I have been searching for the post I made in february or so it was about a family in Kansas I believe who were making a profit by converting their corn to alcohol. They sold the by product,cattle feed .The KEY word is profit.
Yes sailor It is clear from your posts that you are closed minded about biofuels.
I wonder if the gulf veterans that are suffering from gulf war syndrome agree that it it irrevelent.
I am not a history buff but if you look up the first refining of oil you will find that the automobile was not in use then.
If you believe that farmers should not be subsidized then you must stop subsidizing big oil.
You think that fighting a war is not a subsity?
You think that floating battleships in the mediteranian is not a subsity?
You think that sabre ratteling with housain is not a subsity?
Demonstrate that it is relevant? The refining process has changed in the last 100 or so years. How can anyone think that after large scale production starts there will not be improvements.
>> Ah, but the beauty of it that you wouldn’t use two gallons of gasoline, you’d use two gallons of biofuel! Thus, no harm to the environment
Arjuna… hmm… you use two gallons of biofuel to make one gallon of biofuel?? Does this strike you as a good investment?
With justwannano I am not even going to bother. I have posted in previous threads some detailed information with plenty of numbers, especifically a study I did about solar panels for heating of domestic water which is the most efficient use of solar energy and it does not even begin to break even.
If you have numbers that contradict that, i’d like to see them. If not, I’d rather not waste time. You forget i am the proud owner of a solar heating installation in my home and I know very well the finances.
There is also an article in Soybean Digest Apr 2000 about the Kurtz family who manufacture soybean meal and soybean oil on their farm in missouri.They get 312#of oil from 1 ton of soybeans and the meal still contains 6%oil It costs about $8.00 worth of electricity to produce the feed and seperate the oil from a ton of soybeans.
No, but you’d be safe in supposing that something funny happened on the way to the newreply.php page. Sorry.
Anyway, thanks for the info sailor and Crafter–that definitely puts things into perspective. It’s amazing to think about, though: even after the cost of locating, drilling, pumping, piping, shipping, and refining, not to mention the associated infrastructure and environmental costs, we still get more energy out of a gallon of petro-fuel than goes into producing it. No wonder they call it black gold (Texas tea, swimming pools, movie stars…).
Still, you’ll have to forgive my not-so-informed optimism when I ask whether there can’t be some better way. I believe the environmental impact of the world’s use of fossil fuels is very great indeed–more than we know, I would guess. No, I don’t have numbers, but I think the jury’s still out. Perhaps when it comes back in, it will be too late. I have to agree with justwannano’s contention that there are many, many hidden costs associated with petrol fuels. And while there’s no doubt that using much more energy to create less fuel makes no sense, I read about people using canola oil to run their car, and I think it invites (screams, actually) the question: is there something we missed?
And sailor, I know what you’re saying about solar panels. They’re terribly expensive, to boot, but I have to say I get a strange satisfaction out of pointing something at the sun and getting energy. But you’re right: fiscally, it makes no sense, especially on my bill. But hearing so much about even the idea of an internal-combustion engine being obsolete and wasteful (and damaging), I still wonder. Hearing so much about those gas-electric hybrid cars, I was disappointed when I actually read the details. And I heard it costs Honda more to make the car than they sell it for. But I guess that’s another topic…
Ah, but you make up for the loss one gallon with high volume
I heard this first as an old U-Haul truck joke- supposedly they lost money on every truck. The solution: buy more trucks, to make it up with volume …
I guess Anthracite being our resident expert on energy topics could weigh in on this.
To anyone who thinks running cars on bio-oil is economically feasible I would propose the following exercise: Figure out how much it would cost you to buy 100 (or 1000 or whatever) acres of farmland. Figure out the interest rate you would get if you invested that money elsewhere and assume that yearly cost of owning the land (or just figure the cost of renting the land). Now figure out how much oil you get per acre per year. Make a guesstimate of the cost of machinery, fertilizer, fuel, salaries, etc. My guess is you cannot even come close to competing with fossil fuel.
I remember I saw this done somewhere and just the cost of owning the land exceded the value of the oil if sold for fuel. Of course, if you sell it for salad dressing it will bring in quite a bit more.
I will add a link which has some information loosely related to the topic we are discussing mainly because it has some interesting links. http://www.tinaja.com/h2gas01.html
I would also point out that I am in no way opposed to searching for better energy alternatives. What I am against is the ignorant people who haven’t a clue of the technical or economic aspects and think wishful thinking will make it happen.
Friday evening I was out having a beer with a bunch of people who went into such a conversation and they just didn’t have a clue. I really didn’t want to get involved because when people are daydreaming they do not want anyone to burst their bubble with facts. So I kept quiet and listened and after a while excused myself and went home. Thise people were not interested in knowing the facts, just socializing by sharing and reinforcing their own beliefs.
OK if I figured it correctly about 15% of a bushel of soybeans can be converted to fuel. That leaves another 6% that could be used.And this is a byproduct of making feed.The last bag of chicken feed that I bought ,which is almost all soy, cost me $11.47 per 100#.
Now sailor crunch those numbers.
justwannano, is soybean oil measured in a different scale than everything else? A gallon is, by definition, 128 fluid ounces. Or were those weight ounces?
Taking the biofuel side of the argument for a moment, 2 gallons of fuel to produce one gallon isn’t worthwhile… But taking two gallons to produce one gallon plus animal feed might be. Of course, even if this is so, we can’t power all vehicles this way… Only half of our farm vehicles. The other half of the farm vehicles, plus all non-farm vehicles would still have to run on something else, presumably gasoline.
It’s not just the cost, sailor, it is the wasting of a resource. There are hundreds of millions of malnurished people in the world and we are running low on arable land on which to grow crops. Even if we got more energy out of growing crops for bio-fuel than we put into it, the amount of farmland that would need to be cultivated to supply even a small percentage of the worlds energy needs would be enormous. All of that land used for energy production rather than food production in a world were there are already millions of starving people, it doesn’t make a lot of sense.
And I think, Chronos, that justwannno was refering to the number of weight ounces, not fluid ounces, per gallon of soybean oil.
Any cite for that, Dr. Lao? I’d always heard that the San Joaquin Valley alone can produce enough food to feed the entire planet. The problem isn’t one of production, it’s distribution: Food in California doesn’t do any good to a Somali.
Dr Lao, who cares about starving people? We are trying to save the planet and you are going to quibble about minor things? :-))
BTW, I had also not understood the ounces per gallon and dismissed it with a silly comment. I plead guilty.
Getting serious again, Chronos, good arable land is not as plentiful as you may think. I would like to see any support for your assertion that the San fernando valley could feed the planet. I do not believe that even for 40 microseconds. In any case it is much more productive if used to grow fruits or other crops than if to make fuel for cars.
I am not saying there may not be a market for certain agricultural byproducts, but to say this would resolve all our energy problems and it is being held back by the vast right wing conspiracy is plain silly.
Any oil you take out of agricultural products is very high grade energy (which can be used to power humans or other animals) which would be used to power motors which can use lower grade fuel.
What is the amount of energy in a tomato? Can you imagine if you had to feed your car tomatoes? How many miles to the tomato? What would be the cost per mile? What if you had to feed it hamburger? I think gasoline is a better and cheaper fuel.
A few years back, Brazil decided to convert their automobile fuel from gasoline to ethyl alcohol. This made sense,as brazil is a major sugar producer, and until recently, had to import most of its petroleum. They had a few problems:
alcohol contains about 50% of the energy of gasoline. This meant that you had to fill up twice as often. Second, the govt. subsidies for alcohol meant that farmland was switched, from produing food, to growing sugar cane. From all accounts, this raised the cost of living (for the poor) substantially.
Trying to use alcohol in the USA probably would not work. Although we have a lot of surplus corn, alcohol doesn’t vaporize well at temps. below 70 F. A much better scheme would be to convert coal to methyl alcohol, and run our cars with fuel cells 9which are now becoming competitive with IC engines.As far as io know, we have at least a 500-year supply of coal.
egkelly, If I am not mistaken, the winter mixture of gasoline here in the DC area already contains a percentage of alcohol (to lower pollution) and I have read letters from people in the newspapers complaining they get worse mileage.
sailor, I admit that I don’t have a cite for that, and I may have gotten it wrong, to boot (it may have just been the United States, not the world). The reason that I mentioned it is to show that the “shortage of arable land” is not obvious, and that that statement could use a cite, as well. If anyone comes up with hard numbers for either assertation, I’ll accept them.
OK sailor and others here are your numbers.
Notice it takes $9.39 which converts to 14 gallons of diesel at $0.67 per gal.to plant one acre of soybeans yeilding 1556 pounds of beans. Three forths of a ton.At the Kurtzes 15% oil yeild thats approximately 30 gallons of oil per acre.
It will take exactly as much soy diesel as fossil fuel diesel to plant the same number of acres.
Sailor said
>>" What is the cost of refining one gallon of gasoline???
justwannano, I dunno and I dontcare as it is irrelevant. Whatever it costs, if I have to use two gallons of gasoline plus other stuff, to produce a gallon of biofuel, I don’t think the biofuel can be cheaper than the gasoline used to produce it. Do we have to do the math? "
Remember we are not only producing the fuel but also producing feed.
You have to look at the whole picture.
Yes it is expensive but worth it.
It is getting cheaper by default since fossil fuel is getting more expensive.
Is it the sole answer to the gasoline price problem?No. But it is a start. It will take some of the pressure off the driving publics pocketbook.
Is it an alternative fuel? Yes.
I just do not see how or why you can say that it takes two gallons of fossil fuel to produce one gallon of bio fuel.
justwannano, I will let you do all the math and I’ll take your word for it. As I said, every study that I have seen showed it was not economically profitable (which is not to say it may not be one day).
The fact remains that every gallong of soy oil that goes to fuel a car is one less gallon of soy oil that goes to feed people or livestock. I think it would be more productive if used for food and also fetch a better price.
Anyway, I am open to seeing studies.
The two gallons of fuel to produce one gallon of biofuel was just an example. The numbers mean nothing.
