Dear Keith,
I only want to comfort you with the fact that I and probably many others got your message a long time ago. SVO versus BD is a pseudo argument that should not exist. It creates a artificial competitive situation between two good things and distracts from the real issues on how we minimize the use of fossil fuels. I think that the markets are maybe large enough to allow for both SVO and BD. This if I do understand the numbers on fossil fuel usage right. I could be wrong, but I do not think so. So this SVO versus BD is an other example on energy waste and the large need for energy saving. Hakan At 07:32 PM 8/29/2002 +0900, you wrote: > >on 8/28/02 1:09 AM, Keith Addison at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > >Keith: At the risk of having us both bore the list to tears again, I have a > >few points and questions here: > >Quite a major risk. > >You cut the main point I wanted to make, which was this: > > >Can you see what's happening here? It looks like I'm against SVO, > >doesn't it? But I'm not at all against SVO, I do everything I can to > >promote it. This false argument of biodiesel vs SVO puts everyone in > >a false position. Who's laughing? Big Oil, for sure. Who loses? > >Everybody. We've had this debate here several times, and it ends up > >with general agreement that SVO and biodiesel are not competitors, > >they're complementary, it's an individual choice. Again: it's not an > >argument, it's a choice. > >I wonder why you cut it, you don't seem to have cut anything else. > >You've fallen into just that trap (not for the first time): you see >me as against SVO, which I'm absolutely not, and the gist of your >message is essentially "SVO is better than biodiesel", yet again. I >won't be put in that false position again. > >Our SVO page is currently the fifth most popular page at our site, >out of hundreds of pages, getting thousands of visitors a month: >http://www.journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_svo.html >Straight vegetable oil as diesel fuel > >However, three pages on making biodiesel get four times as many >visitors. I think that might be about right, as a comparison, or >probably it favours SVO a bit. But a couple of years ago it would >have been more like 20 times as many, or more. That's why I said: >"SVO is playing an ever-bigger role, growth in the last three years >has been very rapid." And: "What won't help it to change is this >spurious idea of pitting them against each other, like enemies. >They're complementary." Viewing biodiesel as "the competition" is >very short-sighted. > >Anyway. Your point about German water pollution standards: > > >That is an odd situation, to be sure. Opposite in North America and Germany! > >The US Coast Guard considers a spill of vegetable oil to be the same as a > >spill of fossil fuel, I believe. I know that Environment Canada certainly > >considers a vegoil spill to be problem as well - both would think better of > >a biodiesel spill. Yet in Germany, and maybe other countries, we see the > >exact opposite. Very strange, and needs to be resolved. > >Politics and junk science, I suppose. Such as this, from "Comparison >of pure plant oil and bio diesel as fuel", credited to Prof. E. >Schrimpff of Fachhochschule Weihenstephan in Germany. That's a >technical college or something, Schrimpff seems to be involved in >solar power. > >Production: >principle: SVO - decentralized small oil expellers; Biodiesel - >central, big industrial units >Transport / storage: SVO - no risk; Biodiesel - small risk >Biol. degradation: SVO - very fast; Biodiesel - delayed >danger of water pollution: SVO - no; Biodiesel - small >human toxicity: SVO - regularly no or small; Biodiesel - toxic >Social acceptability: >strategy: SVO - small, decentralized; Biodiesel - big, central >logistics: SVO - simple; Biodiesel - complex >transportation: SVO - short distances; Biodiesel - long distances >vulnerability: SVO - small; Biodiesel - higher >regional income generation: SVO - high; Biodiesel - low > >Bullshit, pardon me. It's stuff like this that encourages SVO people >there to exaggerate it a bit more and claim biodiesel's as toxic as >petro-diesel and requires big expensive plants using loads of energy >and so on. That's how spin works, and hence the "debate" in Europe. > >The US work on biodiesel toxicity and biodegradability was very >clear, thorough and detailed, and found it's less toxic than table >salt, more biodegradable than sugar. The biodegradability tests >included water tests, IIRC. > >For the rest, you're pretty much quibbling. Like this: > > >But the main point is that while we may use soap, or know how it is made, we > >do not normally come into direct contact with the chemicals used. Biodiesel > >production requires that we must do so - SVO production does not. > >Probably most people have drain cleaner in their homes, and use it >without qualms. You can get all this stuff in any big supermarket, >including the methanol. People use 1:3 methanol-ethanol blends in >little burners to keep the dinner warm at the table. It's not nearly >as sinister as you like to make out, just household stuff. As I said, >Granny used to make her own potassium hydroxide, and her >brother-in-law quite possibly brewed moonshine. > >Again: > > > so is everything, your > > > computer, your clothing, your house, your food. It's a matter of > > > degree. > > > >But SVO need not be, really hardly "tainted" at all! If you cold press oil > >at or near where the crop is found, using oil from the previous harvest, run > >the tractor on it to grow the crops and run the press, and generate > >electricity with the same plant oil, and so on, that leaves a much smaller > >proportion of fossil fuel, by anyone's LCA, than would an analysis of > >biodiesel production. > >By the same token, our goal from the beginning has been to be able to >make biodiesel in a Third World village setting, with NO taint of >fossil fuels, except in some of the equipment manufacture, and maybe >not too much of that either, and yes, we could do that, and will. The >same goes for SVO, and which it's to be depends on the particular >circumstances, not on some pre-judged conception of what's "best". >Either or both or neither, depending. > > > It's a matter of degree - there are no options for > > > purists, yet, but short of that, you can do a lot of good, not do a > > > lot of bad, and not use a whole load of fossil fuel. > > > >The purists, such as they exist, are the single-tank cold pressed guys - > >Elsbett systems and local cold pressed SVO > >That's not what Pranav meant, nor me. Anyway, "purism" speaks of >impracticality. The Elsbett system is hardly that, it's the most >practical system of all - fill 'er up and go, stop and switch off, >and that's all, same as with biodiesel. No start-up and stop fuel, no >fuel switching, no two tanks. Others do that, yes, especially with >older Mercedes diesels, but they're sailing into the unknown, the >opposite of Elsbett. Elsbett is widely regarded as the most >professional system, and they certainly have the most experience and >expertise. > >Elsbett is the goal. Hopefully, rapid growth in SVO use, of whatever >system, will eventually persuade the manufacturers to make such >options available in their vehicles, as standard. How about a >PSA-Peugeot with multi-fuel options and SVO capabilities the same as >Elsbett's? They already support biodiesel, but that's what we want. > >The Elsbett system, developments of the current two-tank systems, and >of computer applications like the Biocar system, will then be >available along with biodiesel for the many older diesels that will >still be in use. > >The other change that's needed is for vegetable oil, the feedstock >for both biodiesel and SVO, to be regarded as an energy source, not >just as an agricultural commodity with energy as a useful sideline. > >It'll come. But that's where we should direct our efforts, not to >squabbling over which is "better". > >Keith > > >Regards, > > > >Ed > >http://www.biofuels.ca > > > >Biofuel at Journey to Forever: >http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html > >Biofuels list archives: >http://archive.nnytech.net/ > >Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. >To unsubscribe, send an email to: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> 4 DVDs Free +s&p Join Now http://us.click.yahoo.com/pt6YBB/NXiEAA/MVfIAA/FGYolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
