Re: [Biofuel] Time for U.S. to say yes to Canadian oil sands
changing, as more countries - led by China - seek preferential access to scarce global supplies. In the future, security of supply may matter as much as price. The more we can reduce oil demand and increase supply stability, the better off we'll be. On oil sands, we should just say yes. © 2011 Washington Post Writers Group ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20110902/a474bd43/attachment.html ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Time for U.S. to say yes to Canadian oil sands
of the world's, according to Canadian government figures. More important, most emissions from oil (70 percent or more) stem from burning the fuel, not extracting and refining it. Here, oil sands and conventional oil don't differ. When these life cycle emissions - from recovery to combustion - are compared, oil sands' disadvantage shrinks dramatically. Various studies put it between 5 percent and 23 percent. By all logic, the administration's Keystone decision - overseen by the State Department, which issued a final environmental impact statement last week - should be a snap. Obama wants job creation. Well, TransCanada, the pipeline's sponsor, says the project should result in 20,000 construction and manufacturing jobs. Most would be American, because 80 percent of the 1,661-mile pipeline would be in the United States. Continued development of oil sands would also help the U.S. economy; hundreds of American companies sell oil services in Canada. Finally, production technologies are gradually reducing environmental side effects, including greenhouse emissions. The real benefit would be to strengthen the strategic alliance between Canada and the United States. Canada's oil exports now go almost exclusively to us. Our interest is for this to continue. From 2010 to 2020, oil sands production is projected to double to 3 million barrels a day; most of that would be available for export. On paper, it might seem that Canada should diversify its oil customers. Not so. Canada's prospects are so tied to ours that any narrow advantage of having more buyers would vanish if that weakened the U.S. economy. The United States and Canada are each other's largest trading partners and closest allies. Oil markets are subtly changing, as more countries - led by China - seek preferential access to scarce global supplies. In the future, security of supply may matter as much as price. The more we can reduce oil demand and increase supply stability, the better off we'll be. On oil sands, we should just say yes. © 2011 Washington Post Writers Group ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20110902/bba1f300/attachment.html ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Time for U.S. to say yes to Canadian oil sands
it by pipeline to closer U.S. markets. Next, oil sands' greenhouse gases are exaggerated. Despite high per-barrel emissions, the cumulative total is not large: about 6.5 percent of Canada's emissions in 2009 and about 0.2 percent of the world's, according to Canadian government figures. More important, most emissions from oil (70 percent or more) stem from burning the fuel, not extracting and refining it. Here, oil sands and conventional oil don't differ. When these life cycle emissions - from recovery to combustion - are compared, oil sands' disadvantage shrinks dramatically. Various studies put it between 5 percent and 23 percent. By all logic, the administration's Keystone decision - overseen by the State Department, which issued a final environmental impact statement last week - should be a snap. Obama wants job creation. Well, TransCanada, the pipeline's sponsor, says the project should result in 20,000 construction and manufacturing jobs. Most would be American, because 80 percent of the 1,661-mile pipeline would be in the United States. Continued development of oil sands would also help the U.S. economy; hundreds of American companies sell oil services in Canada. Finally, production technologies are gradually reducing environmental side effects, including greenhouse emissions. The real benefit would be to strengthen the strategic alliance between Canada and the United States. Canada's oil exports now go almost exclusively to us. Our interest is for this to continue. From 2010 to 2020, oil sands production is projected to double to 3 million barrels a day; most of that would be available for export. On paper, it might seem that Canada should diversify its oil customers. Not so. Canada's prospects are so tied to ours that any narrow advantage of having more buyers would vanish if that weakened the U.S. economy. The United States and Canada are each other's largest trading partners and closest allies. Oil markets are subtly changing, as more countries - led by China - seek preferential access to scarce global supplies. In the future, security of supply may matter as much as price. The more we can reduce oil demand and increase supply stability, the better off we'll be. On oil sands, we should just say yes. © 2011 Washington Post Writers Group ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20110902/bba1f300/attachment.html ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Time for U.S. to say yes to Canadian oil sands
on Thursday, September 1, 2011 1:48:16 PM Darryl McMahon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Economically viable does not equal environmentally viable. Indeed. Economically viable has become nearly the antithesis of environmentally viable If 'nearly' applies. Some would say it IS the antithesis. http://ottawaaction.ca/join-us (Sept. 26th, 2011, Ottawa Parliament Hill re: Tar Sands mining) http://www.restco.ca/Inuvik_RT_Ottawa.shtml (Sept. 12-16, Ottawa, Canada Science and Technology Museum, Ottawa Forum concurrent with Inuvik Roundtable Review of Arctic Offshore Drilling - a more low-key affair). Darryl McMahon On 01/09/2011 1:30 PM, Keith Addison wrote: Really? http://search.japantimes.co.jp:80/mail/eo20110831rs.html Wednesday, Aug. 31, 2011 Time for U.S. to say yes to Canadian oil sands By ROBERT J. SAMUELSON The Washington Post WASHINGTON - When it comes to energy, America is lucky to be next to Canada, whose proven oil reserves are estimated by Oil and Gas Journal at 175 billion barrels. tar sands are NOT oil, they are an oil precursor. Like the marcellus shale, and all these 'bottom of the barrel' extraction schemes that are coming along these days, one expects there are investment scams at play here, rather than any actual measurable production. ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Time for U.S. to say yes to Canadian oil sands
On Friday, September 2, 2011 10:04:50 AM Zeke Yewdall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Interesting that when you are addicted to coke, the problem does not seem to be the addition, but where to get more coke. Nowhere in the article did I see any discussion of reducing oil demand. Z Nor is it likely that you ever will. Where conservation is mentioned at all, it's always a footnote, an afterthought. There is NO MONEY to be made in conservation. You can't 'grow' the economy by spending LESS. Or, so they say. Personally i see huge opportunities from reducing economic growth, or rather in deliberate economic contraction. It's also pretty funny how google culture can't properly source 'you can't push the river' :) ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Ethanol and gasoline
Hello Keith and all. I agree with you to some extent. Gasoline is a non-polar mix of 100:s and 100:s of hydrocarbons. In order to be corrosive there has to be a) metal ions (Lewis acids) producing a low pH and b) water or other polar compounds in the system. Anhydrous ethanol stays anhydrous reasonably long assuming that it is kept in a closed vessel, preferably with dehydration air filters. No I have not heard if Absolut is into juridical problems. But me, I prefer Lithuanian Gold vodka or Wyborowa, so it does not matter. - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Monday, August 29, 2011 10:44 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Ethanol and gasoline Hij Jan Thanks for your reply. What I was asking about is the 4% (4.37%) water in the azeotrope mix that won't separate from the water by distillation. When 190-proof ethanol is blended with gasoline, the overall proportion of water is even lower. Zeolite will remove the last of the water, but it's another processing step and you have to buy it, and how long will the ethanol stay absolute? I thought that today's engines were built to resist rust and corrosion. Gasoline is also corrosive. There's also this, in a previous message: Biodiesel as an anti-wear and smog additive for gasoline fuel is very encouraging. - Franklin Del Rosario, January 2004, Biodiesel in gasoline engines - scroll down the page to Biodiesel in 4-stroke gasoline engines http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_make2.html#gas It sounds like a good ethanol additive too. Has Absolut Vodka been sued yet for making false advertising claims? :-) Since it sure isn't absolute. Is it still just as good now that it's French? Somebody once gave me a bottle of 100-proof Absolut, wonderful stuff. All best Keith Hello all. I wish to comment that like this: Gasoline engines are sensitive to water, too sensitive to accept anything but a very small portion of water containing alcohol in the gasoline. Any alcohol blend in gasoline should originate from anhydrous alcohol.The fact that ethanol in water is corrosive does not make it better. Some of the ethanol will drop a hydrogen atom to the water and create acid and an ethoxide ion, both are aggressive. The diesel engines, as a contrast, can accept up to four per cents of water without even long-term problems. But then the engine in question has to be prepared for ethanol as fuel, of course. Best regards Jan W - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Sunday, August 28, 2011 6:59 PM Subject: [Biofuel] Ethanol and gasoline Hi all Would someone who has David Blume's Alcohol Can Be a Gas! please look up something for me? I can't get at my copy at the moment. What does Mr Blume say about blending 95% ethanol (190-proof) with gasoline? Miscible or not? Thanks! Keith ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
