BBC World covering bio-diesel.

[aquart]

Showed a truck powered with a part rapeseed oil fuel.

[Kellanved]

1. well, what about it?

:shrug:

[sophie996]

2. LINK AVAILABLE?

NM

[aquart]

7. Nope. It was television.

I guess I was just shocked to see it.

[Deja Q]

3. How much land will need to be used to grow your biomass? and how much

fertilizer, generally PETROchemical, needs to be used?

Biodiesel, unless you can get heaps of it out of algae, is utterly pointless and is as genuine as that snake oil that travelling salesmen peddled in the 1920s. Especially for the amount of people we need to support today.

Oh, BTW, Pawlenty is hyping up Ethanol. What he doesn't mention is the cost to grow the damn corn, how much is needed, how to work the overworked fields, and that a too high concentration of ethanol mixed with gas will DESTROY YOUR ENGINE.

Pahwussy is doing it solely for the benefit of big oil.

[Kellanved]

6. as usual: mixed blessings

Some studies say that each liter biodiesel reduces the emitted greenhouse gasses by 2.2 kg.
On the other hand those studies tend to use far too optimistic estimates regarding the usage of by-products and fail to account for the lower effectiveness and more toxic exhausts.

The best thing to be said about it: it may take some pressure from the oil-market.

[Up2Late]

9. Wrong, Wrong, WRONG!

...overworked fields? ...he doesn't mention is the cost to grow the damn corn?...for the benefit of big oil?

Give me a break! Do you have ANY idea how much the U.S. Government currently pays U.S. farmers NOT to grow crops? Try reading the latest "Farm Bill" some time. Or how much we pay to prop up low crop prices? Or that BioDiesel can be made from almost any oil rich crop? Or how many poor farmers in Africa or S. America, that can't afford to grow their own crops, because the prices are so low world wide, or how much we spend to intercept and turn back those crops when they do get to this country? Or how much of the Pentagon budget it spent yearly to protect all our Oil Pipelines and and Oil transfer stations and Oil Tankers all over the world? Or how many people Die every year, because of the U.S. exploiting the Oil resources in 3rd world countries all over the world? :spank:

Now granted, Crop prices ARE higher right now, but that's because the Dollar is so weak right now, which makes U.S. Crops a bargain for foreign countries or companies to buy and export them, i.e. more demand, higher prices for the cooperate controlled farms. I'm not even going to go into the REAL reason the Dollar is so weak here, but I will just give you this equation- 1.3 Trillion Dollar Tax Cuts + $200 Billion Dollar war + Higher Pentagon and "other" spending = $2 Trillion Dollars more DEBT= weakening Dollar. The Dollar has lost about 65% of it value since the November 2000 selection of *.

Every gallon of Petroleum Diesel we replace with BioDiesel, is a gallon we don't have to import from a country ruled by Dictators or "Kings." I agree with you that ETHANOL SUCKS, the refining of Ethanol creates more air pollution, in most cases, than gasoline, but that is not the case for BioDiesel.

Big Oil (and George W. Bush and just about everyone he's ever done business with) HATES the idea of BioDiesel, because they know how easy it would be for us to start producing it on a massive scale, and how much that would hurt their profits. And it would take away all those Billions we pay the Military Industrial Complex corporations and most of the Pentagons reason to exist, post Soviet Union.

Just think of all the ways we use Petroleum Diesel in this country. OTR Trucks, Trains, Ships, Cars, Electrical Generating Plants, etc. A 100% gallon of BioDiesel currently produces a total air pollution savings of more than 30%, which could be improved without much effort. You actually get more energy from a gallon of BioDiesel than it takes to produce it, unlike Petroleum fuels, which I think take 3 times the energy to produce, than you get in return. BioDiesel can be made from Lower quality, unfit for human consumption grade, grains like Corn, Soy, Peanut, Palm, Cotton Seed, Sun Flower, Safflower, etc.

But the best part is, :think:you can filter out the old Used Cooking Oil, from all the French Fry and Deep Fry cookers all over the United States that restaurant currently have to PAY to have it hauled away to be mixed into cattle and other animal feeds, but that's if you have good environmental laws. If your environmental laws and enforcement are weak, the stuff gets dumped in to the sanitary or storm sewers, over taxing the sanitary system or environment, of those communities.

I'd rather we worked on Hydrogen Fuel Cells, but BioDiesel would be great for this country and the world NOW, that's exactly why * is opposed to it. Check out this website for more info <http://www.biodiesel.org/>

[Up2Late]

4. The World is way ahead of the U.S. in BioDiesel

It just another "logical" step to lessening the U.S. dependence on imported Petroleum the Bush and his oil buddy are covering up and/or discrediting in pursuit of the God he really worships. :think:$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$:grr:

This is a good U.S. site <http://www.biodiesel.org/>

[Deja Q]

5. Their FAQ seems to be missing a few questions...

Snake oil.

I want to be optimistic, but I want to see the reality first. Having grown up in a society of vaporware, that's not unreasonable to ask.

[Up2Late]

11. I'm not saying BioDiesel is THE solution

But it's a move in the right direction. With these OIL Industry bastards controlling our country (and the largest military in the world), we need to START moving in a direction other than sucking up all the cheep oil, then drilling the hell out of all the beautiful places in this country, then the world. :mad:It only gets worst from there.

They say that most modern (made in the last 5 years) diesel engines can run on 20% or 100% BioDiesel (Any Diesel can run on the 20%/80% mix), their is only one pollutant from the BioDiesel-100 (NOX, I think is Nitrogen Oxide) but I bet they can develop a filtering device for that.

Also, a Diesel engine will actually run better and last longer when using BD100. :hippie:I don't know if any of you have been to France or Europe in the last few years, but when I was in France in 2000, my Dad and I rented a car, and it wasn't until we had to fill the tank before returning the car, did we realize that the car was a Diesel (or Gazoil as they call it in France). The Diesel is THAT good in Europe. Bush and his Buddies are soooooooooo short sited.

:hurts:The biggest obstacle, right now, is getting production built up enough, to bring the price per gallon down to a competitive price. I mean, what is a Liter of Wesson oil now, about $6.00?

I do like <http://www.fromthewilderness.com/>another good site for innovative energy ideas is the Rocky Mountain Institute at:<http://www.rmi.org/>

[Unforgiven]

8. Interesting article..

that I may have seen here at D/U some time ago stated that Italy was using surplus olive oil to augment fuel needs for government fleet that used diesel powered vehicles.

One nice thing about diesel engines they will run on almost any burnable liquid.

[JohnyCanuck]

10. I don't think Bio-diesel, ethanol etc, is a panacea

for our dependency on hydrocarbon based energy (at least not with today's technology).

Check out this Real Player video presentation on exponential growth and what it means as far as resource consumption/depletion

http://edison.ncssm.edu/programs/colloquia/bartlett.ram

For example, a steady 3% growth in consumption of some product year by year (doesn't seem like very much) means that in approx 23 years (call it period A) you'll have consumed twice as much of that product as you have used to the current date, and should the consumption continue at a steady 3% growth rate into the future in another 23 years you will have consumed twice as much again of the resource used up to period A. (To find the doubling time divide any constant growth percentage rate into the number 70).

Now bear in mind that all standard economic thinking revolves around encouraging consumption and maintaining growth indefinitely and also read the article "Eating Fossil Fuels." Even if, for the sake of argument, we neglect to consider the effects of peak oil and a future of declining hydrocarbon production/availability our current methods of industrial agriculture used to grow crops as food to eat (without even considering an added burden of growing crops for fuel) is unsustainable and we will run into serious problems with soil and water degradation within 25 to 50 years at current rates of topsoil and water depletion. If peak oil is true and a valid concern (as the author believes is the case), then the ability of our agricultural lands to meet our expanding needs for food is put into jeopardy that much sooner, to say nothing of trying to use them to grow fuel for SUVs as well.

From Eating Fossil Fuels:
(note to mods: www.fromthewilderness.com gives permission to reproduce the article for non profit purposes, hence the 4 paragraph rule is ignored in this case).

To give the reader an idea of the energy intensiveness of modern agriculture, production of one kilogram of nitrogen for fertilizer requires the energy equivalent of from 1.4 to 1.8 liters of diesel fuel. This is not considering the natural gas feedstock.9 According to The Fertilizer Institute (http://www.tfi.org), in the year from June 30 2001 until June 30 2002 the United States used 12,009,300 short tons of nitrogen fertilizer.10 Using the low figure of 1.4 liters diesel equivalent per kilogram of nitrogen, this equates to the energy content of 15.3 billion liters of diesel fuel, or 96.2 million barrels.

Of course, this is only a rough comparison to aid comprehension of the energy requirements for modern agriculture.

In a very real sense, we are literally eating fossil fuels. However, due to the laws of thermodynamics, there is not a direct correspondence between energy inflow and outflow in agriculture. Along the way, there is a marked energy loss. Between 1945 and 1994, energy input to agriculture increased 4-fold while crop yields only increased 3-fold.11 Since then, energy input has continued to increase without a corresponding increase in crop yield. We have reached the point of marginal returns. Yet, due to soil degradation, increased demands of pest management and increasing energy costs for irrigation (all of which is examined below), modern agriculture must continue increasing its energy expenditures simply to maintain current crop yields. The Green Revolution is becoming bankrupt.

<snip>

Modern intensive agriculture is unsustainable. Technologically-enhanced agriculture has augmented soil erosion, polluted and overdrawn groundwater and surface water, and even (largely due to increased pesticide use) caused serious public health and environmental problems. Soil erosion, overtaxed cropland and water resource overdraft in turn lead to even greater use of fossil fuels and hydrocarbon products. More hydrocarbon-based fertilizers must be applied, along with more pesticides; irrigation water requires more energy to pump; and fossil fuels are used to process polluted water.

It takes 500 years to replace 1 inch of topsoil.21 In a natural environment, topsoil is built up by decaying plant matter and weathering rock, and it is protected from erosion by growing plants. In soil made susceptible by agriculture, erosion is reducing productivity up to 65% each year.22 Former prairie lands, which constitute the bread basket of the United States, have lost one half of their topsoil after farming for about 100 years. This soil is eroding 30 times faster than the natural formation rate.23 Food crops are much hungrier than the natural grasses that once covered the Great Plains. As a result, the remaining topsoil is increasingly depleted of nutrients. Soil erosion and mineral depletion removes about $20 billion worth of plant nutrients from U.S. agricultural soils every year.24 Much of the soil in the Great Plains is little more than a sponge into which we must pour hydrocarbon-based fertilizers in order to produce crops.

Every year in the U.S., more than 2 million acres of cropland are lost to erosion, salinization and water logging. On top of this, urbanization, road building, and industry claim another 1 million acres annually from farmland.24 Approximately three-quarters of the land area in the United States is devoted to agriculture and commercial forestry.25 The expanding human population is putting increasing pressure on land availability. Incidentally, only a small portion of U.S. land area remains available for the solar energy technologies necessary to support a solar energy-based economy. The land area for harvesting biomass is likewise limited. (emphasis mine /jc) For this reason, the development of solar energy or biomass must be at the expense of agriculture.

Modern agriculture also places a strain on our water resources. Agriculture consumes fully 85% of all U.S. freshwater resources.26 Overdraft is occurring from many surface water resources, especially in the west and south. The typical example is the Colorado River, which is diverted to a trickle by the time it reaches the Pacific. Yet surface water only supplies 60% of the water used in irrigation. The remainder, and in some places the majority of water for irrigation, comes from ground water aquifers. Ground water is recharged slowly by the percolation of rainwater through the earth's crust. Less than 0.1% of the stored ground water mined annually is replaced by rainfall.27 The great Ogallala aquifer that supplies agriculture, industry and home use in much of the southern and central plains states has an annual overdraft up to 160% above its recharge rate. The Ogallala aquifer will become unproductive in a matter of decades.28

We can illustrate the demand that modern agriculture places on water resources by looking at a farmland producing corn. A corn crop that produces 118 bushels/acre/year requires more than 500,000 gallons/acre of water during the growing season. The production of 1 pound of maize requires 1,400 pounds (or 175 gallons) of water.29 Unless something is done to lower these consumption rates, modern agriculture will help to propel the United States into a water crisis.

In the last two decades, the use of hydrocarbon-based pesticides in the U.S. has increased 33-fold, yet each year we lose more crops to pests.30 This is the result of the abandonment of traditional crop rotation practices. Nearly 50% of U.S. corn land is grown continuously as a monoculture.31 This results in an increase in corn pests, which in turn requires the use of more pesticides. Pesticide use on corn crops had increased 1,000-fold even before the introduction of genetically engineered, pesticide resistant corn. However, corn losses have still risen 4-fold.32

Modern intensive agriculture is unsustainable. It is damaging the land, draining water supplies and polluting the environment. And all of this requires more and more fossil fuel input to pump irrigation water, to replace nutrients, to provide pest protection, to remediate the environment and simply to hold crop production at a constant. Yet this necessary fossil fuel input is going to crash headlong into declining fossil fuel production.

<snip>

US Consumption

In the United States, each person consumes an average of 2,175 pounds of food per person per year. This provides the U.S. consumer with an average daily energy intake of 3,600 Calories. The world average is 2,700 Calories per day.33 Fully 19% of the U.S. caloric intake comes from fast food. Fast food accounts for 34% of the total food consumption for the average U.S. citizen. The average citizen dines out for one meal out of four.34

One third of the caloric intake of the average American comes from animal sources (including dairy products), totaling 800 pounds per person per year. This diet means that U.S. citizens derive 40% of their calories from fat-nearly half of their diet. 35

Americans are also grand consumers of water. As of one decade ago, Americans were consuming 1,450 gallons/day/capita (g/d/c), with the largest amount expended on agriculture. Allowing for projected population increase, consumption by 2050 is projected at 700 g/d/c, which hydrologists consider to be minimal for human needs.36 This is without taking into consideration declining fossil fuel production.

To provide all of this food requires the application of 0.6 million metric tons of pesticides in North America per year. This is over one fifth of the total annual world pesticide use, estimated at 2.5 million tons.37 Worldwide, more nitrogen fertilizer is used per year than can be supplied through natural sources. Likewise, water is pumped out of underground aquifers at a much higher rate than it is recharged. And stocks of important minerals, such as phosphorus and potassium, are quickly approaching exhaustion.38

Total U.S. energy consumption is more than three times the amount of solar energy harvested as crop and forest products. The United States consumes 40% more energy annually than the total amount of solar energy captured yearly by all U.S. plant biomass. Per capita use of fossil energy in North America is five times the world average.39

Our prosperity is built on the principal of exhausting the world's resources as quickly as possible, without any thought to our neighbors, all the other life on this planet, or our children.

<snip>

None of this research considers the impact of declining fossil fuel production. The authors of all of these studies believe that the mentioned agricultural crisis will only begin to impact us after 2020, and will not become critical until 2050. The current peaking of global oil production (and subsequent decline of production), along with the peak of North American natural gas production will very likely precipitate this agricultural crisis much sooner than expected.


www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/100303_eating_oil.html