Thought you guys might find this interesting:
http://www.coe.berkeley.edu/labnotes/0305/patzek.html
http://www.coe.berkeley.edu/labnotes/0305/patzek.html
Interesting article on ethanol
- Thread starter Big_E
- Start date
- Status
Thats something that most of us bitogers already knew. Whats refreshing is that an "educated" professor is realizing this and letting others know. Especially with him being associated with "Berkeley".
I have a hard time believing this theory. I'm betting the oil companies bought this opinion for him.
"Theory?" First, a scientific theory is well thought out, well documented, and open to scientific challenge. A theory isn't a guess.
Second, this isn't a theory. It is a compilation of hard numbers. It is calculating the fuel used by the tractor plowing the field, the fertilizer plant making the fertilizer, the processing plant, etc.
Ken
Maja and Ken2 nailed it. I actually discovered the same thing when I was looking at soy oil for fuel......no such thing as free lunch, now that we are nearing a pinch point (I didn't say we are out of oil)
MolaKule
Staff member
Bingo! on the nuclear power plants although I still disagree with him on the PC bit about global warming. Gas-fired plants were not mentioned either.
With the new nuclear PBR's, we could have distributed NR's (as per the South African model) that would reduce the threat of large grids going down due to T attacks.
If you look at how we got to the top of the food chain, it was agriculture that got us there.
More calories were available from the food that we produced than were expended gaining them, so we had time to develop society and invent.
Now we are at a point where western agriculture uses 4 to 5 times as many calories producing food as actualy make it to our tables. Quakers run at around 3, while Oz (with vast cattle stations over semi-arid areas) can get to around 2.2 to 2.5.
While ever it takes more energy to produce the food than the food itself contains, any biofuels are doomed.
UNLESS the biofuel is a waste product from something that we do already, not a means to it's own end.
More calories were available from the food that we produced than were expended gaining them, so we had time to develop society and invent.
Now we are at a point where western agriculture uses 4 to 5 times as many calories producing food as actualy make it to our tables. Quakers run at around 3, while Oz (with vast cattle stations over semi-arid areas) can get to around 2.2 to 2.5.
While ever it takes more energy to produce the food than the food itself contains, any biofuels are doomed.
UNLESS the biofuel is a waste product from something that we do already, not a means to it's own end.
Molakule, that's what I found to be the most pertinent point also.
Current technology allows these thigns to be built down to 10MW size, and remote operation, allowing them to provide remote communities and stabilise the grid (and provide a starting system for the thermals if they all go down).
Breeder technology, which now includes the Indian thorium breeders provides an extensive fuel source, which has no potential for greenhouse issues, while keeping our precious fossil fuels in the ground.
And maybe fusion will factor into the future.
Current technology allows these thigns to be built down to 10MW size, and remote operation, allowing them to provide remote communities and stabilise the grid (and provide a starting system for the thermals if they all go down).
Breeder technology, which now includes the Indian thorium breeders provides an extensive fuel source, which has no potential for greenhouse issues, while keeping our precious fossil fuels in the ground.
And maybe fusion will factor into the future.
Everybody keeps forgetting about hydro and wind as an energy source for generating electricity. Yes, this is off topic a bit.
Where I was origonaly from, sev eral small northern towns had hydroelectric powerplants on the small rivers and provided cheap and clean electricity. In the mid 70's, the grand majority of them were bought up by the giant power companies and shut down in favor of the coal and oil burning plants. I think a giant step backward was taken.
Locally, a rich guy wants to set up a bank of giantic windmills to supply himself with electricity and sell back the remainder to the grid, the big power companies are blocking this guys efforts.
We are in a sad state of affairs, lets face it, we as an American people have lost control of our own country.
I will be doing my part, in my next plant, I will be heating it with bio diesel that we'll be making ourself and heating the house too. May even buy a diesel vehicle or two to help cut fuel costs.
Fuelman
Where I was origonaly from, sev eral small northern towns had hydroelectric powerplants on the small rivers and provided cheap and clean electricity. In the mid 70's, the grand majority of them were bought up by the giant power companies and shut down in favor of the coal and oil burning plants. I think a giant step backward was taken.
Locally, a rich guy wants to set up a bank of giantic windmills to supply himself with electricity and sell back the remainder to the grid, the big power companies are blocking this guys efforts.
We are in a sad state of affairs, lets face it, we as an American people have lost control of our own country.
I will be doing my part, in my next plant, I will be heating it with bio diesel that we'll be making ourself and heating the house too. May even buy a diesel vehicle or two to help cut fuel costs.
Fuelman
Fuelman.
I'm not forgetting about wind/hydro, and I think they (and solar) are certainly a part of the future, but are unfortunately only a small part.
My state has about 12,000MW of thermal (runs around 80% capacity), 2000MW of large hydro, and 10MW of wind power (and growing), plus a small number of microhydros. A 200MW solar power station is being designed at the moment.
That 10MW of wind power takes an incredible amount of space, and produces enough electricity to run one single Fan on one of the thermal units, or a boiler feed pump. It's tiny in comparison to the consumption of the state, but worthwhile and profitable, so there will be more.
Every dam in the country should have a small hydro built into it, regardless of the fact that they can produce KW not MW.
I'm not forgetting about wind/hydro, and I think they (and solar) are certainly a part of the future, but are unfortunately only a small part.
My state has about 12,000MW of thermal (runs around 80% capacity), 2000MW of large hydro, and 10MW of wind power (and growing), plus a small number of microhydros. A 200MW solar power station is being designed at the moment.
That 10MW of wind power takes an incredible amount of space, and produces enough electricity to run one single Fan on one of the thermal units, or a boiler feed pump. It's tiny in comparison to the consumption of the state, but worthwhile and profitable, so there will be more.
Every dam in the country should have a small hydro built into it, regardless of the fact that they can produce KW not MW.
The whole picture for EVERY technology is never fully analyzed. So why pick on ethanol without picking on everything else?
Fuel cells also need picking on.
How many billions will we spend on poorly thought out ideas?
What ever happened to the mandatory electric vehicle sales in California? Oh, I remember now. They had rolling blackouts and had to rethink their ignorance.
I know some owners of VW TDI vehicles that get 50mpg. Imagine if that TDI was equipped with Prius hybrid technology?? Imagine that TDI with an aluminum or lighter stronger steel body. Too bad TDIs can't be sold new in a bunch of states!
Centralized power sucks. Pretty simple!
Every rooftop should have solar panels. Every yard should have a windmill.
Too bad those same clowns pushing enviro thoughts don't like the look of solar panels or the sound of windmills and push for pathetic zoning requirements.
Every vehicle should be as light as possible and hybrid(whether diesel/ethanol/gasoline/hydrogen fueled).
As long as we are energy hyprocrites, nothing will change.
Fuel cells also need picking on.
How many billions will we spend on poorly thought out ideas?
What ever happened to the mandatory electric vehicle sales in California? Oh, I remember now. They had rolling blackouts and had to rethink their ignorance.
I know some owners of VW TDI vehicles that get 50mpg. Imagine if that TDI was equipped with Prius hybrid technology?? Imagine that TDI with an aluminum or lighter stronger steel body. Too bad TDIs can't be sold new in a bunch of states!
Centralized power sucks. Pretty simple!
Every rooftop should have solar panels. Every yard should have a windmill.
Too bad those same clowns pushing enviro thoughts don't like the look of solar panels or the sound of windmills and push for pathetic zoning requirements.
Every vehicle should be as light as possible and hybrid(whether diesel/ethanol/gasoline/hydrogen fueled).
As long as we are energy hyprocrites, nothing will change.
I think the every roof should have solar is an interesting point, may not be worthwhile in northern regions but then again they are tough and as I understand it should last longer than a typical asphalt shingle roof. I am no ecofreak my daily drivers are V8 4000-5000lbs pigs one should be pushing around 400hp by summer I do try to keep them maintained though and milage is better than most expect.
Ethanol is only a good idea from the farmers standpoint, electrics have batteries so even if you got the power from a non-fossil source still not a good thing, the hybrids don't get much better milage than the TDI mentioned or better than the old Metro and Festiva for that matter. Point being I don't think any of the current popular and PC ideas are all that good.
The hydro in every dam is a great idea, wind is difficult due to the space requirements, wonder how they would do on top of tall city buildings and wonder how managable the vibration/noise would be
.
On global warming the earth has heated and cooled for much longer than man has been around, the amount of time we have been studying it is miniscule far too short a time to jump to the conclusions they have. Sort of like another thread here about cutting open one filter and making a judgment on the whole brand, it does not make a pattern. I do not argue temps are up just that blaming man and certain chemicals is premature. I read an article about how freon was not that bad the patent was just running out so they jumped on a change to have it banned and develope and patent a new replacement
. We need scientist to do the mandating not beurocrats that answer to contributors and kneejerk reactions.
Ethanol is only a good idea from the farmers standpoint, electrics have batteries so even if you got the power from a non-fossil source still not a good thing, the hybrids don't get much better milage than the TDI mentioned or better than the old Metro and Festiva for that matter. Point being I don't think any of the current popular and PC ideas are all that good.
The hydro in every dam is a great idea, wind is difficult due to the space requirements, wonder how they would do on top of tall city buildings and wonder how managable the vibration/noise would be
On global warming the earth has heated and cooled for much longer than man has been around, the amount of time we have been studying it is miniscule far too short a time to jump to the conclusions they have. Sort of like another thread here about cutting open one filter and making a judgment on the whole brand, it does not make a pattern. I do not argue temps are up just that blaming man and certain chemicals is premature. I read an article about how freon was not that bad the patent was just running out so they jumped on a change to have it banned and develope and patent a new replacement
I think nukes are the way to go as well. Biofuel is only good for short-sighted farmers. I farmed my whole life until about 1 1/5 years ago when that all ended. I'd still love to do it, but I can't make it work. The point is that biofuel equals mining the soil, which is a monumentally stupid idea in the long-term.
Nukes are easy to fire up and shut down like hydros, so you can respond to demand changes quickly and easily. Large coal-fired (and even gas-fired AFAIK) plants don't start and stop quickly or easily.
I don't think wind power is either effective or particularly smart in the overall. Stopping enough wind to make a significant impact on our energy usage will lead to significant climate change, IMHO. The same is true of solar, I think.
Nukes are easy to fire up and shut down like hydros, so you can respond to demand changes quickly and easily. Large coal-fired (and even gas-fired AFAIK) plants don't start and stop quickly or easily.
I don't think wind power is either effective or particularly smart in the overall. Stopping enough wind to make a significant impact on our energy usage will lead to significant climate change, IMHO. The same is true of solar, I think.
It's a good article, but nothing new. Ethanol from a bio source receives a subsidy from the federal government. It's about $0.49/gallon. Might be higher now.
Farmers don't really win either since there's plenty of corn in the market. The limiting step is the fermentation. That's why Archer Daniels Midland (ADM) is making all the money...not the farmers.
Besides, ETBE is a better way to add bioethanol anyway. That's the way Europe is going.
- Status
Similar threads
