Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Fueling a Revolution : Biodiesel moves almost into mainstream in Bay Area
The San Francisco Chronicle ^ | Thursday, February 22, 2007 | Michael Cabanatuan

Posted on 02/22/2007 7:16:14 AM PST by Reeses

About a year ago, Paul McNees chose to change his life by changing his fuel.

...

"I just couldn't justify filling up that tank with gasoline anymore for a multitude of reasons," said McNees, 43, citing global warming and the war in Iraq. "This has been great. It's totally cleaned out the engine. It runs great, has a lot more power. It sort of smells like french fries -- it doesn't have that noxious diesel smell."

...

Nationally, biodiesel consumption is up sharply -- from 500,000 gallons in 1999 to more than 75 million gallons in 2005. In the Bay Area, the number of customers filling up at Berkeley's Biofuel Oasis -- one of the region's few public biodiesel stations -- has climbed from about 200 three years ago to about 1,800 today.

...

Much of biodiesel's appeal stems from the fuel's ability to perform as well as petroleum diesel while emitting fewer exhaust materials that cause smog, particulate pollution and global warming. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, pure biodiesel emits 67 percent fewer unburned hydrocarbons, 48 percent less carbon monoxide and 47 percent fewer particulates but 10 percent more nitrogen oxides.

Yet, despite its benefits and growing popularity, biodiesel might not be the fuel of the future because, as demand grows, the amount of land needed to produce the oils could become untenable, experts say.

...

Researchers are looking for more productive, and sustainable, sources of biofuel -- including algae. They're focusing primarily on four types of high-oil algae -- diatoms, green algae, blue-green algae and golden algae -- that could be cultivated in farms or ponds. Oils could be extracted using chemical solvents, enzymes, expeller presses, osmotic shock or ultrasonic shock waves.

(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; US: California
KEYWORDS: algae; biodiesel; diesel; energy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last
To: posterchild

To the argument, it is crucial; to the reality it remains to be seen if we can produce enough new plants to measure a decrease in the rate of increase; if not, we must conclude that burning fuel is not the direct cause of the increase, or adjust the measurement to disguise the failure.


41 posted on 02/22/2007 9:57:20 AM PST by Old Professer (The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, and writes again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Old Professer

"What we need are high-rise greenhouses where 100 acres of corn, etc. could be raised on a foot print as small as a baseball field."

Yup, and we could use even more hydrocarbon fuel to drive the generators that provide the light that grows the corn. :)


42 posted on 02/22/2007 10:13:23 AM PST by FastCoyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: posterchild

Since you asked, here are my notes on the subject.

The estimated transportation fuel and home heating oil used in the United States is about 230,000 million US gallons (870 million m³) (Briggs, 2004). Waste vegetable oil and animal fats would not be enough to meet this demand. In the United States, estimated production of vegetable oil for all uses is about 23,600 million pounds (10,700,000 t) or 3,000 million US gallons (11,000,000 m³)), and estimated production of animal fat is 11,638 million pounds (5,279,000 t). (Van Gerpen, 2004)

Rapeseed = 110gal/acre

Fuel used in the US:

139.9 billion gal gas in 2005

38.3 billion gal diesel in 2005


38,300,000,000 / 110 = 350,000,000 acres needed to replace diesel usage with rapeseed based bio-diesel.


Total farmland in production in 1992 in US is 435,000,000 acres (USDA 1992) Note this was in '92 see below for current acres in production. ( I don't know what amount good farm land is available but out of production, I do know, however, that vast tracts of good farm land are being converted to developments all the time. My numbers are rough but my only goal is to put the magnitude of the issue in perspective.)

These are very rough numbers that don't take into acount other petroleum products besides motorfuels and may not take into account home-heating fuel.

http://www.fas.usda.gov/info/fasworldwide/2006/07-2006/BiofuelsOverview.htm

http://www.nass.usda.gov/census/census92/atlas92/html/m081.htm

Total planted farmland down to 318,610,000acres in 2006 according to --

http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/current/Acre/Acre-09-12-2006.txt

Now you-all can do what ever calculations you want.

As you can see, since there is a shortfall in available acerage for growing bio-diesel, then 5% of the crop land,if used to grow rape seed, would yeild less than 5% of the total diesel currently used.

Now, there are other potential oil producing crops that have a higher oil yeild, but the type of farm land suitable for growing them is much more limited. If only those lands were used to produce only high yeilding crops, then the equation would be different. But the bottom line is still that bio-diesel cannot be considered a replacement for petroleum but only a suppliment.


43 posted on 02/22/2007 10:15:59 AM PST by Liberty Rattler (Don't tread on me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Reeses

It seems to me that if we require them to cut down on combustible fuel use in India and China, then people in the US will not need to be concerned with these problems.


44 posted on 02/22/2007 10:17:02 AM PST by Sam Franklin (So what have we learned?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Liberty Rattler

Thanks. Nice to see that math that journalists never seem to get around to doing:)


45 posted on 02/22/2007 10:24:14 AM PST by posterchild (Ad astra per aspera)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Liberty Rattler
This is why I find using cottonseed oil a great idea. We are not planting cotton specifically for the oil and are using the byproduct of the seed. it would be interesting to see how many other "secondary" use oil crops we could use to produce biodiesel and not plant specifically for the oil.
46 posted on 02/22/2007 12:09:31 PM PST by Herkyman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Campion
i belive if you go and check many of the large diesel manufacture ( big diesel engines, 8 liters and larger) like the one that is the opposite of dog you will see that they recommend not to use more than B5 in their engines.
This is due to a few reason, power, performace, longevity, maintenance, fuel economy, and emission all suffer.
47 posted on 02/22/2007 12:41:13 PM PST by bamaintx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Herkyman
OK, I posted my notes.

Now you tell me. How much cotton seed is currently being produced and what is it being used for? How much is available for making bio-diesel? And, how much of a dent will that make in the total fuel budget of our country?

I'm all for utilizing the resources we have efficiently. But we have to look at the big picture.

For example, in the case of "waste vegetable oil", when I was young, I worked for a number of fry-resturants. The used fry oil was never wasted but was collected by the tallow company and used to make soap, glue, and who knows what other products. The fact is that it was a by-product to us but not "waste" at all. If all "waste fry-oil" were to get made into bio-diesel, where are we to get soap from?

The devil is in the details, FRiend.
48 posted on 02/22/2007 12:47:48 PM PST by Liberty Rattler (Don't tread on me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Reeses
They don't want solutions, they want to take our SUVs away.

Al Gore can give his up first.

49 posted on 02/22/2007 3:26:50 PM PST by pray4liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Liberty Rattler
The fact is that it was a by-product to us but not "waste" at all. If all "waste fry-oil" were to get made into bio-diesel, where are we to get soap from?

From the same source.

How is biodiesel made?
Biodiesel is made through a chemical process called transesterification whereby the glycerin is separated from the fat or vegetable oil. The process leaves behind two products -- methyl esters (the chemical name for biodiesel) and glycerin (a valuable byproduct usually sold to be used in soaps and other products).

50 posted on 02/22/2007 4:08:41 PM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Liberty Rattler
If all "waste fry-oil" were to get made into bio-diesel

Waste oil makes up one tiny fraction of the biodiesel market...and that fraction shrinks daily. For whatever reason, it remains the most popular publicly perceived idea of the source of biodiesel though.
51 posted on 02/22/2007 4:21:06 PM PST by P-40 (Al Qaeda was working in Iraq. They were just undocumented.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: thackney

I stand corrected on the soap issue.

Evidently, that was a bad example. My point though is still valid. Much of what is sometimes thought of as waste, is not really wasted.

I looked up cottonseed and found that it is already used as cattle-feed and to produce food-oil for human consumption, often used to make potato chips, among other things. If that oil were used for fuel, either we would need to replace it with something else for what it is used for now, or do with out those things.

Also the amount of cottonseed oil produced last year works out to about 129 million gallons, which although it is a large amount of oil, it would only amount to less than one half of one percent of our diesel needs, and that is if it was all converted to fuel.


52 posted on 02/22/2007 7:18:25 PM PST by Liberty Rattler (Don't tread on me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Liberty Rattler
Much of what is sometimes thought of as waste, is not really wasted.

I understand, your point is still true.

53 posted on 02/22/2007 7:55:41 PM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Wuli
You don't really know California do you? I grew up there. It does not have "unlimited farmland".

Sorry, I was misusing "farmland". Algae can be grown in the ocean which is practically unlimited. With 70% of Earth's sun absorbing surface being saltwater, bioengineered algae is the most obvious biofuel long term. We shouldn't use our freshwater and real farmland for fuel growing since I agree with you 100%, they are very limited. Algae can also use used to create alcohol and under certain conditions can by made to emit hydrogen gas instead of pure oxygen. Algae is extremely efficient at converting solar energy and CO2 into carbohydrates and oils. It is genetically simple enough it is possibly within our current capabilities to genetically engineer special fuel algae. Unlike most other fuels this would create a closed loop system so we could use unlimited amounts without a net change in the atmosphere. If this was world war time we would be spending many billions of dollars researching it. We really should invest in it now without needing to be forced by war.

54 posted on 02/22/2007 8:49:27 PM PST by Reeses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Reeses
Have you ever spent any time out in the Pacific ocean?

How are you going to keep your giant algael-mats from breaking up and blowing ashore when a big storm comes and you have to deal with 60 knot winds and 40 foot breaking waves?

What happens to the ecologicaly sensitive inter-tidal zone when your algae blows ashore? This could be almost as damaging as an oil-spill.

Maybe you think of growing the algae inland? What happens then when your salt water leaches into the ground water? As has been mentioned, fresh water in California is already precious.

This algae technology looks to be a long way off, if it ever turns out to be feasable at all.

BTW if it were a world war we'd have quite a time defending your algae from the enemy out in the ocean.
55 posted on 02/22/2007 10:38:26 PM PST by Liberty Rattler (Don't tread on me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Liberty Rattler
Algae floats, is very seaworthy. It can take most anything the sea dishes out. There are lots of technical challenges to solve but it looks promising. Algae has been working billions of years and is the primary reason for the high oxygen / low CO2 in Earth's atmosphere. Petroleum originally comes from saltwater algae so the idea is not that far fetched.

Before oil drilling technology was developed whale oil was the thing. It was a biofuel that delivered itself to the coastal villages where it was needed most. We are coming full circle. We probably won't use whales to harvest the energy but we could. Many people don't know this but whales are dumber than cows. They have few natural predators so their brains had no reason to evolve much. If we can farm cattle we can grow and farm whales if we need to.

The oceans are extremely large. A great thing is that 200 miles out is international waters. There are few environmentalists and lawyers floating by to cause trouble. Algae has so many things going for it that it seems obvious to me it should be on the short list. Soon the towel heads will have nothing to do but pound sand.

56 posted on 02/22/2007 11:19:27 PM PST by Reeses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
Big Oil is investing in biodiesel. Looks like a winner and unwholesome profits forever.

Most of the oil companies are owned by you and me. They have proportionately unwholesome capital costs to go with their unwholesome profits. If you live in Alaska aren't you state income tax free plus get an unwholesome oil money check every year for nothing?

57 posted on 02/22/2007 11:41:04 PM PST by Reeses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Reeses

"If this was world war time we would be spending many billions of dollars researching it. We really should invest in it now without needing to be forced by war."

If it is actually economically viable, it should not require government funded R&D.


58 posted on 02/23/2007 6:47:56 AM PST by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Wuli
Computers, nuclear energy, jet engines, supersonic aircraft, robotics, radar, microwaves were all invented for WWII because of massive technology investment during a life or death situation. Do you think the $10 billion in 1940s dollars the US spent in a few years splitting the atom would have happened without the war? We're still riding the technology wave from all that investment.

If you look back on history you will find that war is the mother of invention. Most technology breakthroughs occur for war. The reason America is so wealthy is because we spend so much on military technology which then transfers into commercial products. The internet we're communicating on is an American cold war invention.

Some things benefit us all. British Petroleum recently committed $500 million to research biofuels however if that investment triggers a breakthrough they will own the patents and the profit potential is large. I think if the US spent $10 billion on algae research it would greatly benefit America's future prosperity, and reduce some of our need to deal with troublemakers around the world.

59 posted on 02/23/2007 7:31:47 AM PST by Reeses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Reeses
Reeses,

Your arguments have progressed from the unlikely to the ludicrous.

I never said your algae would sink. I implied it would blow ashore and cause problems there. In order to make a difference in our oil needs, the amount of algae grown would have to be enormous.

When I was 18 & 19 I worked on commercial fishing boats and later I worked for a couple of years maintaining oil-tanker moorings off Central California. That's where I first learned to work on diesel engines. I know exactly how difficult it is to keep any kind of infrastructure operating in that, very harsh, environment. What you are talking about would be an enormous, difficult, and very expensive undertaking.I'm not saying it couldn't be done, but compared to other technologies, like the emerging inexpensive photovoltaics, I don't see ocean algae as very promising.

Your whale comments are even more ridiculous yet. Whale oil was used for light and lubricant, not motor fuel, and the whales were driven to the brink of extinction, with 19th century technology to supply those things to a population that was only a fraction of what we have now. As for whale-ranching, that would be even more difficult and expensive than the algae project.

By the way, yes there is a commercial kelp harvesting industry off our coast but it is limited and highly regulated in order not to destroy the kelp beds which are important to the general ecosystem. That is not an unlimited resource as it exists only in a narrow strip between the land and the deep sea.

If I understand the theory of algae based petroleum deposits in prehistory, that happened in a time when much of the earth was covered in shallow seas and swamps. Those conditions don't exist any more except in very limited areas. Certainly not off California.

I'm all for seeing the Mussies pound sand, and as I said when I joined this conversation, I love diesel engines. I'd love nothing better that to be proved wrong and see bio-diesel be the bright future it is sometimes touted to be. But, as a mechanic and machinist, with 30+yrs of experience in industrial systems, I live in the real world, where things have to be made to work, not just be dreamed about.

And now, that the sun is out it's time for me to get to work.

Good luck to you.
60 posted on 02/23/2007 8:57:59 AM PST by Liberty Rattler (Don't tread on me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson