> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
> Behalf Of xponentrob
> Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 12:09 AM
> To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion
> Subject: Re: Scouted: U.S. to collapse in next two years?
> 
> >
> > If there's biofuel technology that doesn't significantly impact the
> > food stream as a source of motor vehicle fuel, then I'm all for it.
> > I'm not anywhere near PC myself, and if there's a GMO solution that
> > actually does provide a decent rate of return without investing more
> > energy in getting energy out of the fuel produced or cut too deeply
> > into the food supply, great.  Hadn't heard of this.
> >
> 
> These days I'm looking cynically at biofuels. they do nothing to 
> reduce CO2 levels in most cases (most applications are for ICE), 

I'm not sure I follow you here.  Present biofuels are bad, they divert food
into products that have low net energy out per energy unit in.   I have no
problem with that argument.  But, under lab conditions they've gotten over
1000x the yield of corn.  

Now, there are problems with the algae; it's especially susceptible to fungi
attacks.  But, with bioengineering costs dropping a factor of two per year,
this appears to be an area that can be tweaked, one way or another.  It
would be akin to knowing you needed a megaflop machine to get your work done
back in '76....Moore's law would make you optimistic.  Battery performance
has progressed at a much slower rate.



> but there is some hope for a good fuel for Fuel Cells 

That is another possibility for energy storage for cars


>and there *will* be a long term need for diesels.

More critically for biofuel: aviation.  It will be a long time before a
battery can power a 777 for 8000 miles.

Dan M. 



_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to