Re: [Biofuel] Acid - Base questions
Hello Todd, yes, to my knowledge it is favourable producing methyl esters by turning the FFA:s into soaps as a first step. There will be amounts of water created with this method as well, but it seems to be of less importance. There is no need for scaring people off , but there is a need for explaining the mechanisms necessary for success. There will also always be a need for us that are trained to disperse our knowledge with the responsibility required. I was referring to acid esterification of FFA:s / oil without passing through the soap step. These reactions are often incomplete, and moreover, quite slow. With best regards Jan Jan Warnqvist AGERATEC AB [EMAIL PROTECTED] + 46 554 201 89 +46 70 499 38 45 - Original Message - From: Appal Energy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2006 4:29 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Acid - Base questions Jan, Since when are esterifications often incomplete? And since when is a good conversion achieved necessarily through base catalysis? It's relatively simple to take 100% FFAs and achieve a 100% yield of esters. Industry does it daily from soap stock. Let people satisfy their own curiosities rather than scaring them off paths that many have already taken..., and succeeded at one might add. Todd Swearingen Jan Warnqvist wrote: Hello Jim, the sensible thing is to spending time and money producing BD from a cheap feedstock, not the other way around. Acid esterifications are often incomplete, and I assume that oils and fats with max 20% FFA are worth while bothering about, unless you are willing to do several acid esterification steps and draining off the produced water after each step.But in order to have a good conversion into BD, you finally have to run the alkaline transesterification step , also for neutralization. Good luck to you ! Jan Warnqvist AGERATEC AB [EMAIL PROTECTED] + 46 554 201 89 +46 70 499 38 45 - Original Message - From: JJJN [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2006 3:26 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Acid - Base questions Thanks Jan, If I had developed a method to separate FFA's from base stock without using chemicals or water say in the range of 95% separation in WVO (still a work in progress but hopeful results) so that I could React the Low FFA's in a Base method then would it be feasible to react the High FFA's In a separate Acid reaction? Or what problems would I encounter like the water problem you noted below? Would the FFA's be worth the trouble? Thanks Jim Jan Warnqvist wrote: Hello Jim, when using the acid esterification, you will have methyl esters, unreacted oil, sulphate ions, oxonium ions and - water. Proceeding to the base step you will create more methyl esters, potassium or sodium soaps, maybe a little unreacted oil or partially reacted oil, potassium or sodium sulphates and - even more water. This method works fine if the water content can be kept on a reasonable level. Please note that the higher the initial FFA level, the more water will be produced. With best regards Jan Jan Warnqvist AGERATEC AB [EMAIL PROTECTED] + 46 554 201 89 +46 70 499 38 45 - Original Message - From: JJJN [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: BIO Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2006 3:01 AM Subject: [Biofuel] Acid - Base questions I have decided to try the acid/base method in small test batches as I have some High FFA (4ml) oil I would like to process. Since September I have gone to great lengths to get repeatability and accuracy in all my work with Biodiesel. I have read and re-read JtF and I know that I will no doubt read it several more times if I get stumped. I would like to start with fully understanding the process first. Before I start: Can you use KOH with the Acid Base method? It might be obvious, but I did not see it in the recipe as a substitution. When the acid gets done with Estrification properly then the mix that is left is basically an oil (triglycerides) , Methanol, and Sulfur ions ? Or did I miss something? When the Methoxil is added the Sulfur gets combined with the Sodium ions, (right?) how does this affect the reaction? Any good experienced information would be helpful, Jim ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org
Re: [Biofuel] Nuclear War against Iran
Anyone who would consider nuclear war, even limitted nuclear war, as an option of first resort is, beyond any doubt, certifiably crazy. The ramifications to humanity are beyond comprehension and any initiator should be straight jacketed and sedated before given opportunity to do so. Bush's I don't give a shit attitude is going to destroy what little resemblance of humanity is left in this world. Todd Swearingen http://snipurl.com/lcza Nuclear War against Iran by Michel Chossudovsky January 3, 2006 GlobalResearch.ca The launching of an outright war using nuclear warheads against Iran is now in the final planning stages. Coalition partners, which include the US, Israel and Turkey are in an advanced stage of readiness. Various military exercises have been conducted, starting in early 2005. In turn, the Iranian Armed Forces have also conducted large scale military maneuvers in the Persian Gulf in December in anticipation of a US sponsored attack. Since early 2005, there has been intense shuttle diplomacy between Washington, Tel Aviv, Ankara and NATO headquarters in Brussels. In recent developments, CIA Director Porter Goss on a mission to Ankara, requested Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan to provide political and logistic support for air strikes against Iranian nuclear and military targets. Goss reportedly asked for special cooperation from Turkish intelligence to help prepare and monitor the operation. (DDP, 30 December 2005). In turn, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has given the green light to the Israeli Armed Forces to launch the attacks by the end of March: All top Israeli officials have pronounced the end of March, 2006, as the deadline for launching a military assault on Iran The end of March date also coincides with the IAEA report to the UN on Iran's nuclear energy program. Israeli policymakers believe that their threats may influence the report, or at least force the kind of ambiguities, which can be exploited by its overseas supporters to promote Security Council sanctions or justify Israeli military action. (James Petras, Israel's War Deadline: Iran in the Crosshairs, Global Research, December 2005) The US sponsored military plan has been endorsed by NATO, although it is unclear, at this stage, as to the nature of NATO's involvement in the planned aerial attacks. Shock and Awe The various components of the military operation are firmly under US Command, coordinated by the Pentagon and US Strategic Command Headquarters (USSTRATCOM) at the Offutt Air Force base in Nebraska. The actions announced by Israel would be carried out in close coordination with the Pentagon. The command structure of the operation is centralized and ultimately Washington will decide when to launch the military operation. US military sources have confirmed that an aerial attack on Iran would involve a large scale deployment comparable to the US shock and awe bombing raids on Iraq in March 2003: American air strikes on Iran would vastly exceed the scope of the 1981 Israeli attack on the Osiraq nuclear center in Iraq, and would more resemble the opening days of the 2003 air campaign against Iraq. Using the full force of operational B-2 stealth bombers, staging from Diego Garcia or flying direct from the United States, possibly supplemented by F-117 stealth fighters staging from al Udeid in Qatar or some other location in theater, the two-dozen suspect nuclear sites would be targeted. Military planners could tailor their target list to reflect the preferences of the Administration by having limited air strikes that would target only the most crucial facilities ... or the United States could opt for a far more comprehensive set of strikes against a comprehensive range of WMD related targets, as well as conventional and unconventional forces that might be used to counterattack against US forces in Iraq (See Globalsecurity.org at http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/iran-strikes.htm In November, US Strategic Command conducted a major exercise of a global strike plan entitled Global Lightening. The latter involved a simulated attack using both conventional and nuclear weapons against a fictitious enemy. Following the Global Lightening exercise, US Strategic Command declared an advanced state of readiness (See our analysis below) While Asian press reports stated that the fictitious enemy in the Global Lightening exercise was North Korea, the timing of the exercises, suggests that they were conducted in anticipation of a planned attack on Iran. Consensus for Nuclear War No dissenting political voices have emerged from within the European Union. There are ongoing consultations between Washington, Paris and Berlin. Contrary to the invasion of Iraq, which was opposed at the diplomatic level by France and Germany, Washington has been building a consensus both within the Atlantic Alliance and the UN Security Council.
Re: [Biofuel] Acid - Base questions
On Jan 8, 2006, at 2:15 AM, Jan Warnqvist wrote: I was referring to acid esterification of FFA:s / oil without passing through the soap step. These reactions are often incomplete, and moreover, quite slow. Not only that, but difficult to isolate your biodiesel from the react- ants. My experience with straight esterification is that you always have two phases, but you can't ever tell what's in each phase. It starts out, of course, with alcohol in one and FFA in the other. After the reaction has gone as far it's going to (many hours of agit- ation at high temps), there's a combination of biodiesel, FFA, acid, and a little methanol in the oily phase, and the huge excess of meth- anol plus water and most of the acid in the aqueous phase. Hard to ever get pure biodiesel, or even know how far the reaction has gone, and you can't easily purify or wash the biodiesel without reversing the reaction to some extent. I'm sure it's doable, once you work out all the variables and have a process down with good testing of your product. For me, the base- catalyzed reaction is much more practical. -K ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
[Biofuel] Chicage - Venezuela
But we seem to have no problem buying oil from Saudi Arabia, which has had far more to do with funding and sponsoring terrorism than Venezuela. I have yet to see anything conclusive about Chavez other than he has clamped down on some members of the opposition in his own country. I fail to see how he is much of a threat to the US. Not to mention, there is a Citgo station AT THE PENTAGON! It sells Biodiesel! My head hurts. Mike Aramco is a foreign government-owned company, are your local governments allowed to buy fuel? Anyway, whatever, the news report says: But two months later, despite claims of a looming budget crisis, the CTA president has no intent or plan to accept the offer, according to CTA spokesperson Ibis Antongiorgi. She gave no explanation. If your explanation had any chance of standing up I don't doubt she'd have used it, but she didn't. People like Weisbrot would surely know it too. I think you're just grabbing for an excuse. IMHO, considering the current context in the US of oil interests, corruption and interfering with foreign governments (and even your own), your arguments seem somewhat bizarre. In the context of the poor too, especially after some of Hurricane Katrina's revelations. But you blamed the victims at the time, didn't you? Nobody's said the S-word yet (aarghh), LOL! Best Keith ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
[Biofuel] organic PV's absorb from near infared frequencies
http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/003211.html Organic Photovoltaics Absorb From Near Infrared Frequencies A research group has developed organic nanostructures photovoltaics that can absorb photons near the infrared frequency. Ewing, NJ | 4 January 2006 -- Global Photonic Energy Corporation (GPEC), developer of organic photovoltaic (OPVtm) technology for ultra-low cost high power solar cells, announced that the company's research partners at Princeton University and the University of Southern California (USC) have achieved a new record in an organic solar cell that is responsive to light in the near infrared (NIR) range of the solar spectrum. NIR radiation is invisible to the human eye. Many so-called night vision devices operate by sensing infrared light which is emitted by warm objects and makes up a substantial portion of all energy reaching the earth from the sun. Under only NIR radiation, the Princeton solar cell would appear to be generating power in the dark -- as the human eye is only sensitive to visible light. This latest achievement is the highest level of conversion performance yet achieved for an organic solar cell in the IR portion of the solar spectrum. The Company's researchers detail this latest achievement in the December 2 issue of Applied Physics Letters. The Global thirst for energy is continually expanding. Renewable energy sources have experienced rapid growth in recent years as costs have improved. Global solar cell production has grown over 20% annually for the last 20 years, reaching sales of $6 billion in 2004. This strong growth has resulted in a world-wide shortage of semiconductor silicon driving 2005 solar cell prices higher. Cost is a critical factor in the continued expansion of the solar cell industry. Currently, solar-generated power is four to six times more expensive to consumers than coal-generated power. Silicon crystals are too expensive as a starting material for making photovoltaics cells. The development of organic photovoltaic materials holds the potential for much cheaper photovoltaics. These Princeton and USC researchers (see below) are not only pursuing organically based photovoltaics but they are also pursuing the development of much higher efficiency photovoltaics. The odds are developing a way to double or triple the conversion efficiency of organic photovoltaics will not increase costs per square meter of materials anywhere near as much. So cost per unit of energy produced will drop. Recent efforts have focused on the use of organic materials. Organic semiconductors contain the ubiquitous element carbon and are capable of achieving ultra-low cost solar power generation that is competitive with traditional fossil fuel sources. Organic materials have the potential to achieve ultra-low cost production costs and high power output. The materials are ultra-thin and flexible and can be applied to large, curved or spherical surfaces. Because the layers are so thin, transparent solar cells can be applied to windows creating power-generating glass that retains its basic functionality. GPEC sponsors research by Professor Stephen R. Forrest at Princeton and Professor Mark E. Thompson at USC. Professor Forrest's research team has focused on organic small-molecule devices that are assembled literally a molecule at a time in highly efficient nanostructures. These devices have layers and/or structural elements that can be extremely small -- at only 0.5 billionth of a meter thick and can be applied to low-cost, flexible plastic surfaces. These scientists want to boost absorption of photons near the infrared frequency range because that is where much of the energy in sunlight is found. One challenge for organic solar cells has been the efficient capture and conversion of sunlight. Sunlight consists of photons (particles of light) that are delivered across a spectrum that includes invisible ultraviolet (UV) light, the visible spectrum of colors -- violet, indigo, blue, green, yellow, orange and red -- and the invisible infrared or IR spectrum. The amount of incoming photons across the UV, visible and IR spectrums is about 4%, 51% and 45%, respectively. The photons absorbed by a solar cell directly impacts the power output. To achieve high power output, solar devices must take advantage of as much of the solar spectrum as possible. Typical organic solar cells absorb only a fraction of the visible portion of the solar spectrum. In fact, the best organic solar cells absorb and convert only about 1/3 of the total available light utilizing primarily the visible portion of the spectrum. This latest device demonstrates that significant power can be harvested from the IR and near-IR portion of the solar spectrum., said Dr. Stephen R. Forrest. In fact, this novel approach has the potential to double the power output of organic solar devices with power harvested from the near-IR and IR portion of the solar spectrum. With this approach we are well on our way to power
[Biofuel] Pataki Wants Drivers to Fill Up With Ethanol or Biodiesel
January 7, 2006Pataki Wants Drivers to Fill Up With Ethanol or Biodiesel By DANNY HAKIM ALBANY, Jan. 6 - Some 200,000 New Yorkers own vehicles that can run on corn-based ethanol instead of gasoline. But many have no idea that their Ford Explorers, Chevy Impalas or Nissan Titans can use this type of fuel, which some view as a way to liberate Americans from Middle Eastern oil. In any case, the closest station carrying ethanol is in Ottawa, as the Northeast is the one region of the United States that uniformly does not offer ethanol to the public.But Gov. George E. Pataki wants to change that and make ethanol and biodiesel, two controversial alternative fuels, available in the 27 service areas on the New York State Thruway and in 100 more stations throughout the state as early as this year, in a first small step toward reducing the state's petroleum consumption. The governor is also proposing incentives to bring refineries that produce ethanol into the state. Costs and further details of the plan, which Mr. Pataki first sketched out in his State of the State address on Wednesday, will not be disclosed until he makes his budget proposal later this month. If the plan is approved by the Legislature, it will give New Yorkers one of the nation's most diverse ranges of fuel choices. Only Minnesota offers an ethanol-rich blend known as E85 at more than 100 stations. Likewise, biodiesel is offered at only a few hundred of the nation's roughly 180,000 stations.Both fuels can be made from a variety of crops, trees and plant material, and even used grease from fast-food outlets in the case of biodiesel. Ethanol, or grain alcohol, is already mixed with gasoline sold in the New York metropolitan area, but in amounts of about 10 percent. By contrast, E85, as its name suggests, is 85 percent ethanol.Using it is not far-fetched. In Brazil, ethanol made from sugar cane has become a formidable competitor to gasoline.Biodiesel is more commonly sold as B20, a blend of 20 percent biodiesel, with the rest conventional diesel fuel. While ethanol smells like moonshine, a car with biodiesel can smell like cooking French fries through a tailpipe. Both fuels have their share of skeptics and believers. Willie Nelson, for instance, sells his own brand of B20 known as BioWillie and pitches it as an alternative to consuming fuel from the Middle East. The governor's plan comes after the oil price shocks of the last year and frustration with automakers for suing New York for adopting California's greenhouse gas emissions standards for cars. The plan also includes incentives to help the state modify its hybrid-electric vehicles so that the cars can be plugged into stationary outlets to enable them to use even more electricity than fuel, a practice discouraged by the auto industry."Are we supposed to sit around and wait for Detroit to do these things?" said Charles G. Fox, a deputy secretary to Mr. Pataki who oversees energy issues, in an interview on Friday. Part of the plan, he said, was aimed at promoting the use of alternative fuels that can be used right away, as opposed to more futuristic fuels like hydrogen. Biodiesel can run in any diesel engine, and several million cars and trucks on the road nationwide can use E85.Criticism of the governor has come from several sides. Peter Iwanowicz, a director of environmental health for the American Lung Association of New York, said the environmental benefits of the two fuels were mixed."Ethanol increases ozone formation, which is obviously harmful for people with lung disease, and biodiesel increases emissions of nitrogen oxide," he said.But a variety of research suggests that the fuels can be environmentally beneficial, depending on how they are produced.Mr. Pataki has been criticized for promoting ethanol because it is made from corn grown in states that include Iowa, which he has been visiting recently to gauge support for a possible presidential run.But even the governor's advisers say that making ethanol from corn is a bad idea and that they prefer using wood or certain kinds of grass.Environmentalists have largely denounced making ethanol-capable vehicles, calling that a boondoggle intended for the agriculture lobby and Detroit. When automakers build cars and trucks that can use ethanol, called flex-fuel vehicles, they earn credits that make it easier to meet fuel-economy regulations, in turn giving them leeway to build more gas-guzzlers.Automakers have also not even told many customers that they own vehicles with such a capability, but Mr. Fox said New York might do so by consulting state records. Consumers can learn if they own one by examining their vehicle identification number as described at www.e85fuel.com.Only about 400 stations nationwide sell E85, and none of them are in the Northeast. On Friday, a gallon of E85 was selling for $1.73 - in part because of subsidies - at a station in Akron, Iowa,
Re: [Biofuel] Oooops! to much acid
Thanks Keith, As it turns out, between posting this message and receiving your reply I did some thinking and came up with the same solution. I've washed this batch twice since and the PH is coming up slowly, currently about PH 6.5. Tap water here is about PH 7.6 so I estimate another two or three washes will do it, maybe. Lots of water unfortunately however I suppose it can't be avoided. Not good considering Sydney is on level 3 water restrictions caused no doubt by the urban sprawl, drought conditions and infrastructure not keeping pace. I was thinking, is it possible to speed this process up and reduce the water used by using someting like Bi-carb Soda in the wash water to neutralise the acid further? Or would this complicate things? I'm hoping I can manage to do the necessary washes and dry the fuel before I hit the road at the end of the week. Thanks again Keith for your advise, much appreciated. Mick Hello Mick Hi Guys. I was hoping this day would never come. Ive been making Bio from WVO for over 12 months now with great success using the standard Base catalyst method. I run it in my 1992 80 series Toyota Land Cruiser with about 340,000 Km on the clock and she purrs like a Kitten. I find the web site an excellent wealth of knowledge and a great place to learn the different theories and ideas from other like minded soles. Up until now reading and re reading this info has been of great assistance to me when in doubt/trouble, however this time Ive ended up with 180 liters of Bio with a PH of 5.8. after stuffing up the calculations with the acid quench in the wash water. I now find myself with a self induced problem with this latest batch and I would like to ask the mailing list for advice so I can go on my annual camping trip and not have to pay $1.30/Litre at the pump here in Sydney. I have done a tritation of the washed bio and it gave me a 0.075 tritation as per the 'Better tritation method. I'm concerned that I have converted some of the Bio back to FFA's. If the pH is below 7 then you'll get a positive titration reading, but I don't see the point of titrating it. If you have converted biodiesel back to FFA it sure won't be much. The low-ish pH reading is much more likely to be due to residues of the acid you used in the wash quench. It can take quite a lot of qwashing to get it out. Keep on washing it until the pH returns to something near neutral (or the same as your wash water). My questions are:- A. Is this enough catalist to neutralize the acid? B. If so how much Methanol should I use for the reaction? C. Is this the best method to bring this batch back to PH 7? You're planning to neutralise the excess acid you used in the wash quench by re-processing the biodiesel? Overkill, just wash it some more, maybe quite a lot more. If that doesn't work then we can think again. Best Keith Thanks Mick Ellis ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] organic PV's absorb from near infared frequencies
I've heard a few stories the past 6-12 months on these new, cheaper, heaven sent technologies for PV. Hopefully they come sooner than later and not disappear like a lot of new cancer cures that seem to disappear. My 2 cents. John AltEnergyNetwork wrote: http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/003211.html Organic Photovoltaics Absorb From Near Infrared Frequencies A research group has developed organic nanostructures photovoltaics that can absorb photons near the infrared frequency. ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
