Topic Closed: January 18, 2007 - June 29, 2007
Not a member? Register Now. * Required
Biofuels
posted by alpollo on 6/27/2007 - This comment was recommended 1 time
Biofuels are a way to keep us tied to tied to the oil companies. The only true path to energy independence without starving more people is to produce electric vehicles. They could be powered by new nuclear plants and coal plants with carbon sequestration as well as wind and solar. The technology already exists. If Tesla can make an electric car (http://www.teslamotors.com) that has a range of 200 miles and 0-60 speeds in less than 4 seconds, I don't see why the major automakers with their larger resources can't produce similar autos.
www.teslamotors.com
view all 4 replies
Re: Biofuels
posted by Ronald David on 6/28/2007 - Be the first to recommend this
Helo alpollo, You wrote; "...to produce electric vehicles. They could be powered by new nuclear plants..." Now that's a new kinky idea. (Of course, I know that isn't what you had in mind.) To make vehicles of any sort, even electric vehicles, or for that matter vehicles without engines and sails on top, all require vast amounts of raw or recycled materials, notably metals, plastics, and rubber, and to produce such materials requires vast amounts of fossil fuels! Of course, Tesla and all other automakers can make batteries and electric powered cars, but only so long as they have abundant fossil fuels. Without fossil fuels and their extraordinary properties, about all mankind can manufacture is a few thousand hammers and swords. Of course, technology already exists, and that is the trap we have walked into. Metallurgy today, in its variety and demand, continues its forward strides only because of fossil fuels. You commented; "Biofuels are a way to keep us tied to tied to the oil companies." Is that a bad thing? Why? We are tied to all sort of companies; from hospitals to funeral parlors, from farms to grocery stores, from brick makers to bankers, et cetera. Companies are grand achievements. They represent the best in mankind -- people cooperating and working together to provide for other people. "The only true path to energy independence without starving more people is to..." STOP making more people! Less people translates into less demand, not just less demand for cars regardless of how they are powered, but less demand for water, fuel, space, and every sort of raw material. I don't see why mankind with their larger brains can't find their way out of a paper bag.
posted by Chris Askelson on 6/28/2007 - Be the first to recommend this
Don't you mean a wet paper bag? Ronald is right in saying it will take a vase amount of material to produce batteries. Not to mention the end consumer price would be atrocious. Energy independence really means you rely on your own energy to move from place to place. It is really easy to plug in or fuel up. Consider the alternatives walking, bicycling, horse, wood fired steam driven buggy/ car, and most of those involve labor, something many people are afraid of...... bio(life) fuel.
posted by bill f. on 6/28/2007 - Be the first to recommend this
RD and Chris, Thank you both for your comments. So long as what ever we do is an evoutionary process, I would give it an 80% chance of improving our status quo. Eventually the best technology will always win. Abrupt transportation changes from present methods to battery electric would be almost as devastating to our economy as abrupt climate change would be to our survival. It took almost 30 years to go from the horse, buggy and plow to cars, trucks and tractors as our main mode of transportation and farming. Even then some stuck with the old ways. As late as 1950 my uncle Floyd still plowed, tilled, planted and harvested 40 acres with a team of horses. Please don't tell me that the people from Michigan are just that much tougher. During that same time many Texans were hand picking cotton. Thanks, Bill f.
posted by Ronald David on 6/29/2007 - Be the first to recommend this
Hello alpollo, Chris Askelson, bill f., Whoops, I missed it, almost -- alpollo wrote; "The only true path to energy independence without starving more people is to produce electric vehicles." Energy independence? Manufacturing new vehicles, electric or otherwise, even space vehicles, is a boon to oil companies, and blantanty confirms our 'energy dependence'. It isn't the vast amounts of fuel vehicles consume, although that is important, it is the fact it also takes vast amounts of fossil fuel to manufacture anything (as well as to operate anything)! Manufacturing in the current sense, absolutely requires fossil fuels. That growing demand will never lead to 'energy independence'. No matter how long the evolutionary process to design and convert to electric cars, to any kind of car, fossil fuel guys remain on top of the heap providing the manufacturers with fuel -- until the stuff runs out. bill f. wrote: "Abrupt transportation changes from present methods to battery electric would be almost as devastating to our economy as abrupt climate change would be to our survival." Define abrupt. Evolution is never abrupt, as in unexpected, sudden, surprising. Evolution is a slow, plodding, trial and error process. As to being devastating to our economy, that is nonsense. Define devastating to our economy. What keeps us tied to the oil companies is not their fault, it is their grand effort, It keeps us rolling in our cars, our manufacturing, our so called progress. Our rising demand is the boogey man.
SUN Fuel
posted by Ronald David on 6/20/2007 - This comment was recommended 1 time
It is a corny name for biofuel, made entirely from biomass feedstock. Picture a mixture of wood, bio-garbage, animal-waste, and fast maturing plants that are not edible.$br$ $br$ SUN Fuel does not pollute because it is up to 95% carbon dioxide neutral -- that is it emits a similar amount of CO2 that the plants it came from would have naturally produced if they were left in the ground. $br$ $br$ This biomass is used to produce biodiesel or SUN Fuel to be used in diesel engines. It is a low sulfur fuel containing 97% less sulfur than regular diesel fuel, thus reducing nitrous oxide (NOx) emissions by up to 90%. $br$ $br$ In the near term we are stuck with 'internal combustion engines'. We already have highly efficient diesel engines that will burn clean SUN Fuel (even used vegetable oil) right now without designing new engines or expensive kits and labor to convert your gas hog to burn biogas or mixtures thereof..$br$ $br$ It ain't purrfect but it beats buying crude oil to refine into gasoline, and eliminates polluting emissions that is killing the planet. $br$ $br$ So, put up your money, and next time round, buy a diesel-electric plug in vehicle. The sooner you do it the better trade-in allowance for a gas hog, which from now on is on a very slippery slope. $br$ $br$ Eventually, or so it seems, all cars may be electric. Clean diesel is the next best alternative to a gas hog, and by definition any new diesel car performs as well as or better than any hybrid vehicle, with better performance, and real world fuel efficiency.$br$ $br$ The longer you wait the less trade-in allowance you will get for a gasoline hog, regardless of its condition.$br$ $br$ {If these facts do not generate some debate, then I give up.}$br$ $br$
view all 13 replies
Re: SUN Fuel
posted by bill f. on 6/21/2007 - Be the first to recommend this
Ronald David, Making any kind of fuel from waste products is always a net gain since we are trying to impress the group that thinks terminal (fossil fuel) run-out is just around the corner. On the other hand, like I told Chris: If you read warning labels and I do; you will find out even this new product mixture will kill you and cause cancer in some form or fashion. I hope you and the rest of our group now realize that just because a product costs less to produce doesn't mean it will sell for less if the competition charges more. People that have to drive a lot in their vocation or to the best paying job they can get: must be mindful of the MPG they get and from 35 to 40+ MPG is important to them. Us people that are retired or semi-retired and drive less than 10K miles per year could care less. I just bought a 91 B---k with 66K miles and a 3800 V6 that gets 28 mpg on the road and I could care less. I paid less than 10 cents on the dollar of what a new one would cost. Ronald, remember its not what you make its how much you can keep! I guess that if they start mass producing butanol out of this new (sun tea), I get the best of both worlds. Thanks, Bill f.
posted by Ronald David on 6/22/2007 - Be the first to recommend this
Hello bill f., I wrote, "If these facts do not generate some debate, then I give up." Thank you for your vote of confidence! Who is trying to impress whom? Mr. Gore, the History and National Geographic TV channels, the media, the President, the Congress, even as the Speaker of the House says, "the American people" ALL believe fossil fuels are almost history (or as you put it "run-out is just around the corner"). Can they ALL be wrong? Did you read the warning label conspicuously posted under the mat in the trunk of the used car you say you recently bought. It warns, 'driving' your car, used or new, is more dangerous than developing cancer from any source, but less dangerous than being hit by lightning. Perhaps you and I can start a booming business in used gas hogs and lightning rods (for those who could care less)? You are absolutely correct by writing; " because a product (made overseas) costs less to produce doesn't mean it will sell for less..." I'm a model railroader, and today 97% of model trains are made in China, 1% in North Korea, 1% in Japan, and 1% in USA. The models coming from China in particular costs (proportionately) more than a real railroad engine. I wish Wal-Mart would get into the model railroad business (so I could afford the hobby again). Just like you, I shop for the best value for the least price. You do, right? Best value is no longer a consideration to modelers! I'm one of those 'dummies' who believe 40 MPG is important -- to my bank account -- whether working, disabled or retired it is important. I'm disappointed to read that you -- a professed champion for the next generation and our grand children -- "could care less" that your new used car gets less than 28 MPG. You know it is just possible that oil engineers aren't all con artists, anymore than all climate seers! I am mystified with your sentence; "its not what you make its how much you can keep!" Laying in our coffins does it make any difference to us, how much we made or how much we kept, (except to the tax collector)?