In defense of bio fuels

[pinkpops]

Well, not really. Many of you surely know more about it than I do.
But if we are striving for renewable energy and want to stay away form nuclear and coal, we are talking about solar ( wind/photo voltaic) and geothermal, correct?
It is photo voltaic that has me thinking about bio fuels, because it seems to me that this technology competes for sun exposure just as bio fuels do. And when it comes to distribution, electrolysis comes to mind (to make Hydrogen) which competes for water as well as sun.

[Johnny__Motown]

1. I don't know that much about it.. but wanted to chime in anyways

if only to get this thread rolling....




I don't think that electrolysis competing for water is a problem. Once you use the Hydrogen in a fuel cell you produce water. I don't know for certain but it was my understanding that the water reproduced from the fuel cell is equal (or nearly equal) to the amount used to produce the Hydrogen.


Solar seems to make the most sense to me. I don't understand why people talk about the need for a "Manhattan Project" for renewable energy sources when we could simply start mass producing solar panels.

I also think there should be a program to help homeowners afford solar panels for their houses. If the benefit of those panels were estimated and the cost spread out to make it "cost neutral" until they are payed off it could be seen as very attractive. Once they were payed off the panels would then be providing energy without any cost. It should also increase the value of the home. If energy companies provided these solar panels, and installed them, the payment could be on your electric bill and you would not even need to write a separate check to make the monthly payment. If this caught on and most homes produced a portion of their own electricity it may also reduce the strain on our intra-structure.



My big question is about sugar based ethanol. I understand that sugar cane can only be grown in regions closer to the equator. We can't grow it here and do what Brazil did. I assume other places with similar climates can. Why don't we stimulate the production of sugar based ethanol in these countries and import that instead of oil? I am clearly over simplifying here but I think you see my point.

Corn should be used for bio-diesel IMO. The corn based ethanol just does not produce enough energy to make it worth the effort.

I don't know why we are still talking about this stuff instead of acting in any meaningful way.

OK, I rambled on longer than I intended to. Sorry about that. I hope this thread takes off in spite of me.

[msongs]

2. we investigated rooftop solar recently - it's still not cost effective but that may change soon as

solar film technology is about to blossom big time. we also looked into companies making solar film and they are just getting started using private capital, not selling stock much at this time.

Msongs

[Johnny__Motown]

3. Not even if projected "far" into the future? Say, a decade?

A solar panel can't pay for itself (and it's installation/maintenance) in 10 years? These things last longer than that don't they?


Even is we can bring down costs with mass production? What if we assume the current trends in the cost of electricity continue?


Again, I admit I don't know much about it but I have got to believe there is a way to make it cost effective.

[philb]

14. solar PV and solar hot water and solar pool heating are all cost effective in Florida

They all pay back over the life of the installation. All have substantial tax credits.
Solar hot water would be cost effective for many without the subsidy, but with the subsidy pays back in fewer years.
Likewise for solar pool heating, compared to natural gas.

[rasputin1952]

4. It is a combination of all things we can derive usable energy from

that is the key.

Corn is not the "answer", yeast feed on sugar, but opening up the market to purchase South American sugar would help dramatically. Rather than the incredibly high tariffs we have to protect a few sugar producers here in the US, (and we subsidize the sugar industry as well), production costs of ETOH would drop dramatically, as the whole front end of the process drops from the equation if sugar is the primary source, as opposed to having to get at the sugars in corn and other grains. Fluidized Bed Reactors are the next step for biomass becoming ETOH. They can turn incredible amounts of biomass into gas that is in turn refined into alcohol.

Solar, wind, tidal, geothermal all play a major role in our becoming energy independent. If the incentive is there, solutions will follow. The biggest problem we have right now...people are not seeing the serious problems that are coming from the petroleum industry, and we are not demanding change through our habits.

Not that long ago, we depended on whale oil for lighting and lubrication, coal and wood for heat and generation of power. We changed then, we can change again. Industry has to stand up as well...if American auto makers want to sell cars, they had better start selling things w/engines that are multi fuel, like the rest of the world is doing. When you have morons at the top, the idiocy tends to travel downhill. Until these people who produce such energy consuming items start getting their collective heads out of the sand in the Middle East oil reserves, not much will come from this nation in the form of energy reform.

I have a flex-fuel Ford, a 95 Taurus. If I fill up w/E-85 at $2.62 per gallon and drive normally, I lose approximately 1 mpg. Not bad, so I lose 16 mpg per tank. At 41.62 a fill up, (from dead empty) vs. $58.24 I see an immediate savings of $16.62 per tank, I lose 16 mpg...I'm way ahead of the game. If I make sure everything is tuned up, and road worthy, like making sure tire pressure and and a pretty empty trunk are included...my fuel consumption is virtually equal to that of E-10. This car is 13 years old...things are dramatically different now and the savings in one's wallet as well as the environment can be accomplished w/little pain.

[Johnny__Motown]

5. I agree, but I am tired of just talking about it and not doing what can already be done

Opening the sugar market is not what I was talking about.



I suggest creating ethanol "on site" where the sugar is grown. Then importing the finished product.

(From what I know of Brazil's production they burn the unused portion of the cane to produce electricity and use that power to produce the ethanol)

I am also suggesting we invest (or encourage investment) in sugar cane growth and ethanol production in countries that do not now grow this crop.


I know we need more than this to make a serious dent in our fossil fuel economy. I am taking the "bird in the hand" attitude.

[rasputin1952]

6. Transportation of ETOH is a major problem...it doesn't pipe well...

and there are other logistical problems.

Here in NE, we'd love to be able to ship further, but the costs of shipping far outweigh the benefits. CA is going to open it's first ETOH plants on a mass basis, (>100 million gals each), mainly because rail and trucking costs are so high. There are "closed" plants, where they not only generate ETOH, but heat and electricity as well, in fact, enough electricity

As far as sugarcane, specific ranges limit it's growth, but sugar beets have a lot of sugar...but time is a factor, as the available sugar levels drop dramatically after 48 hours.

It will come together, but it must be a concerted effort, especially at the consumer level.

caveat: I am currently changing careers and am finishing up a 2 year course in Applied Science at my local Community College in Renewable Fuels. I can tell you, there is a very high demand for this specialty, as things are constantly changing and technology is gearing up to the challenge.

[kristopher]

7. Energy quantity and quality

Energy quantity and quality are both important. Qualitiy is defined as high energy density and portability, you can put a lot of energy in a container of some sort and take it where you need to do work. Liquid fuels are good 'energy carriers' in this regard.

But we also need to consider energy quantity, how much energy do we get for a given amount of effort. This "Energy Returned on Energy Invested" EROEI or EROI is a good indicator of the best strategy for getting the most energy with the least effort.

When we evaluate the technologies ready to be used with these two measures, we find that wind, solar, geothermal and wave/current/tidal all give high energy returns for the amount of energy invested in them.

Biofuels are a type of solar collecting, true, but it requires a lot more energy input than solar PV or passive solar. In fact, it gives back slightly more energy than is put into it, but not enough to help with all the other needs for energy in our society.
You could think of it like hunting. Ethanol is a tribal hunter who goes out every day and eats his fill along the way; but he only brings back enough to feed 1/2 of another person. A 'good' hunter like wind, however, feeds himself and brings back enough food for 50 other people.

That doesn't mean biofuels aren't important. For example, if those more prolific renewable sources are the input energy for ethanol, then what we are doing is storing energy (from wind say) in a liquid form so that we can use it in a way that we cannot use electricity for. A good example would be the heavy machinery of life, like airplanes, ships, earth moving equipment etc.

For most purposes though, electricity, as it is delivered through the grid from wind, solar, geothermal and wave/current/tidal, is going to be the best way to do work.

For automobiles, of all the ways to store energy to ride around on the most efficient one is battery electric drive. That is because if you include all steps for getting the energy to the wheels of the car, battery electric charged from the grid loses the least along the way.

Hydrogen is a no go. First, you need energy to distill it, then you need energy to compress it and transport it, then you need to convert the hydrogen either back into electricity or burn it in an internal combustion engine. Each of those steps results in a pretty significant loss of energy; so much so that it is one of the least efficient alternatives out there.

[izquierdista]

9. Not ethanol, but butanol

The better way to convert vegetative matter into fuel is to ferment it to butanol, not ethanol. Butanol is a much better replacement for gasoline than ethanol, but the technology for butanol fermentation was abandoned in the 1920's, when cheap petroleum made butanol from crude oil more cost effective. Maybe it will have a renaissance.

You can learn more at www.biobutanol.org (warning: obnoxious ads)

[eppur_se_muova]

10. Or, heck, just DUgle butanol :)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/searchresults.html?domains=democraticunderground.com&q=butanol&sa=Search&sitesearch=democraticunderground.com&client=pub-7805397860504090&forid=1&ie=ISO-8859-1&oe=ISO-8859-1&cof=GALT%3A%23008000%3BGL%3A1%3BDIV%3A%23336699%3BVLC%3A663399%3BAH%3Acenter%3BBGC%3AFFFFFF%3BLBGC%3A336699%3BALC%3A0000FF%3BLC%3A0000FF%3BT%3A000000%3BGFNT%3A0000FF%3BGIMP%3A0000FF%3BFORID%3A11&hl=en

the wiki is reasonably informative:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butanol_fuel

[Fledermaus]

8. There are good reasons why electric cars can't compete with liquid fuels.

Even with the newest Li-ion batteries, we can only expect to get 65% of the energy back out of an electric car. The energy efficiency of any battery decreases the harder it is worked. An electric car, with it's stop and go, is very punishing on batteries.

It is claimed that Li-ion batteries have an efficiency of 95%. However, that is only with a constant current discharge. Driving an eclectic car in the city is anything but constant current discharge.

The application duty cycle plays an very important role in determining the energy efficiency of a cell

From Figure 4, it can be observed that as the duty cycle eccentricity of the current profile
increases, the efficiency decreases for all the battery systems tested.

http://www.pluginhighway.ca/PHEV2007/proceedings/PluginHwy_PHEV2007_PaperReviewed_Valoen.pdf

The EROI (Energy Return On energy Invested) of sugarcane ethanol is 8. Currently, gasoline has an EROI of about 5???(Why anybody would call gasoline's EROI greater than one is beyond me, but that's the game thats played around here.) Wood chips has an EROI of 26 and cord wood has an EROI greater than 30. Hydrogen???...but some day!!!

However, with Plug in Hybrid cars, it is possible to store some renewable energy, such as wind and solar, that would otherwise be lost. Vehicle to Grid technology would allow Plug in Hybrids to supply electricity back into the grid when need.

[excess_3]

11. nobody cares about efficiency

most people care about ...

$$$


some people care about...
cutting the middle east out of the deal
cutting oil companies out of the deal

the electric car is coming

[Fledermaus]

13. I’ll go further than that. I’ll get off at the train station.

You can't put a large amount of cars like the GM volt or 100% electric cars on the grid willy nilly. They would pull the gird down.

Any large scale eclectic car or plug in hybrid fleet will have to be integrated into the grid. You will have to give up some rights. You will have to let your local utility dictate to you when to charge up. Plug in hybrid drivers will have an advantage and can use their internal combustion engine to charge up any time.

People who choose to purchase 100% eclectic cars can purchase or rent range extenders.

http://evmaine.org/html/ev_trailers.html
Some families may own several electric cars, but own only one range extender. The range extender my also double as back up power and heat for their homes. Imagine, everybody owning their own personal mobile co generation plant.

Or, imagine, hybrid trains that we could use and place our eclectic cars on for transportation. Part of our ticket could be offset buy using our plug in hybrids or eclectic cars supplying part or all of the trains energy needs.

When we eventually see through the veils to how things really are, we will keep saying again
and again,..."This is certainly not like we thought it was!"

[losthills]

12. Not hard to figure out

why an ethanol lobbyist would be dissing electric vehicles:

$$$$$$$$$.......

[philb]

15. The big difference is the source of biofuel- some more cost effective and beneficial than others

Biodiesel from used fast food grease is very cost effective and beneficial. Likewise biofuels from agricultural waste such as manure, sugar cane bagesse, etc. And biofuel from other waste materials.
But corn kernals is not as effective an option, though including the crop residue increases the efficiency.
There are other uses for the crop residue, such as plowing under as fertilizer/organic amendment for next crop however that isn't taken into account by some. If you don't do it, you need more fertilizer for the next crop.