My solution for eliminating our oil dependency.

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

Cuba converted significantly to ethanol, though not without immense trouble. They import it, mostly, essentially trading it by exporting nickel.

Nothing else could possibly point out the total inadequacy of ethanol as a fuel than that statement right there.

Cuba's principal export is sugar.

What are the best plants to maximize ethanol production? Those plants highest in sugar.

If a nation chin deep in sugar cane can't make enough ethanal economically to sustain it's own limited third world barbaric cave-man needs, who in their right mind would think it's a suitable fuel for the United States?

I mean, who outside of ADM lobbyists?

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Nothing else could possibly point out the total inadequacy of ethanol as a fuel than that statement right there.

Cuba's principal export is sugar.

What are the best plants to maximize ethanol production? Those plants highest in sugar.

If a nation chin deep in sugar cane can't make enough ethanal economically to sustain it's own limited third world barbaric cave-man needs, who in their right mind would think it's a suitable fuel for the United States?

I mean, who outside of ADM lobbyists?

What about Brazil?

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

What about Brazil?

Yeah, Brazil. They're gonna start making huge demands on global oil stocks once they finish burning all that wood.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

And, of course, there's this other minor problem with ethanol production:

Sooner or later even the dumbest bleeding heart is going to figure out that we're converting food into fuel. As soon as ethanol becomes profitable, without subsidies, the luddite wing of the bleeding hearts is going to start babbling semi-coherently about starving people and selfishness, and probably Elvis, too.

 

[Kelzie]

Yeah, Brazil. They're gonna start making huge demands on global oil stocks once they finish burning all that wood.

:lol: That is so wrong.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

And, of course, there's this other minor problem with ethanol production:

Sooner or later even the dumbest bleeding heart is going to figure out that we're converting food into fuel. As soon as ethanol becomes profitable, without subsidies, the luddite wing of the bleeding hearts is going to start babbling semi-coherently about starving people and selfishness, and probably Elvis, too.

lol ya I'm sure you're right I can see it now: "how dare we use our own crops to do with as we please!"

I just saw a show that was about turning used cooking oil into diesel fuel.

 

[ashurbanipal]

But it will hardly please anybody if we stop eating so that we can put ethanol in our gas tanks...it's got nothing to do with politics and everything to do with science and the physical constraints of the universe we inhabit. Ethanol, biodiesel, etc. are not viable alternatives to gasoline. Period.

 

[Loxd4]

Subsidies make ethanol less profitable?? You have it backwards. Ethanol production is more expensive than pumping oil. Everyone knows that. Also, every coop in the Midwest is "venturing" in the corn game. Cargill and the boys know that the price break is $4/gal. That won't happen consistently for 10 yrs.

There isn’t enough land or farmer in the USA to propose that much ethanol. So we would be back to importing ethanol/corn from other countries? But we could propose se enough ethanol to lower gas price and lesson the demands on foreign oil? Now if we start producing hybrid, hydrogen, ethanol, nuclear power, and electricity cars. And smaller would cars with better gas mileage would be great for the near future. This would help the economy not in the short run but in the long run.

 

[tecoyah]

Or....we might try making ethanol from the unused portion of the crops....and keep eating the good stuff. Hell we might even be able to make it more efficient so we dont need to import electricity in order to run the plant:

http://www.iogen.ca/

 

[Loxd4]

"To produce 1.7 billion gallons of gasoline equivalents (only 0.8 percent of total gasoline) using ethanol we must use about 2.2 million hectares of land; if we produced 10 percent of U.S. gasoline, the land requirement would be 22 million hectares." In other words, today about 5 million acres of land that might otherwise revert to nature is being used to grow corn to produce ethanol.

Pimentel also claims that the demand for corn as a feedstock for ethanol raises the price of corn, which means that beef producers must pay more for their feed. Therefore, more expensive corn raises the price of beef to consumers by about $1 billion dollars.

- http://www.reason.com/links/links112003.shtml -

(I stand correct once again by myself) Just imagine the government trying to take all that land without be called a dictatorship.

 

[tecoyah]

Note the Term "Residue"....this process uses the freakin' Hay left over, and the Stalks of corn ....things normally thrown away, or plowed back under.

Lowers Overall Greenhouse Gas Emissions

The agriculture residues used to make cellulose ethanol also contain lignin - a material that can be burned to generate power to run the cellulose ethanol facility. Because of this ability to produce both fuel and energy, the US Department of Energy life-cycle analysis states that ethanol from cellulose reduces greenhouse gases by 90% compared to gasoline.

The Canadian government estimates that, "If 35 % of gasoline in Canada contained ten percent ethanol, GHG emissions would be reduced by 1.8 megatonnes per year (1.8 million tonnes), which is the equivalent of removing more than 400,000 vehicles from the road."

Reduces Reliance on Imported Oil and Increases Energy Security

Dependence on fossil fuel imports is a concern shared by many countries, prompting expanded production and use of domestically produced renewable fuels. In 2004, 64% of oil consumption in the US was imported. Europe also relies heavily on imported fossil fuels.

Renewable fuels such as cellulose ethanol represent a reliable domestic source of energy and generate economic and environmental benefits.

Blending ethanol with gasoline extends the fuel supply, reduces the amount of oil needed by hundreds of thousands of barrels each day, and lowers overall fuel cost.

Helps Build Rural Economies

Cellulose ethanol biorefineries will strengthen local economies by creating thousands of jobs, while making agriculture a more sustainable industry. Recent reports from the U.S. Department of Energy/Department of Agriculture state that there is enough biomass feedstock for cellulose ethanol production in the U.S. to displace approximately 40% of current U.S. gasoline consumption.

 

[Loxd4]

Note the Term "Residue"....this process uses the freakin' Hay left over, and the Stalks of corn ....things normally thrown away, or plowed back under.

Lowers Overall Greenhouse Gas Emissions

The agriculture residues used to make cellulose ethanol also contain lignin - a material that can be burned to generate power to run the cellulose ethanol facility. Because of this ability to produce both fuel and energy, the US Department of Energy life-cycle analysis states that ethanol from cellulose reduces greenhouse gases by 90% compared to gasoline.

The Canadian government estimates that, "If 35 % of gasoline in Canada contained ten percent ethanol, GHG emissions would be reduced by 1.8 megatonnes per year (1.8 million tonnes), which is the equivalent of removing more than 400,000 vehicles from the road."

Reduces Reliance on Imported Oil and Increases Energy Security

Dependence on fossil fuel imports is a concern shared by many countries, prompting expanded production and use of domestically produced renewable fuels. In 2004, 64% of oil consumption in the US was imported. Europe also relies heavily on imported fossil fuels.

Renewable fuels such as cellulose ethanol represent a reliable domestic source of energy and generate economic and environmental benefits.

Blending ethanol with gasoline extends the fuel supply, reduces the amount of oil needed by hundreds of thousands of barrels each day, and lowers overall fuel cost.

Helps Build Rural Economies

Cellulose ethanol biorefineries will strengthen local economies by creating thousands of jobs, while making agriculture a more sustainable industry. Recent reports from the U.S. Department of Energy/Department of Agriculture state that there is enough biomass feedstock for cellulose ethanol production in the U.S. to displace approximately 40% of current U.S. gasoline consumption.

I know the source you got this info from....lol....but you have the pro's...now you look at the con's of this produce

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

I don't think this plan has been un-proven yet:

OK I got an Idea on how we can end our dependency on oil right now. The big problems with hydrogen fuel cells are the high costs of creating hydrogen and the fact that it takes other sources of fuel eg oil, coal, etc, to create it. So it's this catch 22 that I have a solution for, we should use nuclear power to create hydrogen, we now have the most effecient and cleanest form of power in the history of the world and if we use it to create hydrogen it would eliminate the high cost and the problem with using other fuel to create it and this, I think, would totally eliminate our dependency on oil, now this would entale creating more nuclear power reactors, the question is: will the same environmentalists who complain about global warming and CFC's allow us to create these new reactors? . . . I think not. We now have at our disposal the solution to oil dependency, what we lack is the will to use it.

 

[ashurbanipal]

Explain to me how to "unprove" a theory, and I'll tackle it.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Explain to me how to "unprove" a theory, and I'll tackle it.

well theories are disproven all the time, e.g. people once theorized the world was flat and then it was disproven, to disprove it you would explain why it can't work.

 

[ashurbanipal]

well theories are disproven all the time, e.g. people once theorized the world was flat and then it was disproven, to disprove it you would explain why it can't work.

We've never proven the earth isn't flat. There are Reimannian models that account for our observations where the earth is still flat, and there's no way to show they're not correct.

Your idea could work, if we can scale it up in time. We don't know precisely when things will start to get bad, and what will happen when they do. If we started building nuclear reactors right now and retooling industry on a broad scale, we might make it. But it would appear that to make a smooth transition, we need at least 20 years. I don't think we have that long.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

We've never proven the earth isn't flat. There are Reimannian models that account for our observations where the earth is still flat, and there's no way to show they're not correct.

This works for me:roll:

 

[ashurbanipal]

You wouldn't happen to recall a past life as Arthur Eddington, by any chance?

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

We've never proven the earth isn't flat. There are Reimannian models that account for our observations where the earth is still flat, and there's no way to show they're not correct.

Your idea could work, if we can scale it up in time. We don't know precisely when things will start to get bad, and what will happen when they do. If we started building nuclear reactors right now and retooling industry on a broad scale, we might make it. But it would appear that to make a smooth transition, we need at least 20 years. I don't think we have that long.

Actually the truth of the matter is that there isn't really any oil shortage in the first place, people make this claim without the facts to back it up, oil production is higher now than it has ever been, this is not to say that it isn't a finite resource, however, as technology continues to improve we will find ways to get the oil out of areas which before it would have been impossible to do so; furthermore, there is apparently more oil in the oil shale of Canada and the U.S. than in all of the Middle East. We have plenty of time before the wells dry up.

 

[ashurbanipal]

Actually the truth of the matter is that there isn't really any oil shortage in the first place, people make this claim without the facts to back it up,

No, currently there is a slight oil shortage, I guess depending on how you define "shortage." I would take that to mean that there's not as much oil being produced as everyone would like, which is correct. Just ask anyone from Zimbabwe. But there are not major shortfalls.

oil production is higher now than it has ever been,

This is correct, and we'll be able to say this for probably another 5-10 years as, year on year, we produce a little more than we had the previous year. But after that, we will never be able to make that claim again. That's the issue.

this is not to say that it isn't a finite resource, however, as technology continues to improve we will find ways to get the oil out of areas which before it would have been impossible to do so; furthermore, there is apparently more oil in the oil shale of Canada and the U.S. than in all of the Middle East. We have plenty of time before the wells dry up.

Rather than rehearse what I've already written, I will refer you to this thread:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/showthread.php?t=5476&page=2

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

No, currently there is a slight oil shortage, I guess depending on how you define "shortage." I would take that to mean that there's not as much oil being produced as everyone would like, which is correct. Just ask anyone from Zimbabwe. But there are not major shortfalls.

There is no oil shortage at all which is confirmed to your response below, oil production is higher than its ever been so how can there be a shortage?

This is correct, and we'll be able to say this for probably another 5-10 years as, year on year, we produce a little more than we had the previous year. But after that, we will never be able to make that claim again. That's the issue.

That's what you people have been saying for the last 30 years you people really need some new material.

Rather than rehearse what I've already written, I will refer you to this thread:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/showthread.php?t=5476&page=2

Here's the deal two economists made a bet some 100 odd years ago that as the population goes up the finite resources will steadily decline and that the world is on the brink of running out of natural resources, they concluded that to prove the winner that if in 20 years the cost of these materials went (upcalculating for inflation) then there was indeed a shortage, and the fact of the matter is the price went down. The fact of the matter is that as technology improves we will continue to find more and more ways to obtain more and more oil from places where it was once impossible to do so.

 

[ashurbanipal]

There is no oil shortage at all which is confirmed to your response below, oil production is higher than its ever been so how can there be a shortage?

Suppose you are in debt to the mob. Suppose they come by your house and tell you that today you have to pay back a dollar, but every day after that you have to pay back one more dollar than the day before, or they're going to kill you. Great! you think, because you make a hundred dollars a day, plus every day you earn one penny more than you did the previous day. If your debt is more than $(100!)+1, even though every day you make more money than you did the day previous, they're eventually going to kill you because you won't have enough. Rate of increase is not a necessary excluder of shortfalls.

Here's the deal two economists made a bet some 100 odd years ago that as the population goes up the finite resources will steadily decline and that the world is on the brink of running out of natural resources, they concluded that to prove the winner that if in 20 years the cost of these materials went (upcalculating for inflation) then there was indeed a shortage, and the fact of the matter is the price went down. The fact of the matter is that as technology improves we will continue to find more and more ways to obtain more and more oil from places where it was once impossible to do so.

1) You think that a bet some economists made a century ago shows that everything's peachy keen today? Posted as a cautionary tale not to discount human progress, it's one thing. But it's not proof against my arguments by any means.

2) Discovery of oil as a fuel and energy source helped stave off the Malthusian final solution. But once oil is not present in sufficient quantities, we're screwed.

3) It is possible to plot reserve growth based on technology. That plus extrapolated discoveries cross the line of demand in roughly 2010.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Suppose you are in debt to the mob. Suppose they come by your house and tell you that today you have to pay back a dollar, but every day after that you have to pay back one more dollar than the day before, or they're going to kill you. Great! you think, because you make a hundred dollars a day, plus every day you earn one penny more than you did the previous day. If your debt is more than $(100!)+1, even though every day you make more money than you did the day previous, they're eventually going to kill you because you won't have enough. Rate of increase is not a necessary excluder of shortfalls.



1) You think that a bet some economists made a century ago shows that everything's peachy keen today? Posted as a cautionary tale not to discount human progress, it's one thing. But it's not proof against my arguments by any means.

2) Discovery of oil as a fuel and energy source helped stave off the Malthusian final solution. But once oil is not present in sufficient quantities, we're screwed.

3) It is possible to plot reserve growth based on technology. That plus extrapolated discoveries cross the line of demand in roughly 2010.

But you haven't shown any proof at all that there is an oil shortage only your opinion.

 

[ashurbanipal]

But you haven't shown any proof at all that there is an oil shortage only your opinion.

I've said it would depend on how you define a shortage. If to you, a shortage only occurs in the face of declining supplies irrespective of demand, then of course there is no shortage.

However, supplies will be declining before too long. See that other thread I posted, and the many links I have posted there.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

I've said it would depend on how you define a shortage. If to you, a shortage only occurs in the face of declining supplies irrespective of demand, then of course there is no shortage.

However, supplies will be declining before too long. See that other thread I posted, and the many links I have posted there.

Oil shale is a general term applied to a group of fine black to dark brown shales rich enough in bituminous material (called kerogen) to yield petroleum upon distillation. The kerogen in oil shale can be converted to oil through the chemical process of pyrolysis. During pyrolysis the oil shale is heated to 450-500° C in the absence of air and the kerogen is converted to oil and separated out, a process called "retorting". Oil shale has also been burnt directly as a low-grade fuel. The United States Office of Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves estimates the world supply of oil shale at 1662 billion barrels of which 1200 billion barrels are in the United States [1]. This is comparable to the amount of reserves of conventional oil.

Estimates vary as to how many barrels of oil are contained in oil shale reserves. The US Office of Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves estimates there are some 1.6 trillion barrels of oil contained in oil shales around the world, with 60–70% of reserves (1.0–1.2 trillion barrels) in the United States. Most US oil shale is concentrated in the Green River Formation in Wyoming, Utah and Colorado. These oil shale resources underlie a total area of 16,000 square miles (40,000 km²).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_shale

The Canadian Athabasca oil sands deposit has an estimated reserve production capacity of 750,000 barrels (150,000 m³) of crude oil per day using the current hot water processes. As traditional or conventional sources of oil suffer from depletion, new sources of oil such as oil sands will increasingly be relied upon to make up the difference in future global oil production. This synthetic crude oil process takes two tons of tar sand to fill one barrel of upgraded synthetic crude oil.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tar_sands