late because the livestock industry will have gone off-shore. We're already at a huge disadvantage to South America. Its not a popular song to sing though cuz the bio-fuel promoters have locked onto the green message and they make us naysayers sound like dinosaurs.
Bob Dole had a private exec jet parked at National(Reagan) Airport in DC. He used it exclusively and paid $225 each way shuttling to Kansas. I guess it is OK cause he paid his ticket worth of charges and fed tax. The logo on the tail was "Archer Daniels Midland". Bob D was a huge proponent of corn for methanol and Gummint subsidies for the Big Agre corps. God knows I would vote for any assistance we can give our farmers but we seem to be driving the little farms out of business with our Gummint aid to Mega Corps. Somebody please send help! Quick! >:( >:( >:( ;D
I will not roll my bus up on ramps and never use it again. :'( I even want it in my funeral procession along with that New Orleans street band playing me into the ground. 8) :o :D ;D
Tim,
Yours was a great post. No apology for the emotion. The situation deserves it. You are NOT a cynic....they would not have written. You are sarcastic. Webster says that "is the humor of the master". Write often and long....Please. If they don't like it they can tune out...whoever they are. ???
Your admiring Bus Knut, ;)
John
I don't think that there is any question that there are problems with biofuels at present. However, as with many other technologies, production creates innovation and efficiency. Someone bought the first telephones with all their limitations and no one to talk to. I started using a car phone in the 80's. They cost a fortune at the time, and service sucked, and was also expensive. If there is money to be made, things generally progress. Anyone remember the first transistor radios? Now Intel says it can put millions of transistors in the space the period at the end of this sentence takes up. The first computers took up buildings and were nothing more than calculators. The call "Go west young man" did not necessarily mean that everyone should go west--just the malcontents and pioneers. It also may be that the government is generally wrongheaded in what it pushes. Ethanol produces 1.6 units of energy for every single unit it takes to produce it. That is not much of a gain. Corn is just not the best crop to use. Brazil is managing to become energy independent using ethanol as an important fuel. However, sugarcane produces over 6 units of energy for every unit used in production. A far better choice! There are crops that can be grown here that will do as well. It would seem that real innovation in fuel and energy won't come from the government or corporations that are doing great as things are. I consider the grass roots alternative energy movement a good sign. By the way, if biodiesel uses more energy to produce that it gives back, I don't understand how biodiesel can be selling at the pumps here (including taxes) for 30 to 40 cents less than regular diesel.
I don't wish to be argumentative and don;t want to make this topic even the slightest bit Political..so here's my question...with a couple of comments:
Looking back, historically speaking, can you think of one item which the Environmentalist Whacko's have sold the American people (other than 3 Mile Island) which wasn't a total crock of crap?
The Tom-Tenn cut, a shortcut to the Gulf of Mexico, was held up for years to protect the Snail Darter. (A total load of BS)
Atlanta GA is currently in serious trouble (water-wise) because the Corps of Engineers is required , by Law, to keep up the flow from Lake Lanier into the Chattahoochee River to protect some weird fish that no one ever heard of. Thanks to the Tree-Huggers.
I'm as 'green' as the next guy but the power given to these Whacko's is part of the reason we are in the shape we're in today.
My two cents.....
Bob
Quote from: Lin on November 28, 2007, 11:30:38 PMBy the way, if biodiesel uses more energy to produce that it gives back, I don't understand how biodiesel can be selling at the pumps here (including taxes) for 30 to 40 cents less than regular diesel.
Oh, that's easy. It's subsidized.
Here's the deal:
The government guarantees farmers a set price for corn, just barely above cost of production. So, farmers grow lots of corn, no reason not to, they can't lose money. There's a surplus of corn, so price goes way low, government kicks in their bit to farmer to keep them afloat. Farmer decides he needs to get better yield to get more money. Agri-corps come up with new seed that can be planted more densely, just need to use lots of fertilizer, which they happen to make. Farmers produce more corn, which drives prices even lower. Government kicks in their bit to keep farmer barely afloat. Lather, rinse, repeat. The sad part is that in this scenario, the farmer will *never* achieve better than break-even, and an unforeseen problem like a combine blowing an engine can send him into bankruptcy.
Now the really funny part here is that the same agri-corps that produce the seed and the fertilizer are also the ones buying the corn. But they don't buy it at the government set price, they buy it at market price (much lower). So in effect, the subsidies paid to the farmer don't actually benefit the farmer at all, they benefit the agri-corps. They have every incentive in the world to keep this cycle going until corn costs $.10 a bushel.
As for the petroleum use, a large part of it is used in producing the fertilizers needed to plant those high-yield varieties of corn. Once you add that to the petroleum burned by the farm equipment and the transportation, it's not *possible* to get more energy out of the corn than what was put in. But, because the agri-corps didn't pay the full cost, they can still make a profit.
And to make the whole thing worse, one of the biggest sources of groundwater pollution is now runoff from excess fertilizer.
WVO is a great thing, it's making use of something that would have been thrown away. Biodiesel, ethanol and every other corn product out there is an ecological and economic disaster fueled by pure greed.
Msheldon,
There you go again using verifiable fact, figures and eyewitness testimony to support your side of the argument. ;) Why do you hate America >:( Why won't you support the troops? ::) Do you want to fight them here? :-\
Great post guy. It is supported by the Fed cause they are involved in the entire scam. Even the Dems are paying homage at the Bio trough and that really really scares me.
We have to do something to help the small farmer get unhooked from this system. Recently the Fed did its part by vetoing a move to restrict the use of the term "organic". The small farmer was getting firmly in that nitch and starting to show a serious profit. Trashing the legal definition made that market open to Big agri. So if it ain't local you can't really be sure amigo.
Again thanks for your post and please, write often and long,
John
Thanks for this post, I have been slamming this trend for bio, ethanol for some time and have felt like I was the only one who could see what was going on. The $10 box of cornflakes is not far away!
It appears that oil money is behind this. I also believe, but cannot prove that big corporation money funds many but not all enviromentalists. Think about it, if you have lots of oil to sell and somebody wanted to build a nuclear power plant, who better and cheaper to fight it for you than the people?
Gotta go, the paranoids are after me again.
Earlier this year while searching the internet for bio diesel, I came across a report done as a treatise for a doctorate at a Canadian university. The report compared the efficiencies of processing varies grains to make bio diesel. I sent the writer a personal letter and asked him if the fuel produced was energy positive. His reply was that it was not part of his study and he was was not interested. Do you suppose that this is the problem?
For hundreds of years (long before there was a need for engine fuel) man knew the benefit of fermenting and distilling corn!!
If it was truly energy positive, I have no doubt that you wouldn't have a chance at keeping the big energy producers away from the proffit.
Since it seems to rely on gubberment subsidies & hype (rather than scientifically solid studies showing a net energy gain), I smell a con.
Lets see, a 55 gallon plastic barrel for the mash, a copper "turnip tank" to cook the mash, a "puke tank", some 3/4 copper pipe for a "worm". Hmm, oh, you mean you aren't supposed to drink this stuff? LOL Jack
I would like to know how my recyclying used cooking oil is going to cause a shortage of anything as it was headed to a landfill probably or to a cattle feedlot for you to eat.
LarryH
ps my 80 cents a gallon fuel is nice
Milk lhas recently doubled in price here in this area. According to a newspaper report it was due to the shortage of corn which was being used to produce fuel for automobiles.
Richard
Is that a real $.80 per gallon? Or did you leave out a few things?
I've looked into the bio & wvo.
I'd have a significant startup investment;
– transportation of the raw stock (I'd rather not further trash my cars.)
- storage (Just where do you store 100's of gallons of fuel safely?)
- 'manufacturing machinery'
- TIME (I already have more hobbies than time as it is.)
- The very real potential hazards (to my engine, 'manufacturing machinery', etc).
After considering all that & more, it is false economy in my situation & I'm better off buying at the pump.
But hey, if you are happy doing it, enjoy it as a hobby.
BTW, around here, damn little wvo is going to landfills as it is being used for livestock feeds. & we eat meat at our house - when we can afford it.
Quote from: kyle4501 on November 29, 2007, 07:44:20 AM
Is that a real $.80 per gallon? Or did you leave out a few things?
I've looked into the bio & wvo.
I'd have a significant startup investment;
– transportation of the raw stock (I'd rather not further trash my cars.)
- storage (Just where do you store 100's of gallons of fuel safely?)- 'manufacturing machinery'
- TIME (I already have more hobbies than time as it is.)
- The very real potential hazards (to my engine, 'manufacturing machinery', etc).
After considering all that & more, it is false economy in my situation & I'm better off buying at the pump.
But hey, if you are happy doing it, enjoy it as a hobby.
BTW, around here, damn little wvo is going to landfills as it is being used for livestock feeds. & we eat meat at our house - when we can afford it.
I wonder if a retired fuel truck from an airport might serve that purpose. You could roll up to a restaurant, pump a 55 gallon drum empty in about 1 minute, then off to then next stop. You'd have rolling WVO storage too.
I only mention this because the local aviation fuel distributor 'gave' a friend of mine two old 2500 gallon fuel trucks, if he would have them towed away from the Colorado Springs airport. He checked them both out, kept the best one, and gave one away.
Food for thought.
Jay
87 SaftLiner
I like the way you think Jay, but insurance & maint. on the truck ain't free either. If the truck weighs over 26000# - it's a whole 'nuther can of worms.
Also, you'd have to make dedicated 'supply' trips (as opposed to stoping by while you're on other errands) which adds to the cost of collecting :(
I'm still lookin' for the free lunch tho . . .
Quote from: kyle4501 on November 29, 2007, 07:44:20 AM
After considering all that & more, it is false economy in my situation & I'm better off buying at the pump.
BTW, around here, damn little wvo is going to landfills as it is being used for livestock feeds. & we eat meat at our house - when we can afford it.
I'm still lookin' for the free lunch tho . . .
If you used this stuff you could afford it................. Here's the free lunch. You have to work for everything you get any way, might as well cut out the terrorists.
brazil is making biodiesel from sugar cane alot cheeper than were able to make it with corn. our government wont left them inport it. they would rather tax us to death to subsidize the farmers
Quote from: Charley Davidson on November 29, 2007, 10:16:35 AM
If you used this stuff you could afford it.................
If I was already using it, I'd have already covered the startup costs :o
My situation ain't the same as yours. With 2 kids, there ain't gonna be no bay space left & darn little time left over either ::)
I drive down the same road each day I pull off road abt 100 feet stop pickup step out to pickup and set inside back of pickup two 5 gallon containers get back in pickup pull back into traffic. Collection cost about 2 minutes and I can't figure out how to seperate out collection costs for picking up fuel.
LarryH
My equipt has been paid for for several years if your going to listen to snake charmers and buy all the overprice inferior made equipt then I think your too lazy for this venture anyway. Not flaming you but being honest.
Nothing to do with waste oil reuse.
Thanks to U.S. policies mandating ethanol and biofuel usage, giving thanks for a bountiful meal last week probably cost you.
For the past four decades, food prices have remained fairly stable, lagging far behind inflation. But as the USDA reports, food prices this year are soaring, rising twice the rate of inflation—the highest annual increase in over a decade. Corn prices, which doubled since last year, are close to $4 a bushel. Eggs are up 44 percent from last year, while milk, up 21 percent, has jumped to $3.83 a gallon—the highest retail price since World War Two.
What's driving record food prices? Federal policies mandating more food for fuel are a big factor. Requirements that we use more ethanol over oil for energy use are causing us to divert larger amounts of farmland from food to corn-based fuel, contributing to record food costs. In 2000, we were using a modest 6 percent of our cropland for ethanol production. Last year, that share increased to 20 percent; this year, one quarter of our corn harvest is diverted from food to fuel.
As the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) reports, government policies around the world to replace oil with ethanol and biofuels are drawing us into an ugly "food-versus-fuel" battle: "Any diversion of land from food or feed production to production of energy biomass will influence food prices from the start, as both compete for the same inputs."
For the poor, the situation could grow dire. Already, low-income families in the United States spend 40 percent of their budget on food. Higher food prices could set off hunger and malnutrition for those already struggling.
Enter the U.S. Congress. Driven by powerful agribusiness and ethanol lobby interests, Congress is dead-set on further raising the "renewable fuel standard" for ethanol and biofuels, showing little regard for inflated food prices, its impact on the poor, and the recent stream of scientific studies showing ethanol's harmful impact on the environment.
If the energy bill currently in negotiations between the House and Senate passes, Americans will be required to increase their portion of ethanol-based fuel to 36 billion gallons by 2022, a monumental increase from the current 7.5 billion gallons mandate by 2012. Twenty-one billion gallons of that must come from the still unproven, land-reliant "cellulosic" technology that turns cornstalks and switchgrass into ethanol. The remaining 15 billion gallons must come from corn.
For what? We have known for years that ethanol, like other "poster child" renewables that were supposed to end our dependence on oil, is not all that and a bag of corn chips. More recently, we've learned its effect is even worse than we thought and that, as the OECD reports, "the cure [may be] worse than the disease."
Producing biofuels leaves a huge ecological footprint, exceeding that of fossil fuels. The recent OECD report finds, "When...soil acidification, fertilizer use, biodiversity loss, and toxicity of agricultural pesticides are taken into account, the overall environmental impacts of ethanol and biofuels can very easily exceed those of petrol and mineral diesel."
Similarly, nitrous oxide released in the production of biofuels actually increases greenhouse gas emissions—about twice as much as previously thought—and, according to Nobel Laureate scientist Paul Crutzen, is likely contributing to global warming.
Moreover, ethanol requires enormous quantities of water, a valuable resource already in short supply in many areas of the nation. Producing one gallon of ethanol fuel, including the water needed to grow corn, requires an astonishing 1,700 gallons of water, according to Cornell University ecology professor David Pimentel.
As the New York Times recently summarized in an editorial on biofuel: "What's wrong is letting politics—the kind that leads to unnecessary subsidies, the invasion of natural landscapes...and soaring food prices that hurt the poor—rather than sound science and sound economics drive America's energy policy."
Yet Washington remains fixated on biofuels, ironically furthering our dependence on foreign oil. Government's selection of ethanol as the chosen source of fuel discourages refiners from expanding capacity. Since ethanol can't come close to meeting U.S. demand for fuel—turning our entire corn crop to fuel production would only replace 12 percent of our current gasoline consumption—we dangerously risk increasing our reliance on imports.
None of this will matter, of course, when Congress returns to business on the energy bill. As is the way of the world in the nation's capital, the powerful agribusiness and ethanol interests will trump science, and Congress will turn a blind eye to the poor's struggle against soaring food prices.
Dana Joel Gattuso is at the National Center for Public Policy Research as a Senior Fellow.
Energy content of corn (dry weight) = 8k btu's lb. (all btu's lb. approx)
Energy content of corn stalk/mass = 6.5k btu's
Energy content of Ethanol = 10 btu's lb.
Energy content of No. 2 diesel = 17k btu's lb.
Energy content of gasoline =15k btu's lb.
I'll let HOMEGROWNDIESEL explain the processes used in extracting all the viable contents of the plant (we're not talking just the kernel here) and what uses are compatible for each product/byproduct.
Cellulose based Ethanol using biomass and enzymes is claimed to be more efficient and you don't lose the grain only the stalks and husks.
>>>>Tim - this is for you;
Fermenation of ethanol produces a lot of CO2. Admittedly, the carbon released comes from CO2 that was captured by the growing plant. But for mitigating global warming, it's like bailing a boat with a bucket shot with holes.
Not that using available biomass to produce ethanol is a bad idea, but efficiency could be greatly improved by capturing the CO2 and reacting it with hydrogen. The result is synthesis gas, which can be used to make synthetic fuels.
*** Or your algae farm idea ***
>>>>Food for thought (fuel);
There have been numerous studies on ethanol fuels energy balance and the strongest are by Shapouri and Duffield of USDA's Office of Energy Policy and New Uses, and Wang from the Center for Transportation Research, Energy Systems Division, Argonne National Laboratory. Their July 2002 studies estimated the Net Energy Value (NEV) of corn ethanol. However, variations in data and assumptions used among the studies have resulted in a wide range of estimates. This study identifies the factors causing this wide variation and develops a more consistent estimate. They conclude that the NEV of corn ethanol has been rising over time due to technological advances in ethanol conversion and increased efficiency in farm production - and the research shows that corn ethanol is energy efficient as indicated by an energy output / input ratio of 1.34. Quoting from their Agricultural Economic Report No. 813: "Corn ethanol is energy efficient...for every BTU dedicated to producing ethanol there is a 34% energy gain... Only about 17% 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." Full report (PDF file, 176 kb): www.usda.gov/oce/reports/energy/aer-814.pdf
In "How Much Energy Does It Take to Make a Gallon of Ethanol?", David Lorenz and David Morris of the Institute for Local-Self Reliance (ILSR) state: "Using the best farming and production methods, the amount of energy contained in a gallon of ethanol is more than twice the energy used to grow the corn and convert it to ethanol." A 1992 ILSR study, based on actual energy consumption data from farmers and ethanol plant operators, found that the production of ethanol from corn is a positive net energy generator. In this updated paper the numbers look even more attractive: more energy is contained in the ethanol and the other by-products of corn processing than is used to grow the corn and convert it into ethanol and by-products (see report at second link). In contrast, Cornell professor David Pimental has been on a long time crusade to prove otherwise, and is about the only one I can find who claims the energy balance is negative.
"There is just no energy benefit to using plant biomass for liquid fuel," says David Pimentel, professor of ecology and agriculture at Cornell. "These strategies are not sustainable."
Pimentel and Tad W. Patzek, professor of civil and environmental engineering at Berkeley, conducted a detailed analysis of the energy input-yield ratios of producing ethanol from corn, switch grass and wood biomass as well as for producing biodiesel from soybean and sunflower plants. Their report is published in Natural Resources Research (Vol. 14:1, 65-76).
Hi Guy's,
Back in 2003' when I purchaced my 03' "flexfuel" GMC Yukon, I started buying E-85 Ethenol when I would travel to Maryland.
My first expierence at the pump was $1.13.9 gal. for the E-85. Now I don't even bother because the last time I purchaced it,
it had allready gone up to $2.26.9 gal. in a two year time frame. [not worth the trip there anymore].. It's a shame that New Jersey
doesn't have any retail outlets that sell E-85. I was told by my congressman that N.J. has not figured out how to tax E-85 yet and that's
why they won't issue a license to sell it. He also told me that the tax laws on gasoilne were worded for petrolium products and they would have
to rewrite the laws in order to tax E-85. If I were a politition I would understand this perfectly! ;D
Bottom line,,,, I think that once you guy's figure out how to produce Bio diesel in large quantitys, the gubberment will be right there TAXING IT....
Good Luck
Nick-
Quote from: larryh on November 29, 2007, 12:32:15 PM
I drive down the same road each day I pull off road abt 100 feet stop pickup step out to pickup and set inside back of pickup two 5 gallon containers get back in pickup pull back into traffic. Collection cost about 2 minutes and I can't figure out how to seperate out collection costs for picking up fuel.
LarryH
My equipt has been paid for for several years if your going to listen to snake charmers and buy all the overprice inferior made equipt then I think your too lazy for this venture anyway. Not flaming you but being honest.
I'm not knocking this as a hobby, I think it is a good thing - for some, just not everyone.
However, I do think it is irresponsible (or is it just small minded?) to advise that everyone should do it & gloss over some of the essential details in the hysteria & hype. I especially don't care for the contempt (without consideration for their particular circumstances) for those who don't agree.
(Not flaming, just my thoughts)
I don't have a pickup. . . . . I have been thru the process/ordeal of dealing with waste oil & never could get around the mess that precludes using my car, but if I was driving a total POS as a daily driver it might be different. So collecting is a much bigger deal for me than just tossing it in the daily driver on the way home from work. That has little to do with being lazy, but the total cost for my situation.
Once I have a collection method, I'm sure I could find sources of wvo that were easy enough to collect, but, the last time I got all hot & heavy into this, there were some other concerns in collecting wvo. Consistency in picking it up was often brought up. Also several had contracts with waste haulers that didn't like others taking their product. And those are just some of the details to be worked out that the hype glosses over. Local rules can have a huge impact.
I also don't have a spare out building to use for the processing & storage. Again, nothing to do with being lazy, but it does reflect bact to the total REAL cost to me.
So, if one was to add up all the
real costs associated with it, it will cost more for some than others. I've run the numbers & in MY situation, it ain't cheaper than at the pump.
Things may be different if I had more free time & less income.
In response to TomCat's post:
Quote from: TomCat on November 29, 2007, 09:26:46 AM
...I wonder if a retired fuel truck from an airport might serve that purpose. You could roll up to a restaurant, pump a 55 gallon drum empty in about 1 minute, then off to then next stop. You'd have rolling WVO storage too...
This brings to light the issue I have with WVO as a "replacement" for diesel... Now how many gallons of usable WVO can you actually harvest from each location? On how regular a basis? How much of the WVO can you use without paying the fuel taxes which pay for roads, bridges, and tunnels (etc.)?
WVO may be a neat trick for a "fuel additive hobbyist", but for the general public at large - the usable supply is vastly smaller that the consuming public's demand.
For Niles' post:
Quote from: niles500 on November 29, 2007, 12:57:55 PM
...Fermenation of ethanol produces a lot of CO2. Admittedly, the carbon released comes from CO2 that was captured by the growing plant. But for mitigating global warming, it's like bailing a boat with a bucket shot with holes...
...Not that using available biomass to produce ethanol is a bad idea, but efficiency could be greatly improved by capturing the CO2 and reacting it with hydrogen. The result is synthesis gas, which can be used to make synthetic fuels...
...Pimentel and Tad W. Patzek, professor of civil and environmental engineering at Berkeley, conducted a detailed analysis of the energy input-yield ratios of producing ethanol from corn, switch grass and wood biomass as well as for producing biodiesel from soybean and sunflower plants. Their report is published in Natural Resources Research (Vol. 14:1, 65-76).
Fermentation (conversion from a biomass to a liquid fuel) is not the most effective use of the harvested alge - research has shown that direct burning of the mass as a "peat clump" is similar in BTU content as Coal (lost of BTUs). Yes the resultant burn emissions are heavy in CO2, but this is primarily the captured CO2 which existed in the environment which was unprocessed within the plant itself. With proper processing the CO2 can be returned to the influent stream to the alge ponds (with the black and grey content), to encorage the enzymes and alge which is acting on the water. The carbon should be more or less contained within the processing cycle. The other output from black water is Methane. This can be burned fairly clean - but it can also be processed within a fuel cell (assuming the gas is clean enough). My father works as a Safet Officer at a waste-water plant, and they are installing two fuel-cells which run on the methane the "digesters" (enzymatic reactors) produce. Previously they ran two modified diesel-generators and created over 50% of the power required to run the plant. With the new fuel-cell plants, they are hoping to be able to return power to the grid. The plant also has a reverse osmosis process - but due to public reaction of black water potatiall ending up in th fresh-water supply, it's never been turned on (even through the filtered water would be cleaner than the waater they're currently drink out there...).
There is a lot of pubic "fear" which needs to be over-come when something which will work but requires a mind-set change is brougt to public view (this is like people lookng at The Elephant Man and being terrified - even though he may be a great guy ::)).
I also saw some of the research on switchgrass as a fuel - this is the stuff that rows naturally every year along freeways - with the freeway managment people simply mow and let rot where it was cut. The switchgrass is a more stable plant with low water (rain water is enough to keep it going), and it's EVERYWHERE ;D.
Cheers!
-Tim
I wish I had read this post before I commented on another on about the same subject. Oh well. Maybe I should just read more and open my mouth less. AUUUUGHHHHH!! :) :) :)
<<<I also saw some of the research on switchgrass as a fuel - this is the stuff that rows naturally every year along freeways - with the freeway managment people simply mow and let rot where it was cut. The switchgrass is a more stable plant with low water (rain water is enough to keep it going), and it's EVERYWHERE >>>
One site said that HEMP had the highest biomass btu's per lb., lowest grow cost, and cost of rendering, and needed no fertilizers - Besides weed grows everywhere - I never know when to believe these claims though as there are many HEMP "supporters" out there "hyping" that product too - LOL
Why is the subject around bio deisel I thought the main Idea was to find alternative fuel and I believe before all is over that will come to fruition. Hydrogen is fuel and water has it so why not run on water?? Jerry
The amount of energy needed to break the valent H-H-O bond is equal to or greater than the potential energy of the resulting H2 and O2 - conservation of mass/energy - the only way this is possible to do at a reasonable cost is for a country like Iceland who has large amounts of thermal energy available at zero Co$t and endless abundance - FWIW
Actually, I seen a seminar where they used a wind generator to break it down. I guess one could argue that "why not just use the electricity?" Good point.
I like hydro and Honda is now introing their Hydro car. Should be interesting to see.
Chaz
Chaz - One day I can envision everyone having a home energy generation system which would 1) recycle solid waste into fuel/organic compost 2) convert solar and wind into electricity/fuel 3) recycle effluent into fuel and potable water , etc..
But I don't think in this day and age you want your neighbor, possibly Homer Simspon, manufacturing, storing, fueling and transporting quantities of Hydrogen large enough to satisfy their fuel needs - I'm also sure your insurance company would cancel you - KABOOM!
There are lots of possibilities. I do not know which one or combination will prove to be the most important in the future. But I am sure that things will not stay as they are now. It would be a pretty pessimistic view to believe that we are bond to petroleum forever. I'm sure that there were people that thought nothing could replace whale oil in it's time. A funny thing is that petroleum was once just considered a byproduct of the hunt for salt. Countries would compete for salt resources and thought it essential for military superiority since, pre-refrigeratiion, it was the only way to preserve food; no food, no army. During the American revolution, the salt resources of the colonies was one of the first things the British attacked.
A question that might be considered ridiculous: Does anyone have their doubts that petroleum is a "fossil fuel" --really comes from dead dinosaurs? If it does shouldn't we have at least a spoonful under some cemeteries by now?
Lin,
There was a NOVA thing in which they mentioned the existance of a theory that petro was formed long before the dinos. They had some sort of "proof" in that petro failed some test that would make it dino. Nobody had any pictures so I said "Screw it".
Has anybody ever checked to see if that tablespoon of oil was under that cemetary? I thought not. So that hasn't been debunked yet and there is still hope that "some" may still have the hope of lhaving a positive legacy.
Out of hand,
John
Niles,
Unfortunately, good ol' Homer has gasoline and propane right now also. And the "racing Homers" have Nitrous. You have a point about the F**KING insurance companies (not a good experience with them lately - can you tell?) but hydro has it's pluses and minuses also. Example: would you rather be in a house where a bottle of Hydro was opened up and let empty or a bottle of propane or a natural gas line?
Just a thought,
Chaz
HUGE difference between regulated & approved storage/ handling of fuels vs. good ole Homer doing what in hell he feels like - regardless if it is out of ignorance or stupidity. I don't much care if he blows up or burns down his place, but when he starts crossing his property lines & damaging property of others, I'll take issue with that potential threat.
As much as I loathe the gubberment telling me what I can & can't do, sometimes it has benefits.
Caviler attitudes towards stored energy can have dire consequences for others. It is the regulations that minimize the danger. Ever wonder why gas pump nozzles are always aluminum? etc. . . .
We should at least try to be responsible with our hobbies. Thankfully, most of us are in practice if not advice.
The way I see the home brew working for me is if I heat the house with it & use it as fuel in all my vehicles, maybe even have a diesel generator? Then the TOTAL SYSTEM makes more sense.
BUT, there is only a limited number of people that can practice this before the available wvo is used up & then what?
And another thing, just how long do you think the polliticians are gonna stay out of it? As soon as they get involved, you can kiss the potential savings good bye.
Chaz I FOUND IT the answer to all our problems. see attached
LarryH
Chaz sorry it put up wrong picture I FOUND IT
Thanx Larry, good fun!!!
You're right Kyle, you're right. I'm ordering my Michelin man suit right now off ebay so I don't have to go out in the big bad world and take a chance of someone hurting me. That way I can wear it everywhere and be safe. Even in the tub.
Sorry, that is sarcasm to the MAX!!! And meant. I'm not trying to pi$$ you or anybody else off. Believe me, I'm not. But two sayings come to mind: "Nothing ventured, nothing gained". And a native American saying that "If you do what you've always done, you'll be where you've always been".
Let me try to explain............
My biggest, and I do mean BIGGEST issue with people is the total lack of personal responsibility. It makes me want to puke on a regular basis. (it will kill this country)And ol' next door Homer is case in point. You have a point.
BUT,
Nothing and I do mean NOTHING is accomplished with out risk and sometimes disaster. Hell, look at electricity!!!!!!!!!!!! We CAN"T live without it and yet I'm sure the nay sayers thought the risk was too great back then. The automobile - same thing. And on and on.
Hey, we can go back and forth ALL DAY LONG about issues like this. You can say that it is different because it's Homer doing it. But it's not. Ideas and inventions - to benefit everyone - have to start somewhere and WAAAAAY more often than not it's in a garage rather than a lab.
Sure there are risks. And sure things that are bad happen. It's the nature of the beast. Ever known somebody to be electrocuted??
My point is that we can sit by idle and do nothing and try nothing and live an uneventful life and expect things to stay just the way they are forever, or we can encourage people to try things - responsibly - to benefit us all. I'm damn sure I like things better now than in the middle ages.
I can't tell you all the benefits that COULD possibly happen from people making their own Hydro, responsibly, because the future is not here yet. But I can tell you that I would like to encourage people to try to make life better for all of us - AND ESPECIALLY THE GENERATIONS TO COME, of which I have no stock in as I don't have kids. But I DO care about all people more than most - and hope that they dream up new ideas and try them to the best of their ability. - As in war, yes, there will be an occasional battle lost, and you hope and pray it's not yours, but the object is to win the war. See the relativity?
I have worked for big companies and there is a prevailing thought that they don't want to make the effort or put forth the expense to change anything for a profit. They want the "black" without ANY "red". S**t, who don't??!!??!! But, for the vast majority of the time, that can't be the case. Someone HAS to invest and take the chance or we will never progress.
Now, I hope that I have conveyed my thoughts well enough for you. (Personally, I doubt it for 2 reasons: I'm not a great literary figure, and I can't type. I have spent over an hour hunting and pecking this drivel out.) But either way, it probably doesn't matter. We see things differently. That is the beauty of life. We are not all the same. This is not a "dig" here, but I feel like I tend to be more of a "creative" and explorer, and care about people as a whole and others tend to care more about not creating waves and care more about their immediate people. Different views, different people. It's all good.
One more quick saying that I tend to like: "If ya can't help them, at least don't hold them back".
Ok so now I am done with these topics of alternatives. Yup, sorry. I'm burnt. I have finally succumb to the fate of what I think allot of those who also share my ideas feel: It's just not worth it. And isn't it ironic that I am the one who LIKES debate on topics like this because it furthers the knowledge and ideas that others may not have. Opposite views are a good thing. It makes one think.
Anyway, it just takes too long, and trying to get out my ideas and feelings seems worthless. So I am retiring my alternative posts and just going to go about my merry way trying to implement them and learning from others who are of like mind. I was hoping to help some of you on this board with alternative ideas, but I'm spent on the idea. From now on, I'll just stick with the usual and nornal bus talk and learn all that I can from all you who are willing to share your time and knowledge. I can't thank you all enough for that. Hopefully I will be able to give a little now and again also.
Chaz
Now over 2 hours invested! :P :)
Sorry if ya have to reread it to try to get the jest of it.
Chaz,
You are confusing me; out here Hydro involves BIG concrete structures across rivers and spinning turbines converting nuclear energy into electricity. Hydrogen is not an energy source (unless you have a hydrogen mine) it is merely a transfer medium for nuclear energy. You use the primary energy source to make electricity, hydrogen, compressed air or whatever medium you like to convert to the energy you need at the other end; mechanical, heat, light, what have you.
Hey Chaz,
Debates are fun, as long as you don't think you will actually change everyone else's opinion. ;)
Those that can understand, usually do so quickly, those that can't never will. ;D
My intent is NOT "don't do wvo or bio", but to say that it ain't for everyone, & share a few points of concern that most proponents seem to gloss over.
What kind of group would we be if we intentionally misled someone into a project without helping them determine the full scope of the adventure?
As far as nothing ventured nothing gained goes - please don't leave out responsible planning. Have you ever heard "ignorance is no excuse"? ;)
I'm not necessarily opposed to taking risks, but I'd like to know as much as possible about the water before I jump in. 8)
& I don't like to enter battles without knowing something about the enemy.
I'm all for inventions, but if you kill off too many people early on, you may not get the chance to work out all the bugs. :o
As for "If ya can't help them, at least don't hold them back", we are on the same page, just different paragraphs. If someone starts out with the wrong direction, he may not be able to financially recover. Do you see where blind encouragement may be a future roadblock?
I feel that you can teach some of the people some of the time, & some of the people can't be taught at all.
And Chaz, you haven't offended me & I don't think you ever will due to who you are. ;D
You guys are neat.
Thanks,
John
The one thing that I have not yes seen discussed and that is the transportation of the used oil. What are the environmental regulations, state and federal, if any?
To transport used motor oil you must be licensed in this state and the penalties for being caught transporting used oil is very severe. And if you in some way spill a little bit, it is even worse. I have heard a minimum of $10,000 fine.
I can well imagine a company that is licensed to pick up used oil, and gets paid to do it might get very upset if they see someone coming to their customer and picking up their load of oil. A simple phone call could get you in a bunch of trouble, very quick.
I really thing those of you planning on doing this should check out the regulations.
Also, here in WV you can only use your own waste oil, oil that you generate in the operation of your business, to run a waste oil furnace.
Richard
He he he.. gentleman..none of this makes any difference in the long run, because since the early 20th century when our wireless radio signals began seeping out into outer space, such signals have now propagated well out over 30 parcecs and by now have received the much unwanted attention of the Draconian sensor buoys strung out along our spiral arm. The Draconians are going to pay us a visit and it is not good. Can I please have more wine now? He he he. :) :) :) Just kidding!!!
Quote from: DrivingMissLazy on November 30, 2007, 01:41:12 PM
The one thing that I have not yes seen discussed and that is the transportation of the used oil. What are the environmental regulations, state and federal, if any?
To transport used motor oil you must be licensed in this state and the penalties for being caught transporting used oil is very severe. And if you in some way spill a little bit, it is even worse. I have heard a minimum of $10,000 fine.
I can well imagine a company that is licensed to pick up used oil, and gets paid to do it might get very upset if they see someone coming to their customer and picking up their load of oil. A simple phone call could get you in a bunch of trouble, very quick.
I really thing those of you planning on doing this should check out the regulations.
Also, here in WV you can only use your own waste oil, oil that you generate in the operation of your business, to run a waste oil furnace.
Richard
Arghhh.. That is Dino OIL.. Veggie oil is a FOOD product and most likely does not fall under
that category. Except in Kalifornication.