[kublikhan]

Like all other technology that's predicted or theoretical, I'll believe it when I see it.

Why must people post this refrain to everything in the technology forum? This isn't the ace hardware forum, click here to get your cellulose refinery half off. I come here to see some of the latest developments in energy technology. If you only want to hear about the latest gadget you can buy in the store, go to the planning for the future forum.

[kublikhan]

Some more cellulose ethanol related updates:

Until now, biofuels from non-food cellulosic plant material has been a dream with significant technological and economic hurdles. How do you break down the rigid structures that give plants the ability to survive the environmental changes of seasons and severe weather? How do you do this at a price point that is comparable to existing biofuels? The joint venture between DuPont and the Genencor division of Danisco is answering these questions. The joint venture will deliver integrated cellulosic ethanol technology packages to every region of the world, utilizing regional cellulosic biomass feedstock to offer the most cost effective and efficient technology with the smallest environmental footprint.

dupontdanisco

The farm bill agreement that key House and Senate negotiators reached Friday would extend and reduce the tax credit for conventional ethanol and the tariff on imported ethanol. It would also give new subsidies for cellulosic ethanol -- derived from crop debris, woody plants and grasses.
The move marks a significant shift for some lawmakers who have been some of the biggest advocates for ethanol supports, and for the booming grain and refinery industries that have come with them. "This is a signal to the country," Peterson added, "that we're serious about moving away from corn to cellulose."

Corn subsidies cut, New cellulose subsides added

[kublikhan]

If I said this once I said this a hundred times here at PO. Cellulosic ethanol has a zero energy return. That is, it takes more energy to convert a given quantity of woody material into liquid fuel then is contained in that fuel. That's because lignocellulose bonds are extremely tight and break only under hydrolisis and great heat, pressure, and acidic conditions created with much petroleum and electricity.
Many well-publicized schemes to profit from cellulose depend on unproven unlikely technologies such as bioengineered enzymes and anaerobic bacterium that mimic the cow's rumen. Even if such lifeforms could be commercially developed it is unlikely that the fermenting environment could be maintained except at great costs in energy and money.

Myth: Ethanol takes more energy to produce than it provides in the tank.
This anachronism has been widely disproven. According to researchers at Argonne National Laboratory, today’s ethanol production provides roughly 50 percent more useful energy per unit of fossil energy input than gasoline. Cellulosic ethanol is expected to provide a 10:1 return on fossil fuel investment.

Myth: Commercialization of cellulosic biofuels technology is still over a decade away.
The world’s first cellulosic ethanol plants will come on line in 2008. For instance, Abengoa bioenergy will complete construction on a 1.1 million liter per year plant in Salamanca, Spain that uses wheat straw as a feedstock.
Commercially-ready cellulas enzymes are already being introduced, and commercially available dedicated energy crops are expected soon.
Six DOE-sponsored cellulosic demonstration biorefineries are moving forward and will be on-line in time to meet the first modest production requirement of 100 million gallons in 2010. Seven additional pilot biorefineries have received DOE grants to prove out emerging technologies. In total, 29 advanced biofuel refineries are planned or under construction.

Myth: Biofuels require tons of fertilizer and pesticides.
Ag biotech has helped corn farmers become far more efficient in their fertilizer and pesticide applications. Insecticide usage has declined over 80 percent per acre in the past 20 years. Nitrogen and phosphate applications have declined roughly 30 percent per bushel in the last 30 years. Increased use of conservation tillage has substantially reduced runoff of all inputs.
Many non-food feedstock crop varieties would require little or no fertilizer or pesticide inputs.

BIO Fact Sheet

[vampyregirl]

I'm just giving you all some info. You can make of it whatever you will.

[vampyregirl]

What do you know anyway Pstarr? You didn't even know what GTL is. I had to tell you. You didn't know what a freeze wall is or how it works. You didn't know about CIS technology, wind turbines or integrated deepwater fields and you don't even know the difference between Basin Centered and Sour Gas.
Do you know anything about the energy field you didn't learn from me?

[TheDude]

Why can't you make your own arguments instead of tossing links at people like holy water in a horror movie?

Apt choice of simile, too.

Notice that your BIO Fact Sheet fails to address things like ethanol being corrosive to pipelines and engine components, increasing smog when used as a replacement for MTBE, or the paltry contribution it's making at the moment to US gas needs, or the lack of infrastructure in place, i.e., filling stations for flex fuel vehicles - which have reduced MPG - and are we moving towards EVs or ethanol, anyway?

The NRDC doc they source addresses the volume requirements, at least:

Assuming an aggressive national research, development, demonstration, and deployment
(RDD&D) program starting in the next few years, we believe that by 2015 the
United States could have 1 billion gallons of cellulosic biofuels production capacity
and be ready to put in place technology that can be cost competitive with gasoline
and diesel. By itself, 1 billion gallons represents less than half of 1 percent of our total
transportation oil use, but at the end of this initial stage of RDD&D, biofuels would
be poised for head-to-head competition with gasoline and diesel and would have the
potential for rapid growth.

By 2015 Mexico will have ceased exporting to the US. Biofuels will be pissing in a bucket with a hole in the bottom.

Oh yeah, almost forgot: climate change. Having fuel supply at the mercy of weather isn't such an attractive notion, either.

Work on that spelling, Cell U Lustic Gothster! I can't take anyone seriously who is too lazy to work their shift key, either.

[kublikhan]

Notice that your BIO Fact Sheet fails to address things like ethanol being corrosive to pipelines and engine components, increasing smog when used as a replacement for MTBE...which have reduced MPG

Ethanol is not used as a replacement for MTBE because it has better fuel economy then MTBE. It is used as a replacement because MTBE is poisoning our ground water supplies.

or the paltry contribution it's making at the moment to US gas needs, or the lack of infrastructure in place, i.e., filling stations for flex fuel vehicles

Myth: Biofuels can only supply up to 10% of our transportation fuel needs so they are not worth pursuing
According to the Natural Resources Defense Council, the U.S. can produce enough sustainable biofuels to supply half of U.S. transportation fuel needs – 100% if vehicle fuel economy doubles.

Myth: There’s not enough land to produce food, feed and biofuels.
A 2005 analysis by the Departments of Energy and Agriculture found that there is enough biomass in the U.S. to displace over 30 percent of U.S. gasoline demand without reducing production of food and feed.
Today’s biofuels production represents less than 5 percent of the transportation fuel supply.
There are nearly 5 billion acres of agricultural cropland in production worldwide. Less than 2.5 percent of that land is used to biofuels.
Bioenergy crops can provide food/feed, fuels, and other high-value co-products from the same crop, making the highest possible use of the land.
Advances in agricultural and industrial biotechnology are constantly increasing biofuel yields, making increasingly efficient use of existing lands. Introduction of biotech varieties has helped increase corn yields
30% since 1996 alone. McKinsey & Co. estimate that if current corn yield improvements continue, zero additional acres will be required to meet the new Renewable Fuels Standard of 15 billion gallons of
conventional ethanol.
Many energy crops grow well in poorer soils, and can be planted on less productive land, building soil and
sequestering carbon in the process.

are we moving towards EVs or ethanol, anyway?

Can't we do both?

By 2015 Mexico will have ceased exporting to the US. Biofuels will be pissing in a bucket with a hole in the bottom.

It is true mitigation efforts are happening 20-30 years too late. I don't disagree with that. But that doesn't just apply to biofuels, it applies to all efforts aimed at mitigating peak oil.

[vampyregirl]

You don't keep up to well do you Dude? We are moving towards BOTH EV and Ethanol. If you can't even see that then i can't take you to seriously.

[ThunderChunky]

VampeyGirl - fancy webpages can't fuel a car.

Demos and samples are worthless.

Like all other technology that's predicted or theoretical, I'll believe it when I see it.

Do you need to see doom to believe it? If not, that makes you a hypocrite. The whole "I'll believe it when I see it" argument is really just an evasion. Cellulosic ethanol is a proven technology and it will only get better.

[vampyregirl]

It has fueled race cars. www.greenalternativemotorsports.com If that is not enough proof for you then what is?

[Cashmere]

VampeyGirl - fancy webpages can't fuel a car.

Demos and samples are worthless.

Like all other technology that's predicted or theoretical, I'll believe it when I see it.

Do you need to see doom to believe it? If not, that makes you a hypocrite. The whole "I'll believe it when I see it" argument is really just an evasion. Cellulosic ethanol is a proven technology and it will only get better.

Nonsense.

Your point is ridiculous.

The evidence that Peak Oil is here and that the collapse of civilization is upon us is overwhelming.

The evidence for this new technology or that is sparse to non-existent.

So, you see, my belief in the collapse is rationally supported by the empirical evidence, whereas your belief in all things cornucopian is unsupported by anything more than hope.

Evidence of the crash of human civilization is all around me.

Show me the evidence of cellulosic ethanol that can be more than piss is a bucket.

Not only am I <b>not</b> a hypocrite - I'm perfectly consistent.

[vampyregirl]

This piss in a bucket has fueled race cars. www.greenalternativemotorsports.com
If powering a race engine is not enough proff for you that something works then i don't know what will suffice for you

[Cashmere]

VG, you've been scammed.

Cellulosic ethanol is the same as any other ethanol

It's ETOH, or C-C-O-H

They've been running "alcohol funny cars" for over 30 years.

The site you linked to doesn't say they are running ethanol from cellulose, it's saying "they CAN run", which is different.

Any flex car can run any ethanol, whether it's corn, sugar cane, Bucky Don's moonshine, or cellulosic ethanol.

[vampyregirl]

Flex fuel vehicles are increasingly designed to run on LPG not on alcohol. And you have admitted cellulosic ethanol can pwer engines so why not bring it into commercial production?

[ThunderChunky]

Nonsense.

Your point is ridiculous.

The evidence that Peak Oil is here and that the collapse of civilization is upon us is overwhelming.

Of course there is evidence that oil production is peaking, but there is little supporting the notion of a collapse of civilization. That is an unsubstantiated claim on your part.

The evidence for this new technology or that is sparse to non-existent.

False. Cellulosic ethanol is a proven technology. There are numerous peer reviewed publications on the subject and several companies have been created to make use of the technology.

So, you see, my belief in the collapse is rationally supported by the empirical evidence, whereas your belief in all things cornucopian is unsupported by anything more than hope.

All I see is that you have made unsubstantiated and false claims. My only claim is that cellulosic ethanol is a proven technology, this is a verifiable fact for those that are literate.

Evidence of the crash of human civilization is all around me.

Even if that (unsubstantiated claim) were true, so what? It's not here YET, thus you cannot believe it. Just like you cannot believe in cellulosic ethanol until you "see it." You need to apply you the same level of skepticism across the board.

Show me the evidence of cellulosic ethanol that can be more than piss is a bucket.

You can start with the PNAS article that I linked to in another thread on ethanol. 540% net energy gain for generation 0 technology. (Every year it will get better as the technology improves.)

http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/short/105/2/464?ck=nck

Not only am I <b>not</b> a hypocrite - I'm perfectly consistent.

You won't believe a technology until you see it, but you will believe the collapse of civilization is just around the corner. Unless you SEE collapse, that is very inconsistent.

[isgota]

Well, I'm not gonna say that cellulosic ethanol can be put in your tank right now, but neither is a pie-in-the-sky as many suggested:

DOE's subsidized cellulosic plants.

I've added the productions and they are about 125 million gallons that probably will be online in 3-4 years.

Also I've investigated the companies and they cover almost all tecnologies considered to produce cellulosic ethanol (acid hydrolisys, enzimatic hydrolisys, gasification + chemical production, gasification + biological, etc.) so it seems than is a trial to see which tecnology is/are the best for great scale production.

Best regards.

[Cashmere]

Of course there is evidence that oil production is peaking, but there is little supporting the notion of a collapse of civilization. That is an unsubstantiated claim on your part.

Thunder Chunky - if you can't connect the dots between oil peaking and collapse of civilization, then you don't understand oil.

To put it simply.

I say the fuel gauge is reading close to empty and so the car will soon stop, and you say, "sure there is evidence that the fuel is about to run out, but there is little supporting that the car will stop moving."

You simply don't get it.

I strongly suggest you read MonteQuest's thread on overshoot.

[bkwillia]

Cellulosic ethanol has all the same problems as corn ethanol. It depletes the soil of nutrients, it takes money and energy to transport the feed stock, and then dispose of the solid waste. The only advantage of cellulose over corn is that it can be grown on marginal land where erosion would normally be a problem.

Most cellulosic tech tries to make sugar from cellulose, and then ethanol from the sugar. This take a whole extra step, and the by product has no value as animal feed. This whole setup will misguided, like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.

Low temperature pyrolysis with catalytic upgrading has much more potential since it is a waterless process which produces a charcoal fertilizer/soil conditioner needing no energy intensive drying process. Biofuels need low cost fertilizer, and soil carbon conservation more than anything else. Until we solve these problems, all ethanol is just another non renewable fossile fuel mined from the earth.

[HappyFace]

"I think our way of life is about to change."

"What do you mean?"

"We can't keep on using things up."

"Oh? That's not true because we are no using things up. We are adding value to the earth."

"How can you add value to all that is there?"

"We give inanimate objects meaning. We create civilization where there was nothing. That is progress."

"Is it progress to destroy the oceans? Kill species?"

"No. of course not. But that death comes from laziness, ignorance, political corruption. When all are educated and act well then our technology will flow like a river. Technology solves everything."

"Not too many humans."

"You hate yourself."

"No. I don't. Just you."

[Pops]

"Privately held Poet said it will expand capacity from 50 million to 125 million gallons per year at its corn ethanol plant in Emmetsburg, with about 25 million gallons made from plant waste typically left behind in farmers' fields.
...
Other projects in the works include efforts to make alternative fuels from switchgrass, wheat straw, timber scraps and citrus peels."
http://www.spencerdailyreporter.com/story/1468332.html

Deleterious impacts and unintended consequences aside a step in the right direction I think.

AgDay ran a story on this today citing switchgrass is fodder similar to fescue when cut early for hay and late for biomass.


[Edit for strange characters in the subject]