LaMidRighter said:The simple answer is because it takes more fossil fuel energy to produce biodiesel than the energy output from straight usage of fossil fuel puts out in the first place.
ILikeDubyah said:Cars already run on this, right? They're the ones with the little corn field sticker next to a road on the back, right?...I was watching something, can't remember what, but a bunch of hippies in a commune somewhere have a car that runs on pure vegetable oil. It looked like it ran like a normal car, they just said that it smelled alot like french fries while driving.
Arch Enemy said:One word, Ethanol.
Could you imagine how many farms it would take to produce enough ethanol to destory America's dependency on foreign oil?
ILikeDubyah said:Cars already run on this, right? They're the ones with the little corn field sticker next to a road on the back, right?...I was watching something, can't remember what, but a bunch of hippies in a commune somewhere have a car that runs on pure vegetable oil. It looked like it ran like a normal car, they just said that it smelled alot like french fries while driving.
Stinger said:Lou Ana Pure Vegetable Oil 1 Gallon - 128 oz
LouAna® Pure Vegetable Oil With only two grams of saturated fat...
Cajun Supermarket
This store is not yet rated. Why?
$6.49
$2.50 a gallon for gas don't sound too bad.
MiamiFlorida said:-You are comparing an individually packaged edible oil to something that will be pumped into the tank of your car (No Warehouse, no pallet, no box, no plastic container, no label, less middlemen, no FDA regulation, lower distribution cost)
-No OPEC to restrict production and raise prices.
I don't know where you live, but down here gas is already $2.73
I read it in my local paper which is not conservative in any concievable way. The answer came from an independent scientific study which showed the efficiencies of producing energy from certain fuels, to produce bio-diesel you have to manufacture it which requires energy and most energy in the U.S. is produced by burning fossil fuels, since nuclear plants aren't being built at a fast rate in this country that means the only efficient forms of energy right now are fossil fuels and the less available nuclear energy.MiamiFlorida said:How do you figure that?
Wouldn't We use biodiesel to produce biodiesel?
LaMidRighter said:I read it in my local paper which is not conservative in any concievable way. The answer came from an independent scientific study which showed the efficiencies of producing energy from certain fuels, to produce bio-diesel you have to manufacture it which requires energy and most energy in the U.S. is produced by burning fossil fuels, since nuclear plants aren't being built at a fast rate in this country that means the only efficient forms of energy right now are fossil fuels and the less available nuclear energy.
The problem, as explained to me by a college friend involved in this field is the loss of energy through inefficiency, all fuel sources lose a certain amount of energy in transit, so the double digit lag in biodiesel efficiency as compared to petroleum products would translate into a huge loss of energy, it would actually take more biodiesel to create usable biodiesel than would benefit consumers, likewise, if all automotive products ran on biodiesel, it would actually waste more gas to create a ready supply of biodiesel than would be consumed as fossil fuel power.MiamiFlorida said:Isn't it logical that if we can convert automotive engines from burning gasoline to burning biodiesel we can likewise convert power plants and all other engines which burn fossil fuels.
That is actually a tossup between getting the distribution and looking at ways to either increase efficiency(if possible) and if not make a viable solution with available efficiency.The hardest part of using an alternative fuel is distribution. For example, converting to hydrogen cell technology would mean drastic changes in the nation's gas stations and fuel transportation, whereas biodiesel could be delivered with minor changes.
I don't know, to me you choose your poison when it comes to energy sources, nuclear is the superior source we have currently, but as fossil fuels, it has it's drawbacks. I would like to see "cold-fusion" technology become viable, fusion produces virtually no waste, but the biggest drawback is the intense heat it produces which is basically beyond containment, if we could find a way to harness that it would be perfect(this is actually being researched just a courtesy FYI in case you haven't seen it).We should slow down building more nuclear plants, whose radioactive byproducts last thousands of years.
On a final note, I would love to see Hyrogen fuel technology ASAP, but unfortunately, the efficiency problem and containment are still issues to be dealt with, hopefully though this will be a good transition to future energy consumption.
LaMidRighter said:The problem, as explained to me by a college friend involved in this field is the loss of energy through inefficiency, all fuel sources lose a certain amount of energy in transit, so the double digit lag in biodiesel efficiency as compared to petroleum products would translate into a huge loss of energy, it would actually take more biodiesel to create usable biodiesel than would benefit consumers, likewise, if all automotive products ran on biodiesel, it would actually waste more gas to create a ready supply of biodiesel than would be consumed as fossil fuel power.
That is actually a tossup between getting the distribution and looking at ways to either increase efficiency(if possible) and if not make a viable solution with available efficiency.
I don't know, to me you choose your poison when it comes to energy sources, nuclear is the superior source we have currently, but as fossil fuels, it has it's drawbacks. I would like to see "cold-fusion" technology become viable, fusion produces virtually no waste, but the biggest drawback is the intense heat it produces which is basically beyond containment, if we could find a way to harness that it would be perfect(this is actually being researched just a courtesy FYI in case you haven't seen it).
On a final note, I would love to see Hyrogen fuel technology ASAP, but unfortunately, the efficiency problem and containment are still issues to be dealt with, hopefully though this will be a good transition to future energy consumption.
Cost
The cost of biodiesel is dependent on the choice of feedstock. According to a recent market analysis, if soybeans are used the fuel will cost approximately $0.66/liter ($2.50/gallon) on a small-market scale. However, large-scale commercial use of biodiesel produced using today's technology could reduce biodiesel cost to $0.40 to $0.45/liter ($1.50 to $1.60/gallon). Additional research advances using existing feedstock technologies or innovative feedstocks such as microalgae could further reduce costs. The goal of the DOE/NREL program is to produce biodiesel from microalgae at a cost of $ 0.26/liter ($1.00/gallon).
"First, we need to understand exactly how much biodiesel would be needed to replace all petroleum transportation fuels. So, we need to start with how much petroleum is currently used for that purpose. Per the Department of Energy's statistics, each year the US consumes roughly 60 billion gallons of petroleum diesel and 120 billion gallons of gasoline. First, we need to realize that spark-ignition engines that run on gasoline are generally about 40% less efficient than diesel engines. So, if all spark-ignition engines are gradually replaced with compression-ignition (Diesel) engines for running biodiesel, we wouldn't need 120 billion gallons of biodiesel to replace that 120 billion gallons of gasoline. To be conservative, we will assume that the average Diesel engine is 35% more efficient, so we'd need 35% less diesel fuel to replace that gasoline. That would work out to 78 billion gallons of diesel fuel. Combine that with the 60 billion gallons of diesel already used, for a total of 138 billion gallons. Now, biodiesel is about 5-8% less energy dense than petroleum diesel, but its greater lubricity and more complete combustion offset that somewhat, leading to an overall fuel efficiency about 2% less than petroleum diesel. So, we'd need about 2% more than that 138 billion gallons, or 140.8 billion gallons of biodiesel. So, this figure is based on vehicles equivalent to those in use today, but with compression-ignition (Diesel) engines running on biodiesel, rather than a mix of petroleum diesel and gasoline. Combined diesel-electric hybrids in wide use would of course bring this number down considerably, but for now we'll just stick with this figure."
I wasn't necessarily adressing cost, more over I meant that production of this fuel will take more of the replaceable fuel, in my own opinion it doesn't make sense.MiamiFlorida said:Cost
The cost of biodiesel is dependent on the choice of feedstock. According to a recent market analysis, if soybeans are used the fuel will cost approximately $0.66/liter ($2.50/gallon) on a small-market scale. However, large-scale commercial use of biodiesel produced using today's technology could reduce biodiesel cost to $0.40 to $0.45/liter ($1.50 to $1.60/gallon). Additional research advances using existing feedstock technologies or innovative feedstocks such as microalgae could further reduce costs. The goal of the DOE/NREL program is to produce biodiesel from microalgae at a cost of $ 0.26/liter ($1.00/gallon).
I think gasoline is more efficient than diesel, but maybe you got it right. As far as the math, I'm horrible at it so I'll just trust your figures on that."First, we need to understand exactly how much biodiesel would be needed to replace all petroleum transportation fuels. So, we need to start with how much petroleum is currently used for that purpose. Per the Department of Energy's statistics, each year the US consumes roughly 60 billion gallons of petroleum diesel and 120 billion gallons of gasoline. First, we need to realize that spark-ignition engines that run on gasoline are generally about 40% less efficient than diesel engines. So, if all spark-ignition engines are gradually replaced with compression-ignition (Diesel) engines for running biodiesel, we wouldn't need 120 billion gallons of biodiesel to replace that 120 billion gallons of gasoline. To be conservative, we will assume that the average Diesel engine is 35% more efficient, so we'd need 35% less diesel fuel to replace that gasoline. That would work out to 78 billion gallons of diesel fuel. Combine that with the 60 billion gallons of diesel already used, for a total of 138 billion gallons. Now, biodiesel is about 5-8% less energy dense than petroleum diesel, but its greater lubricity and more complete combustion offset that somewhat, leading to an overall fuel efficiency about 2% less than petroleum diesel. So, we'd need about 2% more than that 138 billion gallons, or 140.8 billion gallons of biodiesel. So, this figure is based on vehicles equivalent to those in use today, but with compression-ignition (Diesel) engines running on biodiesel, rather than a mix of petroleum diesel and gasoline. Combined diesel-electric hybrids in wide use would of course bring this number down considerably, but for now we'll just stick with this figure."
I think it's the "star trek syndrome", that is, whatever the present thinks the future should look like is presented in the now, without regard to trend changes, form, or common sense.ILikeDubyah said:Also, why is it that all futuristic prototype cars look so incredibly stupid?
ILikeDubyah said:I find it very hard to believe that in the past 150 years or so that we've been using massive amounts of oil, that we've almost run through, or significantly lessened, most of what's on this earth. It just doesn't seem possible to run through what took millions of years to create (from every being on the planet) in such a short period of time. Any thoughts?
MiamiFlorida said:During that same period of time we've also depleted 90% of our forests, rainforests, mangroves and jungles, punched a massive hole in the ozone layer, and sent countless species into oblivion.
We are is like spoiled children living off a limited inheritance. Sooner or later it's going to run out.
We'd better find a renewable energy source...and soon...or we're in big trouble.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?