| Submit your comments on this article |
| Science & Technology |
| BioFuels PDF: |
| 2006-05-03 |
| Charts on biofuel and Biofuel vs Hydrogen vs Oil. Includes analysis and stats from Brazil's efforts too. bullets like these: US Automakers: less investment than hydrogen; compatible with hybrids Agricultural Interests: more income, less pressure on subsidies; new opportunity for Cargill, ADM, farmers co-operatives,… Environmental Groups: faster & lower risk to renewable future; aligned with instead of against other interests Oil Majors: equipped to build/own ethanol “factories”& distribution; lower geopolitical risk, financial wherewithal to own ethanol infrastruct.; diversification Distribution (old & New): no significant infrastructure change; potential new distribution sources (e.g. Walmart) Require 70% new cars to be Flex Fuel Vehicles … require yellow gas caps & provide incentives to automakers Require E85 ethanol distribution at 10% of gas stations …. for gas station owners with more than 25 stations Legislate a “cheap oil” tax if it drops below $40/barrel …. Using the proceeds to stabilize prices when prices are high & build reserves Loan guarantees of first few “new technology” plants Institute RFS for E85 & cellulosic ethanol Switch subsidies (same $/acre) to energy crops Switch ethanol subsidy from blenders to “plant” builders Change subsidy amount based on the wholesale price of ethanol (five years only) Switch CAFÉ mileage to “petroleum mileage” Allow imports of foreign ethanol tax free above RFS standard For seven years provide “cellulosic” credits above “ethanol” credits NRDC: 114m acres for our transportation needs Jim Woolsey/ George Shultz estim. 60m acres Khosla: 55 m acres Ethanol from municipal & animal waste, forest Direct synthesis of ethanol or other hydrocarbons Energy Crops: Miscanthus, Switch Grass, Poplar, Willow, 250 million tons of plant waste from current crops, Claim is made that with these techniques including alternate crops and waste South Dakota alone could produce 3,429 thousand bbl per day. That's just under Iran's current oil production. this claim is made: In 2015, 78M export acres plus 39M CRP acres could produce 384M gallons of ethanol per day or ~75% of current U.S. gasoline demand Energy Balance (Energy OUT vs. IN) Corn ethanol numbers ~1.2-1.8X Petroleum energy balance at ~0.8 ….but reality from non-corn ethanol is… Sugarcane ethanol (Brazil) ~8X Cellulosic ethanol ~4-8X Companies & Technologies BCI Clearfuels Full Circle Edenspace Agrivada Mascoma Synthetic Genomics Novazyme Genencor Diversa Iogen Ceres Corn Ethanol Cos. Coal to Liquids MSW to Ethanol |
| Posted by:3dc |
| #15 Makeing fuels out of Biomass is easy. Particulary when that biomass is waste material is it a good deal. Building reactors is hard and time consuming. Building plants that can take coal for feed stock again expensive and time consuming. Biomass is just part of the over all picture. Since phil_b is an expert he will not accept even that partial and stop gap move and instead roots for a world war or total economic colapse. Wonderful. |
| Posted by: SPoD 2006-05-03 23:01 |
| #14 Maybe there is a biofuel source that could produce income for these third world countries whose only exports are heroin and cocaine...nuclear and coal are too difficult to put in a gas tank. I think the better answer is in totally new technology waiting to be discovered. "Necessity is the mother of invention" but I hope it doesn't take a major attack on oil production facilities to spark someone's imagination. |
| Posted by: Danielle 2006-05-03 22:58 |
| #13 phil_b: I and others have said a hundred times, there are only two energy sources that will fix the problem (barring discovery of a monster oil field in the gulf). One is nuclear and the other is coal. That's it. That's my view, in a nutshell. Anything that is as labor-, energy- and resource-intensive as growing crops can't possibly be a solution to the problem of oil dependence. It's a dead end. People are grasping at straws (no pun intended). |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2006-05-03 21:58 |
| #12 SPoD, exactly the opposite. Energy dependence which in effect means your entire economy depends on the Middle East/Russia/Africa/Venuzuela with their myriad problems is IMO a huge problem that unless fixed will end up in a huge economic/geopolitical event (A Great Depression or war). It is imperative to fix the problem. This why I rail at these fake solutions that at best might make a marginal improvement but in many cases make the problem worse. I and others have said a hundred times, there are only two energy sources that will fix the problem (barring discovery of a monster oil field in the gulf). One is nuclear and the other is coal. That's it. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2006-05-03 21:24 |
| #11 Some couldn't read a PowerPoint that big. I cached it in Adobe PDF format |
| Posted by: Chomoling Glomogum1529 2006-05-03 18:21 |
| #10 Phil_b - I think you've forgotten the costs of 911, Gulf War I, Gulf War II, the increased security, etc when making your calculations when calculating the price of a barrel of oil. You make some good points, but you are just naysaying - why it can't be done. It's going to happen and when is directly proportional to the price of a gallon of oil. |
| Posted by: 2b 2006-05-03 17:23 |
| #9 So Phil it appears you would rather we sit on our hands? I am not for a subsidy at all BTW. |
| Posted by: SPoD 2006-05-03 17:02 |
| #8 Proper link and it is a power point and not a pdf... The distractions of folks coming in and bothering you when you post. |
| Posted by: 3dc 2006-05-03 17:00 |
| #7 Slightly away from the topic, but... tip of the hat to your Diggers Phil! We here sure appreciate their many contributions in IZ and elsewhere. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2006-05-03 16:48 |
| #6 SPoD, the thrust of the ppt is that ethanol is great idea and all it needs is more/enough subsidies. My point is two fold. One is that in a world market any subsidy ends up subsidizing foreign consumers. Two, if ethanol production doesn't make economic sense in Australia, it makes even less sense in the USA where agricultural production costs are higher. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2006-05-03 16:46 |
| #5 And this affects me in the USA how? |
| Posted by: SPoD 2006-05-03 16:37 |
| #4 Australia is the lowest cost agriculture producer in the developed world. Australia introduced a subsidy to promote the use of ethanol as a fuel. Guess what happened? We import almost all our ethanol from countries, dumb enough to subsidize this idiocy. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2006-05-03 16:33 |
| #3 I am all for a "import tax" that slides to keep imported oil above 40 or 50 bucks a barrel. We can't do that with refined product, yet. All money from teh "fee" haver to go back to energy undependence. No Corperate welfare, governmnent bondoggles or TRANZI wealth redistribution. |
| Posted by: SPoD 2006-05-03 16:07 |
| #2 SPoD they are talking about making it from crop refuse and alternate energy crops. It would not effect US food supply. Further down the road it might effect export foods. Energy Crops: Miscanthus, Switch Grass, Poplar, Willow, 250 million tons of plant waste from current crops, This article includes Brazil and Argonne studies too. Lots of suff there and I am still working my way through it. Link to the article was provided to me by oil lease trader... a snippet of his discussion with another follows If you (and I actually) are right that OPEC will try to crash the market below $40 bbl to "see off" these alternatives and protect their market it wont happen. If they cant or take too long I think ethanol might develop its own head of steam LOL. Given the environmental benefits you could ensure ethanol is economic vs conventional oil merely by pricing the environmental externalities of oil. Maybe no need for a $40 floor on oil prices after all? And of course ethanol costs will likely fall as the GM feedstock is improved whereas oil production costs will either rise as resources are depleted or stay flat if technology gains continues to offset rises as they have for some time now. |
| Posted by: 3dc 2006-05-03 15:38 |
| #1 Just a few questions I don't have resolved. (1)I still remember the and am still affected by the corsive effects of this type of fuel. (2) Whats it do the ground water? Anything like the MBTE fandango? (3)How much will the cost of food and it's abundant supply (here in the USA) be affected? (4)How many people go will hungry now that are fed in the 3rd world when the big Ag combines and corps switch to producing fuel? (5)How long will the luddites and lawyers in the "environmental" movement and Government "enviromental" regulators block the building of plants that can produce useful and economic fuel? (6)Why make ethonol from coal when you can make Diesel and Gasoline from it? (7) Why not just go completely to Diesel type fuel that doesn't take the level of processing and refinenment? |
| Posted by: SPoD 2006-05-03 15:20 |