BIODIESEL Debunked

[larryh]

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

[DrivingMissLazy]

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

[kyle4501]

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.

[TomCat]

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

[kyle4501]

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 . . .

[captain ron]

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.

[4106-123]

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

[kyle4501]

If you used this stuff you could afford it.................

If I was already using it, I'd have already covered the startup costs 

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

[larryh]

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.

[Lee Bradley]

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.

[niles500]

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).

[Nick Badame Refrig/ACC]

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!

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-

[kyle4501]

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.

[Tim Strommen]

In response to TomCat's post:

...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:

...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 .

Cheers!

-Tim

[HB of CJ]

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!!