Hi David
I think Todd and I were talking mostly about Biodiesel Industries'
Modular Production Unit ("MPU"), which is an expensive corporate
gadget, and most of your points wouldn't apply (except #7). (See
"Container units - was Re: [biofuel] Yield of Jerusalem artichoke").
I did post some info on historical use of mobile units (ethanol).
I think Todd's comparison is with providing permanent infrastructure
for local cooperatives (grower-user-community energy self-suffiency),
so your points #1-6 wouldn't apply either.
Where primary producers want to market fuel, rather than use it
themselves or for the local community, there could be a case for
mobile units, depending (as always) on the circumstances. But again,
if they could afford it, they'd be better off, producing a cheaper
product and with greater independence and flexibility, if they had
their own plant tailored to their needs. Whoever makes it, whether
on-site or a mobile unit, it still has to travel down that road, good
or bad, to get to the market.
Where use of the fuel is to be local, there's a case for a mobile
unit where the producers/local community can't afford their own
production unit(s). But with a bit of improvising, small but
effective on-farm units can be very cheap. In Third World rural areas
labour to run them is also usually very cheap. You have to see the
operator of the mobile unit as another middleman, after all.
A mobile unit can certainly help to spread the concept of local fuel
self-sufficiency, and to extend the technology, and serve as an
interim measure until appropriate local facilities are installed.
Actually Journey to Forever will be such a unit, among other things,
though we aren't going to need a container for it.
Best
Keith Addison
Journey to Forever
Handmade Projects
Tokyo
http://journeytoforever.org/
>Keith, Todd, et al,
> While mobile plants may not be applicable to the
>States and even there I am doubtful I certainly believe and am convinced in
>many places in Asia (certainly India for one) that a mobile plant would be a
>very good idea principally for the following good reasons:
>1) the first is the quality of the roads and difficulty of getting product
>to market.
>2) the second is that it makes more sense sometimes to produce the product
>where it is going to be used rather than sending it to market and then
>having to get the finished product returned.
>3) the third is that it cuts out the middleman.
>4) the fourth is that if being sent to market and then returned a certain %
>of the fuel produced is being consumed in transportation and hence higher
>production costs. Also higher inefficiencies built into production costs.
>5) the fifth is that the people who produce the raw material and generally
>do the hard part generally get the least out of the deal. eg. the campesinos
>who pick coffee generally get 20c kg, the farmer gets 50c, and yet consider
>how much you pay for a cup of coffee at any good western country city cafe
>(note 140 cups of espresso coffee to a kg of roasted coffee). The same is
>true of farming generally. Using a mobile plant can leave the benefits in
>the producers hands rather than some great multi national who most of the
>time are top heavy, inefficient, and darn greedy.
>6) the sixth is that the producers of the raw materials can combine together
>in the locality the material is grown to produce greater efficiency and
>lower their production costs.
>7) the seventh is that a mobile plant can quite often serve for a time in a
>transitory phase while an industry is growing.
>I could go on for a while listing a number of reasons I am sure but I
>believe the reasons above are more than enough. Some of these also apply to
>the States and especially certain localities. While a lot of multi nationals
>might or might try to convince you otherwise those at the coalface generally
>know otherwise. In my lifetime I have seen more good businesses sunk by
>accountants and banks than by incompetance on the behalf of those who
>actually run the business.
>B.r., David
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Keith Addison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: <biofuel@yahoogroups.com>
>Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 9:16 PM
>Subject: Re: [biofuel] Container Plants
>
>
> > Hi Todd
> >
> > I agree, I can't see it - well, not for the likes of us. Nor for
> > farmers, coops, local communities. It's corporate stuff I guess.
> >
> > >Keith,
>
>
>
>Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
>http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
>To unsubscribe, send an email to:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
