How then, do we move backwards? How does a society, with most of the people having no clue of future events, move from being dependent on a vast and intertwined network of goods and services produced by the indigenous people of whereever, to a local resource and renewable energy based society, and do so in the timeframe available (20-30 years using the most liberal extimates, 10-20 with resonable estimates, 5-10 with worst case scenarios), all the while prices on everything increasing, world politics getting more militaristic, governments continuously reducing civil liberties, shortages of goods on the market and weather patterns resembling bad Hollywood movies?
Posted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 11:23 am Post subject: The Mother of all Biofuels Debates (large scale)
Since this topic has been rehashed and rehashed, let's have one final debate of the pro's and con's of biofuels as a solution to the liquid fuels problem we are facing.
To start the debate, I think it comes down to EROEI, scalability, energy density, and time. We are going from a stock to a flow of energy. While biofuels have great potential and I support their development, they will only replace or supplement existing liquids fuels on a small scale.
Feel free to cut and paste relevant posts from other threads as the idea is to condense this debate into one thread so as not to have it rehashed. Many posters do not read the threads that have discussed this issue at length, and it has become tedious for all to constantly revisit the crucial points of the debate. _________________ A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
Live in Arizona? Check out: http://sustainablearizona.org and read my blog.
Last edited by MonteQuest on Tue May 16, 2006 4:40 pm; edited 2 times in total
Joined: Mar 04, 2005 Posts: 2552 Location: New Zealand
Posted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 12:44 pm Post subject: Mother of all biofuels debates
I'll start this by copying the relevant material from the OICA site:
7 BIOFUELS (Biomass)
Biofuels are alcohols, ethers, esters, and other chemicals made from cellulosic biomass such
as herbaceous and woody plants, agricultural and forestry residues, and a large portion of
municipal solid and industrial waste. Biofuels include fuels used for power generation but
we will focus on automotive use including bioethanol, biodiesel, biomethanol, and pyrolysis
oils.
Biological material can be used as automotive fuel in several ways:
– Plant oils (rapeseed (colza), soybean, sunflower, etc.) can be converted (by
transesterification process) into a diesel substitute to be blended with conventional diesel or
burnt as a sole fuel.
– Sugar beets, cereals and other crops can be fermented to produce alcohol (bio-ethanol)
which can either be used as a component in gasoline, or as motor fuel in pure form. Future
developments may also make it possible to produce economically competitive bio-ethanol
from wood or straw material.
– Organic waste material can be converted into automotive fuel as follows:
waste oil (cooking oil) into biodiesel,
animal manure and organic household waste into biogas
plant waste products into bio-ethanol.
Quantities are limited in most cases, but raw materials are free and waste recycling costs are
reduced.
In the medium term, other liquid and gaseous biofuels produced by thermochemical
processing of biomass such as bio-dimethylether, bio-methanol, bio-oils (pyrolysis oils) and
hydrogen could become competitive.
What Are The Benefits
They are a renewable and inexhaustible source of fuel, which can produce lower
atmospheric pollution than petroleum fuels.
They are potentially C02 neutral.
They can use wastes that currently have no use.
They can be domestically sourced to reduce dependence on foreign oil, an issue that came
into sharp relief following the increases in oil prices in 1973.
Issues – specific issues for bio diesel and biogas are included in their respective sections
Bio fuels are expensive and the energy consumption in producing bio diesel is such that
roughly half of the CO2 benefit is offset in the production process - more so for bio-ethanol.
This offset can be reduced by fuelling the production process with waste material from crops
(straw), but this tends to further increase costs.
The maximum overall bio fuel substitution is usually considered around 8% of present
gasoline and diesel consumption if bio fuel production was restricted to the 10% of
agricultural land presently covered by the set aside regime.
In certain circumstances there may be an increase in unregulated emissions which can be
respiratory irritants and therefore an air quality penalty.
Overall
Whereas bio fuels will hardly be seen as a long-term high volume substitute for motor fuels
because of the limitation of available land, they merit attention in the short to medium term
because they can be applied to existing vehicles using the current distribution system and
thus do not require expensive infrastructure investment, provided they are used as blending
components rather than substitute fuels.
8 BIODIESEL
The pioneer diesel engine of 1895 used vegetable oil and Rudolf Diesel’s demonstrator
vehicle of 1900 used peanut oil.
What is Biodiesel?
Bio-diesel (mono alkyl esters) is a variety of ester based oxygenated fuel made from
domestic renewable resources (plant oils/animal fats) and includes all fatty acid methyl ester
(FAME) fuels that can come from a variety of sources including
VOME - Vegetable Oil Methyl Esters such as
SOME/SME - Soya Bean Methyl Esters, Olive oil
RAME/RME - Rape Seed Methyl Esters, peanuts, cottonseed, sunflower seed, hemp.
UVOME – Used Vegetable Oils, fuels made from [re-]used (recycled) cooking oils (known
in the US as 'Yellow grease')
TME – Tallow Methyl Ester, animal oils including waste oils resulting from the rendering of
animal carcasses.
- Also Ethyl Esters such as
REE – Rape Ethyl Ester and E – Soy Ethyl Ester
Use of unmodified vegetable oils results in severe deposit formation and hence use of their
esters is preferred.
Because it has similar properties to diesel fuel, bio-diesel is an alternative fuel capable of
being successfully used directly in any existing, unmodified diesel engine and can be
blended in any ratio with diesel fuel (but see materials compatibility concerns where blend
strengths exceed 5%). Bio diesel can be stored anywhere that diesel fuel is stored and
maintains the payload capacity and range of diesel. Properties may differ slightly in terms of
energy content, cetane number or other physical properties.
How is Biodiesel Made?
Currently, bio diesel is produced by a process called transesterification whereby the
vegetable oil/animal fat is first filtered, then processed with alkali to remove free fatty acids.
It is then mixed with an alcohol (usually methanol but can also be ethanol) and a catalyst
(typically sodium or potassium hydroxide), reacting to form fatty esters such as methyl ester
or ethyl ester, and glycerol, which products are then separated and purified. Glycerol (used
in pharmaceuticals and cosmetics) is produced as a co-product.
Biodiesel Fuel Market
Much interest in bio diesel production comes from the farming industry faced with an excess
of production capacity, product surpluses, and declining produce prices and its use has
grown dramatically during the last few years. Soybeans contain about 20 percent oil and it
takes about 0.73 kg of soybean oil to produce a litre of fuel (1 bushell of soybeans to
produce 1.5 US gallons of biodiesel). The rapeseed used in Europe has an oil content of
about 40 percent but some other oil seeds contain as much as 50 percent oil. In the UK a
hectare of land is required to produce a tonne (1100 litres) of biodiesel from rapeseed oil.
(Bio Fuels Northern Ireland)
Benefits: where used 100% neat
Pure bio-diesel is 11% oxygen by weight and for this reason combustion may provide
significant reductions in pollutants. Initial analysis suggests that the CO2 benefits are not
that significant but when CO2 absorption during plant growth is factored in the benefits
become worthwhile. The lifecycle production and use of bio-diesel is claimed to produce at
least 50% less carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions, plus substantial
reductions in total unburned hydrocarbons and aromatic hydrocarbons, plus modest
reductions in particulates and carbon monoxide compared with diesel fuel.
Biodiesel works well with new technologies such as catalysts (which reduces the soluble
fraction of diesel particulate but not the solid carbon fraction), particulate traps, and exhaust
gas recirculation (potentially longer engine life due to less carbon).
The impact with types of bio-diesel other than RME is difficult to quantify because fuel
characteristics can vary so much. Based on Ames Mutagenicity tests in the US, bio-diesel is
claimed to provide a 90% reduction in cancer risks, but other work in Europe (notably a
recent Swedish report) casts doubt on this. Bio-diesel is safe to handle and transport because
it is as biodegradable as sugar (but see stability problems), 10 times less toxic than table salt,
and has a much higher flashpoint than diesel fuel.
Issues:
Bio-diesel in HGVs may provide a significant increase in nitrogen oxides. It is estimated
that the maximum feasible replacement of conventional diesel fuel by bio-diesel (assuming
use of “set aside” land only) amounts to about 5%. Because of materials compatibility and
stability problems with bio diesel (discussed below) the motor industry recommends that the
fuel should be used in a blend of up to 5% with conventional diesel and that 100% use (or
85% blends) of bio-diesel should be restricted to vehicles specifically designed for its use.
Given the supply limitations just outlined and the substantial on-cost for vehicles to be
compatible with high blend strength or 100% bio diesel, such use should be restricted to
captive fleets (also SI ethanol flex fuelled vehicles - FFVs).
Stability of bio-diesel
As noted earlier, use of unmodified vegetable oils results in severe deposit formation and
thus use of their esters is preferred.
A number of potential problems have already been found with bio-diesels. Of prime concern
is the propensity for the fuel to age. Extensive tests have shown that fuel degradation can
take place in the fuel supply chain and in the vehicle fuel system, accelerated by the
presence of oxygen, water, heat and impurities. The products of bio-degradation have been
shown to cause the following problems-
-Corrosion of aluminium and zinc components in fuel injection systems due to free methanol
-Elastomeric seal failures (softening/swelling or hardening/cracking) due to fatty acids
-Low pressure fuel system blockage from fatty acids/free glycerine
-Injector spray hole blockage/poor atomisation from potassium/sodium solid compounds
-Increased dilution and polymerisation of engine sump oil
-lubricity problems polymerisation (thickening) or dilution requiring increased lube oil
changes.
- Injection pump seizures due to high fuel viscosity at low temperatures
(Source Delphi Diesel Systems)
Draft CEN standards (prEN14124) are being developed for bio-diesels (publication October
2003?) but until quality standards are established and compliance can be assured for the fuel
during storage, manufacturers will be unable to provide a full warranty where such fuel is
blended with conventional diesel in blend strengths exceeding 5%.
Availability
It is estimated that availability of land in Europe is such that at best bio-diesel can only
provide about 5% of the fuel demands. Thus availability of 100% bio-diesel (B100) would
be very limited and perhaps very localised reducing widespread consumer interest in
vehicles compatible with such fuel.
Overall
Once fuel quality standards are established and the supply of bio-diesel is assured to remain
in conformity with such standards, bio-diesel should form a useful extender to conventional
diesel in blends of up to 5% (B5). Supply restrictions and the need for dedicated vehicles
will limit widespread use of 100% bio-diesel (B100) in Europe.
Sources include Center for Renewable Energy and Sustainable Energy - USA
9 LANDFILL GAS AND BIOGAS
What Is Landfill gas?
Before defining biogas it is necessary to describe landfill gas which is a major source of
biogas, being a cheap, clean and highly efficient source of renewable energy. Landfill gas
exploits a resource which could otherwise pollute the atmosphere and transforms it into
useful electricity and heat at prices comparable with conventional power. More generation
schemes have been built in the UK using landfill gas than with any other "new" renewable
technology.
Landfill gas (typically 45% methane, 35% carbon dioxide and 20% nitrogen) occurs
naturally wherever household and commercial waste is disposed of in engineered rubbish
sites. As the organic matter in the buried waste decomposes it creates a methane-rich biogas,
the methane providing a valuable source of energy for both heat and power. Landfill gas is
produced within about a year of the first tipping. It can continue to be exploited for decades
afterwards
Bio gas
Biogas is similar to landfill gas but enriched with methane 60-65% content and minimal
nitrogen. At a modern disposal site, excavated areas are progressively lined with an
impervious material before being filled with waste and then capped over again. The lining
and capping help to prevent gas escaping. The activities of the naturally occurring anaerobic
bacteria can be exploited in purpose built biogas plants/digesters to breakdown organic
wastes such as liquid manure, fixed muck, waste from agriculture, slaughterhouses and food
factories to produce biogas and spent supernatant the latter serving as a high quality liquid
agricultural fertilizer. The organic waste material is given to a septic tank or digester,
without air or light access. The process duration depends on the special microorganisms
(psychophil, mesophil, and thermophil) and their optimal growth temperatures - typically
100, 30 and 10 days at 15º, 35º and 55ºC respectively.
Issues
The developed fermentation gas unfortunately also contains approx. 1% hydrogen sulphide
(H2S) - a poisonous and corrosive gas, which is removed by injecting 3 - 5 % air into the
digester or tank separating the H2 S into water and elementary sulphur, the latter providing
liquid manure.
Like wind and solar power, landfill/bio-gas is one of the "new" sources of renewable energy,
which have been developed seriously (especially the USA) since the oil price crisis 25 years
ago. These gases do not burden the environment, air water or soil, and they conserve fossil
resources such as natural gas, oil or coal.
The biogas can be used either directly as a fuel for process heating, electricity generation or
it can be further purified and used as an automotive fuel (albeit with a lower methane
content than Natural Gas) plus attendant risks related to the presence of potentially corrosive
materials. Special lubricants may be required to accommodate the higher sulphur content. A
typical engine using biogas would be a reciprocating internal combustion spark ignition
engine in the power range of 100 - 2500kW powering generators.
Posted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 1:28 pm Post subject: Re: Mother of all biofuels debates
Graeme wrote:
In the UK a
hectare of land is required to produce a tonne (1100 litres) of biodiesel from rapeseed oil.
(Bio Fuels Northern Ireland)
Well, peeling off a small piece, that number saves the mechanized small farm. Five acres of rapeseed (canola over here) will give plenty of biodeisel for a 100 acre family farm. And you still get to use what's left of the seeds for animal (or human in famine times) food.
I predict that, before 2010, more than twice the amount of money will be invested in small to medium scale biofuels projects in those countries that are located between the tropic of cancer and the tropic of capricorn, than will be invested in North America, Europe and East Asia (Japan, China) combined.
And that more than half of the production coming from those investments will be exported to North America, Europe and East Asia, because the end product will cost far less than the price paid for the energy contained in a barrel of oil, or than the price paid for the equivalent amount of energy contained in biofuels that were produced in these more northern countries. (Transport from those producing countries to the North included in the final price at the port).
We should make clear what we are discussing. There's a range of applications from modest, locally appropriate use of biofuels (which is probably feasible and sustainable) to replacing oil 100% (which is probably neither).
There's also a clear distinction between:
1. transition technologies that will buy us the time to reduce the impact of peak oil, and, more critically, avert the possibility of a runaway greenhouse effect (or other forms of ecological catastrophe);
and
2. technologies that will help us meet our energy needs in some as-yet-undefined sustainable future.
They are probably very different.
Lorenzo - you could easily be right. Cynically - I think this is why Tony Blair is so interested in Africa all of a sudden.
The EROEI is irrelevant - biofuels will be used to power our aeroplanes, ships and tanks whatever it takes. It may be expensive, difficult and inefficient to make - but it will still be made on a massive scale. The fact that replacing oil with biofuels of whatever sort is totally unsustainable is irrelevant.
So, goodbye rainforests (prime palm oil land);
goodbye breathable air (biofuels may be less toxic than petrol etc per unit volume in combustion, but they are still toxic and we will be burning relatively more of the stuff);
goodbye landrights (it always happens in a gold rush);
goodbye clean water as pesticides, herbicides & fertilizers are used to maximise yields (yes palm oil can be grown sustainably - but it won't be);
goodbye water (as people try to grow palm oil etc further North or South [EDIT - and therefore need to irrigate] because the dryland oil crops dont yield as well);
etc. etc.
Unless...
there is some kind of shift in awareness. There is no technofix to greed. We will merely hit Peak Something Else.
Last edited by jpfrazer on Sun Jun 19, 2005 11:57 pm; edited 2 times in total
Joined: Oct 12, 2004 Posts: 1647 Location: Davis, California
Posted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 7:28 pm Post subject:
Biofuels are cool because I'm getting my degree in making them _________________ Joseph Stalin "It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything. "
Joined: Jun 13, 2005 Posts: 1206 Location: Western US
Posted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 9:40 pm Post subject:
Quote:
Because of materials compatibility and stability problems with bio diesel (discussed below) the motor industry recommends that the
fuel should be used in a blend of up to 5% with conventional diesel and that 100% use (or 85% blends) of bio-diesel should be restricted to vehicles specifically designed for its use.
Sure about that one? I have a friend who bought a used Mercedes Diesel, uses B100 exclusively, and loves it!
Biodiesel can be operated in any diesel engine with little or no modification to the engine or the fuel system. Biodiesel has a solvent effect that may release deposits accumulated on tank walls and pipes from previous diesel fuel storage. The release of deposits may clog filters initially and precautions should be taken. Ensure that only fuel meeting the biodiesel specification is used.
Joined: Oct 03, 2004 Posts: 512 Location: Washington State
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2005 12:10 am Post subject:
I won't bet against Lorenzo. Biofuels have been produced in the US because of Gov't subsidies (corn, ethanol, soy) While there are homebrewers using waste vegetable oil and academic research using canoil, almost all US produced biodiesel comes from soybeans and is controlled by large agricultural corps. It's going to take a massive shift in thinking to make biofuels anything besides "business as usual"
Will production of biofuels delay peak oil? sure, about the same as drilling in ANWAR.
Will peak biofuels be TEOTWAWKI? No. After peak oil, we feudal peons will be glad for all the security given us by our lords and masters. We know they will get us through peak biofuels as adeptly as they did when oil peaked. _________________ This is where everybody puts profound words written by another...or not so profound words written by themselves
Highlander 2007
Joined: Mar 04, 2005 Posts: 2552 Location: New Zealand
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2005 6:36 am Post subject:
Brazil biofuel strategy pays off as gas prices soar
About 70,000 farmers produced 385 million tons of sugar cane last year, and refiners made 4 billion gallons of alcohol fuel -- enough to replace 460 million barrels of oil.
But over the past 12 months, 160 million gallons of the Brazilian product still entered the country (USA).
Drivers in parts of Minnesota were paying $1.59 for a gallon of E85, compared with $1.99 for regular gasoline.
Adapting cars to pure ethanol can be done relatively inexpensively by adding a fuel sensor and corrosion-resistant hoses. .
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2005 9:59 am Post subject: Re: Mother of all biofuels debates
FrankRichards wrote:
Graeme wrote:
In the UK a
hectare of land is required to produce a tonne (1100 litres) of biodiesel from rapeseed oil.
(Bio Fuels Northern Ireland)
Well, peeling off a small piece, that number saves the mechanized small farm. Five acres of rapeseed (canola over here) will give plenty of biodeisel for a 100 acre family farm. And you still get to use what's left of the seeds for animal (or human in famine times) food.
Theoretically, that 5% of land could provide 100% of a farm's energy needs. Not only can the leftover protein cake from the seed press be used in feed, but if the farm operate its own bio-diesel processor, or a co-op of farms have a regional processor, the leftover glycerine can be used as fertilizer (from what I have read). Glycerine can also be blended with cellulose matter such as paper, sawdust, or shredded straw and used in a biomass furnace to produce both heating and electricity.
If 100% of agriculture's energy needs were met from local production, that would be an excellent way to replace a significant chunk of foreign oil.
What energy will be used in the heavy equipment to clear the rainforest? How can you say EROEI is irrelevant when no fuel can exit this closed system? All the resulting energy will be re-input into the biofuel program and none will ever get out. This is ridiculous.
jpfrazer wrote:
goodbye landrights (it always happens in a gold rush)
And the dispossessed farmers. What do they eat? Where is their food grown now that the land is producing energy?
jpfrazer wrote:
goodbye clean water as pesticides, herbicides & fertilizers are used to maximise yields
You can not make pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers from biomass. They come from petroleum. Irrigation is pumped with what? Virtual computer technology, good intentions, bad intentions?
EROEI is not "irrelevant." I have to believe that folks who make such blanket statement know very little of the real, non-virtual world outside their computers.
If you bothered to learn anything about petroleum production, you would see that the virtually free oil that this society depends on can never, never, never, never be replaced by energy intensive biomass products. period.
What energy will be used in the heavy equipment to clear the rainforest? How can you say EROEI is irrelevant when no fuel can exit this closed system? All the resulting energy will be re-input into the biofuel program and none will ever get out. This is ridiculous.
Rainforests can be very easily cleared by hand or fire if necessary, and a chainsaw probably doesn't use too much (bio)fuel. I doubt if the EROEI of biofuels are negative (anyone got actual fiures for the different types under different production/ storage/ transport regimes?) - just not nearly so high as for oil. Wood can be burned to provide the heat required for gassification or distillation. I personally don't think EROEI is irrelevant, in the same way that I dont think sustainability is irrelevant - I'm just saying that its irrelevant for the addicts who will stop at nothing...
pstarr wrote:
And the dispossessed farmers. What do they eat? Where is their food grown now that the land is producing energy?
I don't know - ask the indigenous people of the Amazon who have been dispossessed (or even just murdered)! Again this problem is irrelevant to the logging/ ranching/ drilling companies - and probably also to the biofuel companies.
pstarr wrote:
You can not make pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers from biomass. They come from petroleum.
There are plenty of non-oil derived versions of all of these. Fertilisers always used to come from livestock, and/or fires (ash) - but although technically organic, too much still causes problems such as eutrophication of water bodies. Non-oil based pesticides include nicotine and pyrethrum.
pstarr wrote:
Irrigation is pumped with what?
Umm... slave labour, wind, solar, nuclear, biofuels? Where there's a will there's a way.
pstarr wrote:
...the virtually free oil that this society depends on can never, never, never, never be replaced by energy intensive biomass products. period.
I agree, but that's not what I was saying. I won't return your insults - but perhaps you could re-read my post?
Last edited by jpfrazer on Mon Jun 20, 2005 3:08 pm; edited 1 time in total
While biofuels have great potential and I support their development, they will only replace or supplement existing liquids fuels on a small scale.
That's a rather sweeping statement. Care to back that up with some facts or statistics? Allow me to state the opposite, and back it up with some numbers.
But let's look at some numbers. It is estimated that land photosynthesis contributes 120 billion metric tons per year of carbon, according to http://epswww.unm.edu/facstaff/gmeyer/envsc101/wk14biogeochem.htm In carbohydrate form (C6H12O6) this represents a total biomass of 300 billion t/yr. Let us assume you only collect 10% of that, or 30 billion t/yr. According to CWT, they can convert 1 ton of waste into 2 barrels of oil, so the yield would be 60 billion barrels of oil per year. Global demand for crude is expected to be 81.8 million barrels per day for 2005, according to http://www.axcessnews.com/business_102804b.shtml or about 30 billion barrels for the year. Oops, we have too much biomass.
Quote:
While biofuels have great potential and I support their development, they will only replace or supplement existing liquids fuels on a small scale.
That's a rather sweeping statement. Care to back that up with some facts or statistics? Allow me to state the opposite, and back it up with some numbers.
Quoting myself from http://peakoil.com/fortopic5194-15.html
Quote:
But let's look at some numbers. It is estimated that land photosynthesis contributes 120 billion metric tons per year of carbon, according to http://epswww.unm.edu/facstaff/gmeyer/envsc101/wk14biogeochem.htm In carbohydrate form (C6H12O6) this represents a total biomass of 300 billion t/yr. Let us assume you only collect 10% of that, or 30 billion t/yr. According to CWT, they can convert 1 ton of waste into 2 barrels of oil, so the yield would be 60 billion barrels of oil per year. Global demand for crude is expected to be 81.8 million barrels per day for 2005, according to http://www.axcessnews.com/business_102804b.shtml or about 30 billion barrels for the year. Oops, we have too much biomass.
Oh well, we'll have to take it slowly then...
Your name is really showing here. I've argued enough over this topic and I'm done. PLEASE reread other posts. Why others disagree is stated there.
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2005 3:44 pm Post subject: Biofuel debate
Well, that is not too convincing. Would you rather have me waste time on a wild goose chase? At least provide some links, if you cannot provide a convincing argument.
Again, a factual argument would be helpful and would make a meaningful discussion possible.
If you are done arguing, what is the point of your post?
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
ree rah rip ram. sunofabitch godamn. hidey didey christ almighty. rah rah crap 
