[biofuels-biz] Europe names its 'fleet of shame'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/2538987.stm BBC NEWS | World | Europe | Tuesday, 3 December, 2002, 14:17 GMT Europe names its 'fleet of shame' A blacklist of 66 ships deemed too dangerous for European waters has been published by the European Commission. The ships have been named and shamed amid concerns over safety standards in the wake of the Prestige tanker disaster. The single-hulled vessel went down off the Spanish coast after spewing thousands of tons of fuel oil into the Atlantic. Words are not enough: it is necessary to act and apply the maritime safety measures in full Loyola de Palacio Transport commissioner A French mini-submarine which reached the wreck on Sunday found no sign that the estimated 60,000 tons still on board were leaking - boosting hopes that the fuel had congealed in the chilly ocean depths. A second dive was planned for Tuesday. Dozens of Spanish beaches have already been contaminated by the oil which did escape. The local fishing industry has been devastated, and an estimated 15,000 seabirds have been killed or covered in oil. Ship expelled The disaster has provoked an angry response from France and Spain, which agreed to check all ageing single-hulled vessels in their waters and force them out if necessary. France, hit by oil from the Erika tanker in 1999, agreed with Spain to go ahead with the measures without waiting for the rest of the EU to endorse them. Portugal and Italy have introduced similar measures. The first test of the clampdown came at the weekend, when the Spanish and Portuguese navies ordered a tanker, the Moskovsky Festival, out to sea after concerns about safety. The 17-year-old vessel was carrying 25,000 metric tons of fuel oil from Estonia to Gibraltar, officials said. The commission said the 66 ships on its blacklist had been detained on several occcasions in European ports for failing to comply with safety rules. Most are bulk carriers, although 16 are oil and chemical tankers and one is a passenger vessel. The biggest single number of the vessels - 26 - sail under a Turkish flag. Twelve are flagged to the Caribbean nation of St Vincent and Grenadines, and nine to Cambodia. A total of 13 flags are represented. The Prestige was registered in Liberia and flagged to the Bahamas. Words are not enough: it is necessary to act and apply the maritime safety measures in full, said European Transport Commissioner Loyala de Palacio. Safety is the responsibility of everyone and a strict application of all the measures is the only way of ensuring that substandard ships do not fall through the safety net. The commission also wants all single-hulled tankers banned from transporting fuel oil through European waters. And it is urging members to speed up the implementation of extra safety measures agreed after the Erika sinking, including the appointment of enough staff to inspect at least 25% of ships coming intoport. The Commission said at the time these were urgent and needed to be adopted immediately, said Ms De Palacio Unfortunately this has been borne out by recent events. Accidents of this kind can and must be avoided. The plans will discussed by European transport ministers at the Copenhagen summit next week. Clean-up Along the shoreline wrecked by the Prestige oil, volunteers have been continuing to scrape tons of oil from beaches. Around 5,500 tons have been pumped from the sea by vessels from Belgium, Britain, France, Germany, the Netherlands and Norway. Several small oil slicks have been spotted from the air, 10 nautical miles north of Cape Penas, off Spain's northern region of Asturia, officials said. Gibraltar drama In a separate incident, a cargo ship slipped out of Gibaltar under cover of darkness after an inspection was ordered, a government spokesman told the French news agency AFP. The Canyon - also flying the St Vincent and Grenadines flag - was suspected of having defective bilge pumps and a faulty radar. The port authority ordered the ship to be boarded, and the captain was asked to surrender the ship's papers. But the ship took on fuel and steamed out of Gibraltar bay under cover of night, with lights switched off and without her papers, said the spokesman. Police launches gave chase after the vessel refused to stop, but it sailed on, possibly bound for Piraeus in Greece. Ports have been alerted, and asked to refuse the vessel entry. Biofuels at Journey to Forever http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel at WebConX http://webconx.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech: http://archive.nnytech.net/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[biofuels-biz] Clean vehicles
Clean vehicles analysis Automaker Rankings: The Environmental Performance of Car Companies This is the executive summary from the UCS report Automaker Rankings: The Environmental Performance of Car Companies http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/health_and_environment/page.cfm?p ageID=1065 Full report: http://www.ucsusa.org/publication.cfm?publicationID=517 PDF 413 kb http://ens-news.com/ens/dec2002/2002-12-04-10.asp U.S. Automakers Trail Japanese in Eco-Ranking WASHINGTON, DC, December 4, 2002 (ENS) - When it comes to environmental performance Japanese automakers still far outpace their American rivals, according to a new survey released today by the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), but all six of the automakers that dominate the U.S. market need further pressure from policymakers if any significant reduction in pollution from automobiles is to be expected. [more] Biofuels at Journey to Forever http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel at WebConX http://webconx.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech: http://archive.nnytech.net/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[biofuels-biz] Honge oil - was Re: [biofuel] EREN Network News -- 12/04/02
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2540321.stm BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Wednesday, 4 December, 2002, 09:31 GMT Huge oil find 'threatens Caspian' By Alex Kirby BBC News Online environment correspondent in Atyrau, Kazakhstan Western oil companies are poised to start developing a field near here which experts believe is the world's largest. But Kazakh scientists say pumping out the oil, at Kashagan, threatens the northern Caspian with catastrophe. The oil beneath Kashagan is a genie in a bottle -- Prof Muftach Diarov They say earthquakes in this seismically active region could wreak havoc as the submarine reservoirs are drained. And they want the developers to agree to scale back production significantly. The Kashagan field, about 70 kilometres (45 miles) from Atyrau, is believed to contain about 40 billion barrels of oil, 10 billion of them recoverable. 'Wild East' One barrel contains 45 gallons, enough to fill the tanks of three family saloon cars. Experts say a one-billion-barrel field is considered huge, and Kashagan is being compared with some of the largest Saudi Arabian fields. World War Two oil tanks still dot the Caspian shore The Western companies involved in the consortium preparing to exploit Kashagan include Agip of Italy, British Gas, the US giant ExxonMobil, Shell, and TotalFinaElf. The region around Atyrau, a city of 200,000 people which sits almost 30 metres below sea level, is known as central Asia's Wild East. The Caspian is a formidable challenge for the oil companies. The southern part of the sea is up to 1,000 m deep, and the central belt lies about 4-500 m down. But the northern basin averages little more than 10 m in depth, although high winds can temporarily alter the sea level over wide areas. Sturgeon concern Agip has commissioned special shallow-draught icebreakers, capable of operating in 2 m of water, for winter use. The companies cannot use traditional drilling rigs, and have to build artificial islands to extract the oil. Many Kazakhs oppose the exploitation of Kashagan, fearing it will worsen health problems in the area by increasing air pollution. They say its position, in the mouth of the Ural river which divides Europe from Asia, will push the prized wild Caspian sturgeon closer to extinction. Some fear a more cataclysmic threat from Kashagan. Professor Muftach Diarov, a geologist who heads Atyrau's Oil and Gas Institute, is a member of Kazakhstan's national academy of sciences. 'No risk' The oil in Kashagan and elsewhere in the north Caspian, he says, is pressurised to1,000 atmospheres and is at 100 to 120 C. The problem is that we do not have enough experience to work under such extreme conditions. Beyond that, Professor Diarov fears that emptying the oil and gas from their reservoirs beneath the Caspian's bed could trigger devastating earthquakes. He says tremors elsewhere in the Caspian have already been felt near Atyrau, and could also destabilise the Kashagan reservoirs. Professor Diarov told BBC News Online: The oil beneath Kashagan is a genie in a bottle - it's a bomb. Sooner or later it will explode, and everything in the north Caspian will be damaged. We know what to expect from a fire in the Tenghiz field south of here, operated by a consortium which includes ChevronTexaco. That burnt for more than a year, and caused damage over a 300 km radius. I've told Agip and Chevron of my fears. But oil dollars always win. Professor Diarov said Russia, which has a similar field close to the Kazakh frontier, had decided wisely to reduce production to 25% of the attainable level, because they understand they have to go slowly. And Kazakhstan should do the same. A spokesman for TengizChevroil, exploiting the Tenghiz field, told BBC News Online: Our geologists say there is no risk right now that distant tremors could set off disturbances here. http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/18894/story.htm Kazakhs slap $70mln ecology fine on Chevron venture KAZAKHSTAN: December 5, 2002 ALMATY - A court in Kazakhstan has fined ChevronTexaco-led oil venture Tengizchevroil (TCO) 11 billion tenge ($71 million) for ecological damage caused by storing millions of tonnes of sulphur at its Tengiz field. The fine is the latest in a series of blows to TCO, the highest profile joint venture in Kazakhstan, whose energy-based economy is heavily dependent on foreign investment. TCO said it was very disappointed and was considering an appeal. According to our data, this sulphur negatively affects the environment, Turaly Onerbayev, regional representative of the natural resources and environmental protection ministry, told Reuters yesterday from the Central Asian state's oil capital Atyrau in western Kazakhstan. TCO, a 40-year, multi-billion project and until now a showcase of successful foreign investment, was prompt to react. Tengizchevroil is very disappointed with the decision made by the
[biofuels-biz] Re: Small-scale ethanol - Bio fuel business-Tables
Hi Hakan It is difficult to make tables in mail, if you cannot use html. Therefore I also did the tables at the end of, http://energy.saving.nu/biofuels/biofuelorg.shtml Hakan Difficult too to discuss them by email, for the same reason, so I copied your tables and did an alternative version for comparison, here: http://journeytoforever.org/ethanol_compare.html Best Keith At 04:08 PM 12/4/2002 +0100, Hakan Falk wrote: Keith, Original draft for article at http://energy.saving.nu/biofuels/biofuelorg.shtml You just posted several press releases from oil companies and these are quite telling. They touch very much the subject of my article. The situation in Poland and the moonshine argument, show the relevance of this discussion. David have already started to think about it and I hope that we get more valuable views. To add to the discussion about centralization versus decentralization risk for Ethanol and biodiesel/SVO, I have done the following tables. I is a topic for discussion and I am not claiming that I got it right on the first time or on my own. The following table is a first attempt to map technical feasibility of fossil to bio fuel replacement. Biofuels at Journey to Forever http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel at WebConX http://webconx.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech: http://archive.nnytech.net/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[biofuels-biz] Sorry! - was Re: Honge oil - was Re: [biofuel] EREN Network News
Wrong subject. :-( http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2540321.stm BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Wednesday, 4 December, 2002, 09:31 GMT Huge oil find 'threatens Caspian' Biofuels at Journey to Forever http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel at WebConX http://webconx.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech: http://archive.nnytech.net/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[biofuels-biz] Re: Ex-GM CEO makes green auto industry comeback
I think we will see these Ovonic NiMh batteries in some of the hybrids. It's a pity, but I don't see where we'll see them in an EV anytime soon. I hope I'm wrong. I think Mr. Ellis of Honda mentioned that the size of a battery in their hybrid versus an EV is about 1/20. So, that's a reason they're not impossible to find in hybrids. ECD has been making seemingly very good batteries for years, but, somehow, they were just never able to get into EVs in volume, aside from the EV1, which program is over, and which was never a non-prototype program. Perhaps the the failure to get the batteries out there has something to do with GM co-owning the Ovonic battery venture during the 90s and then more or less passing on this ownership (once it seemed they'd delayed things to an absurd point) to Chevron-Texaco (a major oil company). There hasn't been much critical commentary of a major Oil Company having a large stake in what in the past was the best hope by some for an advanced battery for EVs, but I'm not sure it shouldn't be pointed out that, for whatever reason, C-T Ovonic has yet to get their battery into a mass produced highway capable EV. NiMH does seem to be making the expected good headway into hybrids, thanks particularly to Toyota and Honda, and Matsushita which has I think been making the batteries. Matsushita has run afoul of ECD a few times in patent disputes I think. For real EVs I am hanging some hope on Hydro Quebec and their Lithium batteries and cars, because they're not a US company, because they make electricity (not Oil) and are thus a potential competitor to make fuel for cars, and so have a real incentive to get EVs on the road to buy their products, and they seem to really intend to do this thing. On Wed, 4 Dec 2002 01:52:14 +0900, you wrote: http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/18867/story.htm Ex-GM CEO makes green auto industry comeback USA: December 3, 2002 ROCHESTER HILLS, Mich. - Nearly 10 years to the day after he was pushed out as chief of General Motors Corp. (GM.N), Bob Stempel shoveled a handful of dirt to break ground for a new plant in Ohio that could make him a key player in a more environmentally-friendly automotive industry. Stempel, 70, could easily have retired to a comfortable life after his tenure as chairman and CEO of GM ended in October 1992 with a boardroom coup. But now as chairman of Energy Conversion Devices Inc. (ENER.O) he works 60 to 70 hours a week, and flies around the world to visit clients as he makes his case for battery-powered vehicles. Stempel is betting that sales of hybrid cars and trucks, powered by conventional gasoline or diesel engines mated to an electric drive system, will grow in the coming years as companies seek more fuel-efficient vehicles. In late October, Stempel ceremoniously kicked off construction of a 170,000-square-foot plant in Springboro, Ohio, that will make enough nickel-metal hydride batteries to supply 50,000 to 60,000 vehicles a year. Production at the plant, a joint venture between Chevron Texaco (CVX.N) and Energy Conversion Devices, is scheduled to start in the third quarter next year. MOVING OFF THE FENCE People have been sort of on the fence about hybrid cars, Stempel told Reuters, his voice booming with excitement. All of a sudden they are moving off the fence. We know that there's going to be enough solid business out there that we ought to get under way. Currently there are only three hybrid gas-electric vehicles for sale in the U.S. market, all made by Japanese automakers Toyota Motor Corp. (7203.T) and Honda Motor Co. Ltd. (7267.T) - the Toyota Prius, the Honda Insight and a hybrid-version of the popular Honda Civic small car. However, Stempel said that U.S. and European automakers are requesting prototypes for some test vehicles from his joint venture company, Texaco Ovonic Battery Systems. Unlike pure electric vehicles, which take hours to recharge and have limited range, hybrid gas-electric vehicles recharge themselves and can travel as far as conventional cars and trucks. Some so-called soft hybrids expected to be rolled out over the next two years shut the engine down when the vehicle idles or comes to a stop, such as at a traffic light, and quickly restart upon acceleration, also saving gasoline. Some will also have 110-volt outlets that can be used for power tools, which could appeal to construction workers. Other hybrids, such as the Prius, Insight and Civic hybrid, have electric motors that provide extra power, thus improving fuel economy even more. Because they use less fuel, hybrids produce less carbon dioxide, which is considered one of the prime greenhouse gases responsible for global warming. BETTER MILEAGE, LOWER EMISSIONS Stempel, an engineer by trade, was part of a team at GM that created the catalytic converter to clean vehicle emissions. He laughs now when recalling how he and his colleagues thought they had perfected
[biofuels-biz] Re: [biofuel] Re: Auto Fuel Taxes
Speaking from a Canadian perspective, fuel taxes are not road taxes. Only two jurisdictions levy motor fuel taxes in Canada - the federal goverment (about 40% of levies) and provinces/territories (about 60%). The federal government maintains a trivial portion of the roads in Canada, estimated at less than 1%. The provinces maintain a relatively small portion of roads - probably about 10%. The remainder are maintained by counties and municipalities, who have no fuel tax levies of any kind. In short, most roads in Canada are maintained from the property tax base, and most motor fuel taxes go into the general revenue pot of senior levels of government. This also applies to most petroleum spill damage on land. Federal and provinical jurisdictions do fund health care. So, my take on it is that motor fuel taxes go primarily to health care to remediate damage caused by air and water pollution. In that case, I don't have a problem with EVs being exempted, as they cause no pollution at point of use, reducing negative impacts on health and health-care costs. There was a good report on this subject on several government websites a couple of years ago (Derkson and Shurvell), but now that municipalities are looking for some funding as a result, I notice that any links from search engines to it now come up 404. However, I kept a copy here, and I have just put it up on my site. If you want to read it, go to http://www.econogics.com/ev/fueltax.pdf The report indicates that federal government spends about 10% of its motor fuel tax take on road transportation expenditures of all kinds, while the remainder of road maintenance at municipal and provincial levels takes up about 75% of the amount collected by provinces and territories by their motor fuel taxes. (This does not mean that the provinces spend all this money on roads - much of the actual money spent comes from municipal property taxes.) In summary, most of the motor fuel taxes collected do not pay for road maintenance, and a significant portion of road maintenance is paid for by property owners, who are not necessarily vehicle owners. Darryl McMahon If the road tax is *really* a road tax, then I guess EVs should, arguably, be on the same playing field and pay the same taxes. If it is a fuel tax, levied for some other reason, then tough and they should not pay it, in my view. However, taxes are so co-mingled that I could not figure it out quickly. Furthermore, I am not sure that electrcity isn't taxed or otherwise burdened with bureaucracy as well, a tax that gasoline-burners do not have to pay. Darryl McMahon 48 Tarquin Crescent, Econogics, Inc. Nepean, Ontario K2H 8J8 It's your planet. Voice: (613)784-0655 If you won't look Fax: (613)828-3199 after it, who will?http://www.econogics.com/ Biofuels at Journey to Forever http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel at WebConX http://webconx.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech: http://archive.nnytech.net/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[biofuels-biz] biofuels-homebrew problems
Dear Wendell, The skin that you are talking about is a common occurence with WVO. It is wax which forms in contact with cold air above the liquid surface. You will also notice a skin forming on the insides of your tanks. The wax will be methyl stearate. Paddy Biofuels at Journey to Forever http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel at WebConX http://webconx.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech: http://archive.nnytech.net/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[biofuels-biz] biodiesel business plan template
Does anyone know of a template or guide to evaluating the feasibility of a small-scale, commerical biodiesel operation? In other words, I am looking for material to guide someone in the draft of a feasibility study/business plan who has business experience but is not familiar with biodiesel. thanks for any responses. thor skov = Grants Manager Stillaguamish Tribe Of Indians 3439 Stoluckquamish Lane P.O. Box 277 Arlington, WA 98223-0277 (360) 652-7362 Ext 284 __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com Biofuels at Journey to Forever http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel at WebConX http://webconx.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech: http://archive.nnytech.net/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuels-biz] Cellulosic Ethanol
Anyone know who the folks in NYC who are doing the Garbage Cellulosic process are? James Slayden On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, Appal Energy wrote: Wednesday, November 27, 2002 Forestry, flax seen as ethanol options Karen Briere, The Western Producer People may argue about whether Saskatchewan ethanol plants will use local wheat or imported corn, but one expert says neither feedstock is the best option. Keith Hutchence, senior research scientist at the Saskatchewan Research Council's petroleum branch, says he'd like to see ethanol plants that use cellulose feedstock. There's lots of cellulosic waste around, Hutchence said. That includes about one million tonnes of flax straw that is burned every year, and several million tonnes of sawdust, bark and branches that are produced by the forestry industry and are becoming an environmental problem. Hemp is a good multipurpose crop that would provide another source of feedstock from the cellulose fibre in the stalks. The industry is a few years away from using more of these types of plants, but Hutchence said it is the way of the future. We're limited to how much we can produce from grain without starting to disturb the grain market, he said. As a scientist, Hutchence likes the idea of more ethanol production, but as a farmer, he is concerned that proponents will get carried away thinking a larger cattle industry, spurred by ethanol, will save the rural economy. Two Manitoba agricultural economists have written that the ethanol industry in that province would rely on cheaper imported corn because there isn't enough feed in the Prairies to supply the growing livestock industry and ethanol plants. However, officials in Saskatchewan say they wouldn't be building plants in the province if they didn't think there was sufficient feedstock. Hutchence added that cellulosic plants will offer alternative benefits. One of the few cellulose plants operating right now is eating up New York garbage, he said. Hutchence is not the only proponent of cellulose-based production. Iogen Corp., an Ottawa-based biotech company, has been promoting cellulose-based production for several years. Iogen officials calculated that processing just 30 percent of the wheat, barley and oat straw produced in the three prairie provinces would produce four billion litres of ethanol. In partnership with Petro-Canada, Iogen is building a $35-million demonstration plant in Ottawa. The pilot plant will produce three to four million L of ethanol per year, and will test the performance of different types of straw. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT Biofuels at Journey to Forever http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel at WebConX http://webconx.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech: http://archive.nnytech.net/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. Biofuels at Journey to Forever http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel at WebConX http://webconx.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech: http://archive.nnytech.net/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuels-biz] speedy separation on a large scale
http://www.wsus.com/ Although I'm sure there are more companies out there. BTW, They're a new partner of the NBB. Gotta get your advertising somehow ;-) James Slayden On Fri, 29 Nov 2002, Tom Branigan wrote: Hello, can anyone give me a rough idea of the types of centrifuges or liquid liquid separation equipment that could be used for the separation of glycerol from biodiesel, and the separation of water from biodiesel. (as in after washing) I have no expertise in this kind of equipment and would appreciate greatly any help on the matter. I am aiming at a plant to produce 15000 litres of biodiesel per week. Tom _ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT Biofuels at Journey to Forever http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel at WebConX http://webconx.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech: http://archive.nnytech.net/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. Biofuels at Journey to Forever http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel at WebConX http://webconx.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech: http://archive.nnytech.net/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[biofuels-biz] Coalbed methane
http://www.motherjones.com/news/featurex/2002/45/we_187_02.html MotherJones.com Drilling and Discontent While Wyoming's Powder River Basin is ground zero for the growing battle over coalbed methane drilling, the conflict is causing flare-ups from Montana to New Mexico. Coverage from Mother Jones and High Country News A Rural Flare-Up By Rebecca Clarren November 4, 2002 Throughout the Intermountain West, plans for coalbed methane development on private land are pitting county officials against state regulators, and rural residents against the gas industry. The New Range Wars By Verlyn Klinkenborg November/December 2002 They come on your land and take what lies beneath. In Wyoming's coalbed methane country, it's the ranchers versus the wildcatters. Open Season on Open Spaces By Bob Burtman July/August 2002 The Bush administration has made energy development on public lands its priority number one. The wild West will never be the same. Ten Regions at Risk July 3, 2002 From the high alpine valleys of Montana to the border grasslands of New Mexico, the energy rush is on. We review how the Bush administration's plans for accelerating energy production in the west is threatening ten wilderness areas. More coverage of coalbed methane drilling from High Country News Local governments tackle an in-your-face rush on coalbed methane By Ray Ring September 2, 2002 For people worried about coalbed methane development on private lands, local governments seem to be the only line of defense. Land board says, 'Look before you lease' By Adam Burke May 13, 2002 The rush to develop methane on Wyoming's public lands has hit a regulatory speed bump of undetermined size. Montana gets a crash course in methane By Hal Clifford November 5, 2001 The Powder River Basin doesn't end at the Wyoming state line; about one-third of the sprawling basin lies in Montana. Colliding forces: Has Colorado's oil and gas industry met its match? By Rebecca Clarren September 25, 2000 The majority of Colorado's 70,000-plus oil and gas wells are in rural counties where real estate development is burgeoning. Special Report: Coalbed Methane Boom Biofuels at Journey to Forever http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel at WebConX http://webconx.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech: http://archive.nnytech.net/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[biofuels-biz] Making Ethanol from Sugar Cane in Brazil
http://www.undp.org/seed/energy/policy/ch10.htm Chapter 10: Converting Biomass to Liquid Fuels Energy as an Instrument for Socio-Economic Development Edited by Jos Goldemberg and Thomas B. Johansson Executive Editor, Rosemarie Philips The views expressed in this volume are those of the authors and not necessarily those of UNDP. This publication should be cited as: J. Goldemberg and T.B. Johansson, (Editors) Energy As An Instrument for Socio-Economic Development United Nations Development Programme, New York, NY, 1995 Copyright © 1995, all rights reserved, by the United Nations Development Programme 1 United Nations Plaza, New York, NY, 10017, USA ToC: http://www.undp.org/seed/energy/policy/index.html Part III: Removing The Obstacles: The Large-Scale Approach Chapter 10 Converting Biomass to Liquid Fuels: Making Ethanol from Sugar Cane in Brazil Isaias de Carvalho Macedo1 Considered simply from the standpoint of a renewable-intensive energy future, biomass would be a widely used fuel of choice.2 It would be grown on a sustainable basis, and converted with high efficiency to fuels or electricity. However, the possible effects of widespread use of biomass must be analyzed from a broader perspective, including aspects not usually within the scope of conventional economic analyses. The most commonly cited benefits of biomass use are reductions in air pollution and carbon dioxide, and diversification of fuel supply. An important additional consequence of biomass utilization for energy is related to its ability to promote jobs in rural areas, even for unskilled workers. This case study analyzes the large-scale production of fuel ethanol from sugar cane in Brazil from the perspective of job creation. It is estimated that ethanol production corresponds to nearly 700,000 jobs in Brazil, 75 per cent of them direct jobs. Technological and economic issues make so-called large scale biomass conversion to energy in fact a large collection of small-scale systems; in the Brazilian case, this corresponds to the scale of agriculture generally. The socio-economic differences among ethanol-producing regions in Brazil give each of the regions different equilibrium points in the trade-off between job quality and number of jobs. The ethanol programme has been an important factor in creating job opportunities, in both more and less developed regions of Brazil. In some regions, it has been remarkable at evolving from lower to higher-quality jobs, reducing seasonal unemployment, increasing wages and social benefits, and introducing new technologies in a timely way. The Fuel Ethanol Programme One of the largest commercial efforts to convert biomass to energy anywhere in the world today is the substitution of sugar- cane-based ethanol for gasoline in passenger cars in Brazil. Fuel for cars and light vehicles in Brazil is either neat-ethanol (94 per cent ethanol, 6 per cent water) or gasohol (78 per cent gasoline, 22 per cent ethanol). The programme to promote ethanol production was established in 1975 to reduce the country's dependence on imported oil, and to help stabilize sugar production in the context of cyclical international prices; it includes government-sponsored incentives to promote private production. By 1989, production reached 12 million cubic metres annually and continues at that level. The creation of new skilled and unskilled jobs was an important part of the programme's objective from the start. Additionally, the programme is almost entirely based on locally manufactured equipment, helping to establish a strong agro-industrial system, with a significant number of indirect jobs. It has demonstrated technological developments, in both agriculture and cane processing, leading to lower ethanol costs and the possibility of a large surplus in biomass-based (bagasse and trash) electricity. This could contribute to creating a carbon-dioxide-free energy source. The two-decade-long experience has been important in its many positive aspects as well as in its shortcomings. It has helped to reduce oil imports, to stabilize and promote the growth of the sugar industry, to create quality jobs, and to reduce automobile pollution in urban areas. It is a model for biomass-to-energy programmes in Brazil and elsewhere. It has provided valuable information about the trade-offs in using land for food or energy, as well as about the number and quality of jobs the renewable energy industry can create.3 Converting Biomass to Energy The size of any biomass-based energy production system is determined by at least two factors: the energy conversion (industrial) unit must have a minimum size to achieve a reasonable efficiency, but transportation costs set an upper limit to how much biomass is efficiently available. This is very important for wood-to-electricity systems (leading to development of wood gasifiers and gas turbines), for higher efficiencies at low power
Re: [biofuel] EREN Network News -- 12/04/02
Hi all, I recently joined this group as a person interested in promoting Bio-Fuel awareness in India. I just read a article in Internet about a small group in bangalore, India promoting BIO-Fuel. Hope the information provided are are some help. Some figures in the article 1US $ = 50 India Rupee (Rs) 1 crore = 10 million indian rupee 1 lakh = 0.1 million India rupee Please let me know of any clarification. Best regards, Siva. One evening in early 1999, Dr.Udipi Shrinivasa from the Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore was having tea with some locals in Kagganahalli village. He had for some years been investigating various strategies that would sustain continuous economic development of this semi - arid area. Oh there is nothing much here, a villager was saying. No river, no wells, no electricity; just hundreds of Honge trees and tonnes of seeds. Not much use now. Our grandparents used the uneatable oil for lamps! Dr.Shrinivasa perked up! Useless? If it can burn in lamps, it can surely run diesel engines. After all Rudolf Diesel used peanut oil to run the first ever diesel engine. The adventure begins: Back in the Institute, he quickly extracted some oil, poured it into an engine and started it. Of course it ran! And ran well too. It was a sobering moment, he says. Here we were,- all scientists- looking at technical solutions like windmills, gasifiers, solar panels and methane generators for rural India, and we had not made the obvious connection with the potential of non-edible oils known from Vedic times as fuels. As he excitedly researched this 'bio-diesel' or 'eco-fuel', astonishing facts and scenarios came tumbling out. In the 1930s the British Institute of Standards, Calcutta had examined, over a 10 year period, a series of eleven non edible oils as potential 'diesels', among them the oil from Pongamia Pinnata ['Honge' in Kannada]. In 1942, during those dark war years the prestigious US journal, 'Oil and Power' had in an editorial euologised Honge Oil as technically a fit candidate to generate industrial-strength power. The Cinderalla oil: What happened then? War was over, oil fields were secure again, everyone got lazy and the petroleum industry got smart: it pumped out and flooded the world with fuels, at times cheaper than the cost of water. Honge oil fell from favour and waited like Cinderalla, for its prince charming. Even the rural Indian was moving away from remembered traditions: Kerosene had arrived in Indian villages. And yet a Honge oil economy did survive in India, though once removed from direct contact with people. Dr.Shrinivasa estimates that the size of trade in Honge oil['Karanji' in Hindi and 'Pungai' in Tamil] controlled by the Bombay commodities market is 1 million tonnes feeding mostly soap making and lubricants industries. In Warrangal, Andhra Pradesh, the Azamshahi Textile Mills, set up by the Nizam of Hyderabad in 1940, generated all the power needs of the factory using non-edible oils until its recent closure; and it had surplus power left over for the city's needs! However the Honge is a much ignored tree now. It grows on regardless, waiting for its virtues to be re-discovered. It is a hardy tree that mines water for its needs from 10 metre depths without competing with other crops. It grows all over the country, from the coastline to the hill slopes. It needs very little care and cattle do not browse it. It has a rich leathery evergreen foliage, that is a wonderful manure. From year-3 it yields pods and production is a mature average of 160kG per tree per year from year-10, through to its life of 100 years. Ten trees can yield 400 litres of oil, 1200 kg of fertiliser grade oil cake and 2500kg of biomass as green manure per year. Quick economics: Dr.Shrinivasa ran through some quick numbers. A litre of Honge was equivalent in performance to a litre of diesel. If the farmer collected the seeds free from his land, had it milled and sold the oil cake at Rs.3 per kG, the cost of oil to him was Rs.4 per litre. [The cost of diesel is Rs.18 a litre today.] If he bought the seeds at Rs.3.50 per kilo, the cost was Rs.9 per litre and if he bought the ready oil from the market it was Rs.20. The potential to drive the rural economy, make it autonomous and put some cash in its pockets was obvious. We are mindlessly increasing food grain production without caring to see how the poor would buy them. That it is why food rots and people go hungry. If the power and fertiliser needs are met by Honge, villages would have cash surpluses, says Dr.Shrinivasa. In fact the opportunity is enormous for the country's macro-economy too. ...30 million hectare equivalent [planted for biodiesels] can completely replace the current use of fossil fuels, both liquid and solid, renewably, at costs India can afford, says Dr. Shrinivasa. Our oil bill is $6 billion a year; we can put a third of that cash in the hands of rural Indians, have our oil needs met and save the two thirds. Do
Re: [biofuel] Forests (Long) - was Re: It all comes back to the sun
Keith, in some parts of your message, it was difficult to tell were you were talking or it was someone else, to please bare with me and excuse me if I got you mixed up with someone else. I took my time to reply because I thought it was an important enough topic to give it some true thought, instead of thinking about it on the fly as I typed it out. The rest of my comments are below mixed in the message. - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 06:34 Subject: [biofuel] Forests - was Re: It all comes back to the sun Motie, I'm prepared to accept your allocation of fault and blame in the forest you live in, though I've said it doesn't reflect my experience with forest management or mismanagement in various places. But you seem to extend it as a general rule: environmentalists are at best misguided, misinformed, and their effects destructive; loggers, including big logging companies, and the Forest Service can be trusted to maintain and sustain forests - that the only problem with Big Loggers is that they've failed to refute mis-information. Locally, and for many parts of Colorado (and for many parts of the United States for that matter) I have seen the environmentalist to be the extremist of the groups involved. No doubt that some of them are misguided and misinformed , but, many tend to be stubborn to the point that trying to reason with them makes arguing with a brick wall look easy in comparison. I have seen attempts by the Forest Service and Logging companies, to present good information only to have it drowned out buy the noise of those lead heads, that know what they know and don't want to learn anything else. Please do a search for Interfor and Boise Cascade, among others in the US, among destructive Big Logging companies worldwide. BOISE SAYS IT WILL STOP LOGGING OLD GROWTH The Oregonian, Monday, March 18, 2002 - Timber Company Violates Pledge, Cuts Canada's Oldest Trees (Interfor), British Columbia - etc etc etc That it's the environmentalists who tie any effective action up in law-suits is mistaken. No doubt it happens, some times it is on purpose, sometimes it is not. How often is it that a logging company takes environmentalist group to court, in order to stay in business, especially when many environmentalist have said that they want to drive all logging companies out of business? On the other hand, some old growth should be removed from time to time in order to make way for new growth ( more on this later ). http://ens-news.com/ens/jul2002/2002-07-11-06.asp Conflicting Reports Shade Forest Fire Debate By Cat Lazaroff WASHINGTON, DC, July 11, 2002 (ENS) - The U.S. Forest Service released a report this week charging that lawsuits from environmentalists are preventing the agency from effectively managing forests to reduce wildfire risk. Environmentalists counter that the agency report ignores a number of fire management tools that the conservation community supports, and warn that the Forest Service is misspending funds provided for forest management. The Forest Service report found that 48 percent of projects in which the agency planned to cut down small trees to reduce fire fuels were stalled by administrative appeals filed by conservation groups. Twenty-one of those cases were eventually taken to court. While the agency recognizes there are multiple factors that affect its ability to decide on and implement fuels reduction projects, the report notes, the number of mechanical fuel treatment decisions appealed shows how much this process can contribute to the overall process timeframe for agency fuel treatment decisions. In many places (especially in the dry western US), the mechanical removal of wood is much safer than other means especially when you consider the amount of debris build up over the last 100 years in some cases. Administrative appeals and litigation contribute significantly to the time it takes to plan for and decide on fuels projects prior to implementation, concludes the report. The report looked at 326 national forest tree thinning projects from the past two years, finding that 155 were stalled by appeals. In Arizona and New Mexico, site of this year's worst wildfires, 73 percent of mechanical thinning projects were appealed; in the northern states of Montana, northern Idaho, North Dakota and northern South Dakota, all 53 of the reviewed projects were appealed. Any way you cut it this is a pretty high rate of appeals, said Mark Rey, the Department of Agriculture's undersecretary for natural resources and environment. Some members of Congress pointed to the Forest Service report as evidence that the catastrophic wildfires that have swept through Western states this year could have been prevented if environmental groups had not blocked the agency from doing its job. Fires have already burned more than three million
Re: [biofuel] reposting acid-base liter batch information
Here's the archive link: http://archive.nnytech.net/index.php?view=13265list=BIOFUEL Note where it says in the header: More on this subject. If you click on it you'll be given links to the other posts in that thread. It's not essential to drain off the glycerine in the second-stage, nor to remove the alcohol as Todd did. Best Keith This weekend I was fighting a flu and consequently was too doped up on NyQuil-type medications Friday night to make up a sample of step 1 of the 2-stage acid-base process to use in our biodiesel class saturday morning. So we never covered the second step of acid-base two-stage, no doubt disappointing everyone. I'm finding that people who are otherwise completely competent figuring out single-stage concepts on their own, get really excited about seeing two-stage acid-base done 'live' - they've been unwilling to try it as it seems a little intimidating on paper. I think that more importantly, (due to the additional heating required), that the equipment for doing liter batches isn't as obvious as just using a blender for single-stage liter experiments. As people have pointed out here before, figuring out equipment for small experimental batches of this process would be valuable. I think a lot more people would be willing to try it if they could use some simple equipment for their first go at it. So I wanted to re-post this bit by Todd Swearingen from last spring- it's directions on making a 1-liter batch of acid-base two-stage with a couple of variations. I want to post it again as I think it's really useful for people to have step-by step directions on doing this with really small batches. How about a version of something like this (1-liter two-stage, whether with this equipment or some other setup) on Journey to forever, Keith? I don't exactly agree with his using a gas stove as his heater for this, I use an electric hotplate for my own 10-liter test batches and I think that staying away from flames is necessary for safety. We talked here recently about using some other heating gear- I think a crockpot slow-cooker might be useful (especially if used as a water bath or double boiler apparatus like the one outlined below) and I also think that other immersion heaters (with different agitation equipment) - immersion heaters for aquariums, for instance), might work well for making up small-batch test apparatus. Mark Here's the message in the archive (sorry I just couldn't find it in the nnytech archive, so here's the Yahell version) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/biofuel/message/13115 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/
[biofuel] Europe names its 'fleet of shame'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/2538987.stm BBC NEWS | World | Europe | Tuesday, 3 December, 2002, 14:17 GMT Europe names its 'fleet of shame' A blacklist of 66 ships deemed too dangerous for European waters has been published by the European Commission. The ships have been named and shamed amid concerns over safety standards in the wake of the Prestige tanker disaster. The single-hulled vessel went down off the Spanish coast after spewing thousands of tons of fuel oil into the Atlantic. Words are not enough: it is necessary to act and apply the maritime safety measures in full Loyola de Palacio Transport commissioner A French mini-submarine which reached the wreck on Sunday found no sign that the estimated 60,000 tons still on board were leaking - boosting hopes that the fuel had congealed in the chilly ocean depths. A second dive was planned for Tuesday. Dozens of Spanish beaches have already been contaminated by the oil which did escape. The local fishing industry has been devastated, and an estimated 15,000 seabirds have been killed or covered in oil. Ship expelled The disaster has provoked an angry response from France and Spain, which agreed to check all ageing single-hulled vessels in their waters and force them out if necessary. France, hit by oil from the Erika tanker in 1999, agreed with Spain to go ahead with the measures without waiting for the rest of the EU to endorse them. Portugal and Italy have introduced similar measures. The first test of the clampdown came at the weekend, when the Spanish and Portuguese navies ordered a tanker, the Moskovsky Festival, out to sea after concerns about safety. The 17-year-old vessel was carrying 25,000 metric tons of fuel oil from Estonia to Gibraltar, officials said. The commission said the 66 ships on its blacklist had been detained on several occcasions in European ports for failing to comply with safety rules. Most are bulk carriers, although 16 are oil and chemical tankers and one is a passenger vessel. The biggest single number of the vessels - 26 - sail under a Turkish flag. Twelve are flagged to the Caribbean nation of St Vincent and Grenadines, and nine to Cambodia. A total of 13 flags are represented. The Prestige was registered in Liberia and flagged to the Bahamas. Words are not enough: it is necessary to act and apply the maritime safety measures in full, said European Transport Commissioner Loyala de Palacio. Safety is the responsibility of everyone and a strict application of all the measures is the only way of ensuring that substandard ships do not fall through the safety net. The commission also wants all single-hulled tankers banned from transporting fuel oil through European waters. And it is urging members to speed up the implementation of extra safety measures agreed after the Erika sinking, including the appointment of enough staff to inspect at least 25% of ships coming intoport. The Commission said at the time these were urgent and needed to be adopted immediately, said Ms De Palacio Unfortunately this has been borne out by recent events. Accidents of this kind can and must be avoided. The plans will discussed by European transport ministers at the Copenhagen summit next week. Clean-up Along the shoreline wrecked by the Prestige oil, volunteers have been continuing to scrape tons of oil from beaches. Around 5,500 tons have been pumped from the sea by vessels from Belgium, Britain, France, Germany, the Netherlands and Norway. Several small oil slicks have been spotted from the air, 10 nautical miles north of Cape Penas, off Spain's northern region of Asturia, officials said. Gibraltar drama In a separate incident, a cargo ship slipped out of Gibaltar under cover of darkness after an inspection was ordered, a government spokesman told the French news agency AFP. The Canyon - also flying the St Vincent and Grenadines flag - was suspected of having defective bilge pumps and a faulty radar. The port authority ordered the ship to be boarded, and the captain was asked to surrender the ship's papers. But the ship took on fuel and steamed out of Gibraltar bay under cover of night, with lights switched off and without her papers, said the spokesman. Police launches gave chase after the vessel refused to stop, but it sailed on, possibly bound for Piraeus in Greece. Ports have been alerted, and asked to refuse the vessel entry. 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/
Re: [biofuel] Forests (Long) - was Re: It all comes back to the sun
Hello Greg Keith, in some parts of your message, it was difficult to tell were you were talking or it was someone else, Should have been clear, follow the 's. I made some comments under the quote from Motie's post, followed by two quite long news reports in full, with some references and one comment between them. It's no longer clear though, between your snips and comments, I can't make out what came from where. You seem to have made a lot of particular points. It seems you're trying to support this, which I questioned: But you seem to extend it as a general rule: environmentalists are at best misguided, misinformed, and their effects destructive; loggers, including big logging companies, and the Forest Service can be trusted to maintain and sustain forests - that the only problem with Big Loggers is that they've failed to refute mis-information. I don't think you've done so. You say the enviros are wrong-headed, stubborn lead-heads and the most extremist of the three groups involved, but you don't offer anything to support that. There's been much said about the enviros being responsible for the problems caused by anti-fire policies. The refs I gave put the blame on the big logging companies, and the Forest Service. You say the government came before the companies, okay, but then why blame the enviros? The ENS report says this: Most of those projects had the full support of the conservation community, which has long called for controlled forest thinning to reduce the risk of fires that burn so hot they sterilize the soil beneath forests. But you snipped that bit. You snipped everything about the GAO report. http://ens-news.com/ens/jul2002/2002-07-19-06.asp Green Groups Urge Fire Fuel Reduction, Not Logging WASHINGTON, DC, July 19, 2002 (ENS) There's deliberate confusion by the big loggers and the Forest Service to disguise the one as the other, and blame the enviros for the problems. You don't seem to have any comment on this: Please do a search for Interfor and Boise Cascade, among others in the US, among destructive Big Logging companies worldwide. Re this: That it's the environmentalists who tie any effective action up in law-suits is mistaken. You say no doubt it happens, but that referred to clear-cutting, not this. I gave a link to the GAO report that detailed just what happens, and is in conflict with the Forest Service report. I also gave a link to evidence that the big logging companies put pressure on the Forest Service to slant their reports. These references were sparing - there's plenty more. Same internationally - a lot of pressure went into forming the Forest Stewardship Council and its forest certification system, endorsed by global conservation organizations as well as the timber industry. But they cheat - corporate interests hold sway, local communities and indigenous people are marginalized, unsustainable logging is certified and the products sold worldwide under the FSC label. Trading in Credibility: the myth and reality of the Forest Stewardship Council http://www.rainforestfoundationuk.org/FSC/RFA4REPORTfull.pdf Not a very big surprise. Take your eyes off them for half a minute and that's what'll happen. As for clear-cutting, it certainly does happen, yes, and where they can get away with it it's the preferred method, not the last resort only where appropriate as claimed. I've never heard environmentalists saying they want to drive all logging companies out of business. They invariably want to work with them, as the FSC demonstrates. But corporations seldom respond well to such initiatives unless finally forced to, and in the US especially the bureaucracy is rather thoroughly corporatized, and the USDA is no exception. Nobody's against logging. It's no big secret that forests have to be managed - that is worked, logged. There's nothing unsustainable about wood production. Forests can be immensely productive. The only question is how it's done, for whose benefit, at whose expense. Land too is immensely productive. Nobody's against farming. But industrialized agriculture is THE worst way yet found of doing it, benefiting only the agribiz corporations at everyone else's expense and at great environmental cost. The USDA strongly supports industrialized agriculture nonetheless. The comparison with forestry is a good one. Local, community-based forestry is the solution, or an essential part of any solution, as I said previously. The environmentalists aren't opposed to that. Has the Forest Service done anything more to promote this kind of localized forestry than the USDA has done to promote small sustainable farms? I doubt it. You question St. Clair and Cockburn (perhaps thinking it was me), but my experience of them is that they don't write stuff they haven't checked, they're pros. So I'll say it again: proposing as a general rule that the enviros are the demons who're destroying the forests and the
[biofuel] Clean vehicles
Clean vehicles analysis Automaker Rankings: The Environmental Performance of Car Companies This is the executive summary from the UCS report Automaker Rankings: The Environmental Performance of Car Companies http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/health_and_environment/page.cfm?p ageID=1065 Full report: http://www.ucsusa.org/publication.cfm?publicationID=517 PDF 413 kb http://ens-news.com/ens/dec2002/2002-12-04-10.asp U.S. Automakers Trail Japanese in Eco-Ranking WASHINGTON, DC, December 4, 2002 (ENS) - When it comes to environmental performance Japanese automakers still far outpace their American rivals, according to a new survey released today by the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), but all six of the automakers that dominate the U.S. market need further pressure from policymakers if any significant reduction in pollution from automobiles is to be expected. [more] 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/
Honge oil - was Re: [biofuel] EREN Network News -- 12/04/02
Hello Siva The url for that article: http://www.goodnewsindia.com/Pages/content/discovery/honge.html There's been some discussion about it before. Do a search for honge at the archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/index.php?list=biofuel My reservation is that Dr. Shrinivasa seems to regard it as a panacea, a fix-all, but really there's no such thing. Top-down prescriptions of the best technology don't have a good record and are likely to leave us with many of the same problems Big oil has caused. It needs local solutions, and that means a wide range of options, depending on local requirements. The best would usually be those the local people already had knowledge of, even if other crops/trees might yield more or have other advantages. Other oil crops: NewCrop SearchEngine at the Center for New Crops Plant Products at Purdue University -- Search for oil. Results: The following pages containing 'oil' were found -- hits 1-20 of 200. Results are hyperlinked to detailed factsheets. http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/SearchEngine.html Plants For A Future -- Database Search -- See Search by Use - Select any of the following uses. Or select none and use the plant criteria below. Select Other Use - oil. Results: Other Use: Oil (460). Results are hyperlinked to detailed factsheets. http://www.ibiblio.org/pfaf/D_search.html Do you know of NARI? The Nimbkar Agricultural Research Institute in Maharashtra. http://nariphaltan.virtualave.net http://nariphaltan.virtualave.net/att9.htm Alternative Energy This is from one of their reports: Taluka Development Strategy India produces in its Talukas ~ 400 million tons/yr. of surplus agricultural residues which theoretically can produce ~ 53,000 MW of power. This power is 70% of the total amount available in the country as of today from all other sources. Not only can these residues produce adequate power to supplement existing power production, but husbanding this resource properly, can also produce adequate animal feed and fertilizer. With increasing food production the agricultural residues quantity will also increase. This will have a positive feedback on the whole scenario and will in turn improve the rural economy and the quality of land. However as this agricultural residue is spread all over the country and is very decentralized, it points towards decentralized power production systems which makes it suitable for Taluka level. My Institute Nimbkar Agricultural Research Institute (NARI) did a study for Phaltan Taluka in Western Maharashtra, where it was shown that all the energy needs of the Taluka for 2000 AD could be supplied by the use of its biomass resources. This study became the basis for National Policy on Energy Self- sufficient Talukas in 1997 and is being implemented nation-wide by the Ministry of Non-conventional Energy Sources (MNES). The NARI study showed that Phaltan Taluka produces ~ 100,000 tons/yr. of surplus agricultural residues which are presently burnt in the fields as a part of waste disposal process and hence are total loss of useful energy. These residues in conjunction with energy plantations (Leucaena, Prosopis, Eucalyptus etc.) and energy crops like sweet sorghum and sugarcane can produce about 40 MW of electric power (via biomass based power plants) and liquid fuels (pyrolysis oil and ethanol) which are equivalent to 30 million liters/year of petroleum products. This will take care of all the commercial energy needs of Taluka for 2000 AD via renewable energy and hence the production could be done on a sustainable basis. The study also showed that this strategy has the potential of creating 30,000 jobs and giving ~ Rs. 200 crore/year income to the Taluka (1 crore = 107 ). For this program a total capital investment of about Rs. 300 crore/Taluka will be required in the plants, machinery and technology. Hence for 3342 Talukas a massive investment of about one million crore rupees will be required. This can be very attractive for foreign institutional investors and can result in large inflow of foreign funds. With the production of fuels like pyrolysis oil and ethanol (substitute for diesel, petrol and kerosene) from agro based materials, the Taluka strategy has the potential of making our oil import bill almost zero. The study also showed that Taluka has adequate amount of other biomass derived materials like night soil, vegetable waste, weeds, municipal solid waste and animal/chicken manure that which can be processed via technologies like vermiculture, composting and generally husbanding them so that they yield excellent fertilizer for the farmers. This has the ability of developing a whole range of fertilizer industry in rural areas that will be organic, sustainable and economically viable. Further the study showed that with husbanding the Taluka's rainfall properly via check dams and percolation tanks most of its water requirements for agriculture and energy
Honge oil - was Re: [biofuel] EREN Network News -- 12/04/02
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2540321.stm BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Wednesday, 4 December, 2002, 09:31 GMT Huge oil find 'threatens Caspian' By Alex Kirby BBC News Online environment correspondent in Atyrau, Kazakhstan Western oil companies are poised to start developing a field near here which experts believe is the world's largest. But Kazakh scientists say pumping out the oil, at Kashagan, threatens the northern Caspian with catastrophe. The oil beneath Kashagan is a genie in a bottle -- Prof Muftach Diarov They say earthquakes in this seismically active region could wreak havoc as the submarine reservoirs are drained. And they want the developers to agree to scale back production significantly. The Kashagan field, about 70 kilometres (45 miles) from Atyrau, is believed to contain about 40 billion barrels of oil, 10 billion of them recoverable. 'Wild East' One barrel contains 45 gallons, enough to fill the tanks of three family saloon cars. Experts say a one-billion-barrel field is considered huge, and Kashagan is being compared with some of the largest Saudi Arabian fields. World War Two oil tanks still dot the Caspian shore The Western companies involved in the consortium preparing to exploit Kashagan include Agip of Italy, British Gas, the US giant ExxonMobil, Shell, and TotalFinaElf. The region around Atyrau, a city of 200,000 people which sits almost 30 metres below sea level, is known as central Asia's Wild East. The Caspian is a formidable challenge for the oil companies. The southern part of the sea is up to 1,000 m deep, and the central belt lies about 4-500 m down. But the northern basin averages little more than 10 m in depth, although high winds can temporarily alter the sea level over wide areas. Sturgeon concern Agip has commissioned special shallow-draught icebreakers, capable of operating in 2 m of water, for winter use. The companies cannot use traditional drilling rigs, and have to build artificial islands to extract the oil. Many Kazakhs oppose the exploitation of Kashagan, fearing it will worsen health problems in the area by increasing air pollution. They say its position, in the mouth of the Ural river which divides Europe from Asia, will push the prized wild Caspian sturgeon closer to extinction. Some fear a more cataclysmic threat from Kashagan. Professor Muftach Diarov, a geologist who heads Atyrau's Oil and Gas Institute, is a member of Kazakhstan's national academy of sciences. 'No risk' The oil in Kashagan and elsewhere in the north Caspian, he says, is pressurised to1,000 atmospheres and is at 100 to 120 C. The problem is that we do not have enough experience to work under such extreme conditions. Beyond that, Professor Diarov fears that emptying the oil and gas from their reservoirs beneath the Caspian's bed could trigger devastating earthquakes. He says tremors elsewhere in the Caspian have already been felt near Atyrau, and could also destabilise the Kashagan reservoirs. Professor Diarov told BBC News Online: The oil beneath Kashagan is a genie in a bottle - it's a bomb. Sooner or later it will explode, and everything in the north Caspian will be damaged. We know what to expect from a fire in the Tenghiz field south of here, operated by a consortium which includes ChevronTexaco. That burnt for more than a year, and caused damage over a 300 km radius. I've told Agip and Chevron of my fears. But oil dollars always win. Professor Diarov said Russia, which has a similar field close to the Kazakh frontier, had decided wisely to reduce production to 25% of the attainable level, because they understand they have to go slowly. And Kazakhstan should do the same. A spokesman for TengizChevroil, exploiting the Tenghiz field, told BBC News Online: Our geologists say there is no risk right now that distant tremors could set off disturbances here. http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/18894/story.htm Kazakhs slap $70mln ecology fine on Chevron venture KAZAKHSTAN: December 5, 2002 ALMATY - A court in Kazakhstan has fined ChevronTexaco-led oil venture Tengizchevroil (TCO) 11 billion tenge ($71 million) for ecological damage caused by storing millions of tonnes of sulphur at its Tengiz field. The fine is the latest in a series of blows to TCO, the highest profile joint venture in Kazakhstan, whose energy-based economy is heavily dependent on foreign investment. TCO said it was very disappointed and was considering an appeal. According to our data, this sulphur negatively affects the environment, Turaly Onerbayev, regional representative of the natural resources and environmental protection ministry, told Reuters yesterday from the Central Asian state's oil capital Atyrau in western Kazakhstan. TCO, a 40-year, multi-billion project and until now a showcase of successful foreign investment, was prompt to react. Tengizchevroil is very disappointed with the decision made by the
[biofuel] Re: Small-scale ethanol - Bio fuel business-Tables
Hi Hakan It is difficult to make tables in mail, if you cannot use html. Therefore I also did the tables at the end of, http://energy.saving.nu/biofuels/biofuelorg.shtml Hakan Difficult too to discuss them by email, for the same reason, so I copied your tables and did an alternative version for comparison, here: http://journeytoforever.org/ethanol_compare.html Best Keith At 04:08 PM 12/4/2002 +0100, Hakan Falk wrote: Keith, Original draft for article at http://energy.saving.nu/biofuels/biofuelorg.shtml You just posted several press releases from oil companies and these are quite telling. They touch very much the subject of my article. The situation in Poland and the moonshine argument, show the relevance of this discussion. David have already started to think about it and I hope that we get more valuable views. To add to the discussion about centralization versus decentralization risk for Ethanol and biodiesel/SVO, I have done the following tables. I is a topic for discussion and I am not claiming that I got it right on the first time or on my own. The following table is a first attempt to map technical feasibility of fossil to bio fuel replacement. 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/
Sorry! - was Re: Honge oil - was Re: [biofuel] EREN Network News
Wrong subject. :-( http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2540321.stm BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Wednesday, 4 December, 2002, 09:31 GMT Huge oil find 'threatens Caspian' 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/
Re: [biofuel] Re: Small-scale ethanol - Bio fuel business-Tables
Keith, Thank you, I will go through it and we will discuss the differences. Hakan At 08:02 PM 12/5/2002 +0900, you wrote: Hi Hakan It is difficult to make tables in mail, if you cannot use html. Therefore I also did the tables at the end of, http://energy.saving.nu/biofuels/biofuelorg.shtml Hakan Difficult too to discuss them by email, for the same reason, so I copied your tables and did an alternative version for comparison, here: http://journeytoforever.org/ethanol_compare.html Best Keith At 04:08 PM 12/4/2002 +0100, Hakan Falk wrote: Keith, Original draft for article at http://energy.saving.nu/biofuels/biofuelorg.shtml You just posted several press releases from oil companies and these are quite telling. They touch very much the subject of my article. The situation in Poland and the moonshine argument, show the relevance of this discussion. David have already started to think about it and I hope that we get more valuable views. To add to the discussion about centralization versus decentralization risk for Ethanol and biodiesel/SVO, I have done the following tables. I is a topic for discussion and I am not claiming that I got it right on the first time or on my own. The following table is a first attempt to map technical feasibility of fossil to bio fuel replacement. 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/
[biofuel] Re: Ex-GM CEO makes green auto industry comeback
I think we will see these Ovonic NiMh batteries in some of the hybrids. It's a pity, but I don't see where we'll see them in an EV anytime soon. I hope I'm wrong. I think Mr. Ellis of Honda mentioned that the size of a battery in their hybrid versus an EV is about 1/20. So, that's a reason they're not impossible to find in hybrids. ECD has been making seemingly very good batteries for years, but, somehow, they were just never able to get into EVs in volume, aside from the EV1, which program is over, and which was never a non-prototype program. Perhaps the the failure to get the batteries out there has something to do with GM co-owning the Ovonic battery venture during the 90s and then more or less passing on this ownership (once it seemed they'd delayed things to an absurd point) to Chevron-Texaco (a major oil company). There hasn't been much critical commentary of a major Oil Company having a large stake in what in the past was the best hope by some for an advanced battery for EVs, but I'm not sure it shouldn't be pointed out that, for whatever reason, C-T Ovonic has yet to get their battery into a mass produced highway capable EV. NiMH does seem to be making the expected good headway into hybrids, thanks particularly to Toyota and Honda, and Matsushita which has I think been making the batteries. Matsushita has run afoul of ECD a few times in patent disputes I think. For real EVs I am hanging some hope on Hydro Quebec and their Lithium batteries and cars, because they're not a US company, because they make electricity (not Oil) and are thus a potential competitor to make fuel for cars, and so have a real incentive to get EVs on the road to buy their products, and they seem to really intend to do this thing. On Wed, 4 Dec 2002 01:52:14 +0900, you wrote: http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/18867/story.htm Ex-GM CEO makes green auto industry comeback USA: December 3, 2002 ROCHESTER HILLS, Mich. - Nearly 10 years to the day after he was pushed out as chief of General Motors Corp. (GM.N), Bob Stempel shoveled a handful of dirt to break ground for a new plant in Ohio that could make him a key player in a more environmentally-friendly automotive industry. Stempel, 70, could easily have retired to a comfortable life after his tenure as chairman and CEO of GM ended in October 1992 with a boardroom coup. But now as chairman of Energy Conversion Devices Inc. (ENER.O) he works 60 to 70 hours a week, and flies around the world to visit clients as he makes his case for battery-powered vehicles. Stempel is betting that sales of hybrid cars and trucks, powered by conventional gasoline or diesel engines mated to an electric drive system, will grow in the coming years as companies seek more fuel-efficient vehicles. In late October, Stempel ceremoniously kicked off construction of a 170,000-square-foot plant in Springboro, Ohio, that will make enough nickel-metal hydride batteries to supply 50,000 to 60,000 vehicles a year. Production at the plant, a joint venture between Chevron Texaco (CVX.N) and Energy Conversion Devices, is scheduled to start in the third quarter next year. MOVING OFF THE FENCE People have been sort of on the fence about hybrid cars, Stempel told Reuters, his voice booming with excitement. All of a sudden they are moving off the fence. We know that there's going to be enough solid business out there that we ought to get under way. Currently there are only three hybrid gas-electric vehicles for sale in the U.S. market, all made by Japanese automakers Toyota Motor Corp. (7203.T) and Honda Motor Co. Ltd. (7267.T) - the Toyota Prius, the Honda Insight and a hybrid-version of the popular Honda Civic small car. However, Stempel said that U.S. and European automakers are requesting prototypes for some test vehicles from his joint venture company, Texaco Ovonic Battery Systems. Unlike pure electric vehicles, which take hours to recharge and have limited range, hybrid gas-electric vehicles recharge themselves and can travel as far as conventional cars and trucks. Some so-called soft hybrids expected to be rolled out over the next two years shut the engine down when the vehicle idles or comes to a stop, such as at a traffic light, and quickly restart upon acceleration, also saving gasoline. Some will also have 110-volt outlets that can be used for power tools, which could appeal to construction workers. Other hybrids, such as the Prius, Insight and Civic hybrid, have electric motors that provide extra power, thus improving fuel economy even more. Because they use less fuel, hybrids produce less carbon dioxide, which is considered one of the prime greenhouse gases responsible for global warming. BETTER MILEAGE, LOWER EMISSIONS Stempel, an engineer by trade, was part of a team at GM that created the catalytic converter to clean vehicle emissions. He laughs now when recalling how he and his colleagues thought they had perfected
Re: [biofuel] Re: Auto Fuel Taxes
Speaking from a Canadian perspective, fuel taxes are not road taxes. Only two jurisdictions levy motor fuel taxes in Canada - the federal goverment (about 40% of levies) and provinces/territories (about 60%). The federal government maintains a trivial portion of the roads in Canada, estimated at less than 1%. The provinces maintain a relatively small portion of roads - probably about 10%. The remainder are maintained by counties and municipalities, who have no fuel tax levies of any kind. In short, most roads in Canada are maintained from the property tax base, and most motor fuel taxes go into the general revenue pot of senior levels of government. This also applies to most petroleum spill damage on land. Federal and provinical jurisdictions do fund health care. So, my take on it is that motor fuel taxes go primarily to health care to remediate damage caused by air and water pollution. In that case, I don't have a problem with EVs being exempted, as they cause no pollution at point of use, reducing negative impacts on health and health-care costs. There was a good report on this subject on several government websites a couple of years ago (Derkson and Shurvell), but now that municipalities are looking for some funding as a result, I notice that any links from search engines to it now come up 404. However, I kept a copy here, and I have just put it up on my site. If you want to read it, go to http://www.econogics.com/ev/fueltax.pdf The report indicates that federal government spends about 10% of its motor fuel tax take on road transportation expenditures of all kinds, while the remainder of road maintenance at municipal and provincial levels takes up about 75% of the amount collected by provinces and territories by their motor fuel taxes. (This does not mean that the provinces spend all this money on roads - much of the actual money spent comes from municipal property taxes.) In summary, most of the motor fuel taxes collected do not pay for road maintenance, and a significant portion of road maintenance is paid for by property owners, who are not necessarily vehicle owners. Darryl McMahon If the road tax is *really* a road tax, then I guess EVs should, arguably, be on the same playing field and pay the same taxes. If it is a fuel tax, levied for some other reason, then tough and they should not pay it, in my view. However, taxes are so co-mingled that I could not figure it out quickly. Furthermore, I am not sure that electrcity isn't taxed or otherwise burdened with bureaucracy as well, a tax that gasoline-burners do not have to pay. Darryl McMahon 48 Tarquin Crescent, Econogics, Inc. Nepean, Ontario K2H 8J8 It's your planet. Voice: (613)784-0655 If you won't look Fax: (613)828-3199 after it, who will?http://www.econogics.com/ 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/
[biofuel] One big corporation Was: Forests (Long)
Corporatized that's an interesting term. I get this feeling, from watching all the news ... that the bottom line is that the US govt. has almost ... devolved ... into almost a division of big Corporate world. Like a subsidiary. Only a junkyard dog subsidiary. One that (sic 'em boy, sic 'em) gets used to growl at ... and takes bites out of any legs of anyone that Big Corporate sees as a threat. Protecting what's theirs ... you know, the WHOLE entire American countryside which it sometime seems they think they own. Now, these are only impressions I get as I watch the news. That is.. putting two (and two and two) together of all the junk I see. Curtis Get your free newsletter at http://www.ezinfocenter.com/3122155/NL - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] But corporations seldom respond well to such initiatives unless finally forced to, and in the US especially the bureaucracy is rather thoroughly corporatized, and the USDA is no exception. - Introducing NetZero Long Distance 1st month Free! Sign up today at: www.netzerolongdistance.com 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/
[biofuel] Bio fuel business-Tables
Hi Keith, Thank you for your response and I am somewhat uncomfortable with the second table. I am not sure of that the presentation of political - commercial - influencing points are suitable in a table. Need to think more about it. Therefore I like to discuss the basics first and the table Characteristics, comparing Ethanol, Biodiesel and SVO. first. I do think that the table Characteristics, comparing Ethanol, Biodiesel and SVO. can be useful and ask you or others to suggest points that I maybe have missed. I must also underline that this is not a question of choice between them, they are all desperately needed and that is also covered in the table. On those points we agree. I have marked the points we agree on, in table at, http://energy.saving.nu/biofuels/biofuelorg.shtml from yours at http://journeytoforever.org/ethanol_compare.html The open points are: Possible crops: I changed this to Possible raw material sources, to be sure that I do not exclude trees and fruits. I like to have more discussions about this, but all that I have seen until now points to more source material for vegetable oil. Soil sensitivity: Here I am in deep water and need your expertise. It is a very important point and I would like you to analyze it further. Crop rotation problems: The same as previous point. But I thought with effective oil producing trees or more choices of crops, it would be easier to overcome. Fuel productivity per acre: Again, the production numbers I have seen for oil are better than for Ethanol. It is however a weak point, since we do not look at the total possible production of ethanol and veg oil from the same source. Possible bi-products: The same as for previous point. Veg. oil do opens up for a larger number of replacement applications, among those are many in the lubrication field. Chemical altering or distilling: I corrected this. Energy for production: I read a lot and I seems that ethanol is the most energy demanding process, oil pressing definitely is the least. Biodiesel as I understand the process, is much less energy demanding than alcohol. On producing raw material they are all similar, but distilling is a very energy demanding process. Net energy gain: The fossil fuel processes are also very energy demanding and not very effective, but it is mostly conversion processes to marketable products. Some of the raw material for ethanol, do contain more or less veg oil. We can maybe add this aspect also, but as I see it, it becomes a part of raw material evaluation. Cost to produce: See energy for production. End use efficiency: Needed clarification and I changed heading to End use efficiency for fuel/technology, this to clarify that a change in fuel/technology will achieve substantial energy savings. I do not think we will disagree with this. Needed quantity to replace fossil fuel: Water can be added to gasoline also, with similar energy savings. The difference is that the water/air have to be added at injection. All testimonies and technical adjustments point to more quantity use with replacement of gasoline with ethanol and unchanged quantities with replacements of diesel. Storage time: I corrected this. I do not cover combined production of ethanol and veg oil from the same source and it would be very useful to discuss this. Maybe it is not a biodiesel or ethanol business, it could be that you need to combine both for a good business. Hakan At 12:33 PM 12/5/2002 +0100, Hakan Falk wrote: Keith, Thank you, I will go through it and we will discuss the differences. Hakan At 08:02 PM 12/5/2002 +0900, you wrote: Hi Hakan It is difficult to make tables in mail, if you cannot use html. Therefore I also did the tables at the end of, http://energy.saving.nu/biofuels/biofuelorg.shtml Hakan Difficult too to discuss them by email, for the same reason, so I copied your tables and did an alternative version for comparison, here: http://journeytoforever.org/ethanol_compare.html Best Keith At 04:08 PM 12/4/2002 +0100, Hakan Falk wrote: Keith, Original draft for article at http://energy.saving.nu/biofuels/biofuelorg.shtml You just posted several press releases from oil companies and these are quite telling. They touch very much the subject of my article. The situation in Poland and the moonshine argument, show the relevance of this discussion. David have already started to think about it and I hope that we get more valuable views. To add to the discussion about centralization versus decentralization risk for Ethanol and biodiesel/SVO, I have done the following tables. I is a topic for discussion and I am not claiming that I got it right on the first time or on my own. The following table is a first attempt to map technical feasibility of fossil to bio fuel replacement. Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels
[biofuel] home heating with biofuels
Hello all. I'm trying to convince our state (Wisconsin, USA) renewable energy contracting/research firm to pursue biofuels in residential applications. If you orsomeone you know has used waste oil, fresh oil, and/or biodiesel to heat a residence(displacing fossil fuels) I would appreciate a contact. If you are aware of any researchprojects or demonstrations of such technologies, I would also appreciate your help. In doing this, I hope to open up our state's generous renewable energy grants and low-interestloans to folks wishing to convert their fossil fuel oil boilers/furnaces to renewablesources. Also, if you happen to live in Wisconsin, I would love to speak with you abut thisproject and hopefully work together to let our state know there is interest in such aprogram. You can see Wisconsin's Focus on Energy program at: http://www.wifocusonenergy.com/ Sincerely, Aaron Ellringer 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/
Re: [biofuel] Bio fuel business-Tables
Might you want to also provide a table with Hydrogen and producer gas also? Seems to me to be somewhat narrow, unless that is the intention. James Slayden On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Hakan Falk wrote: Hi Keith, Thank you for your response and I am somewhat uncomfortable with the second table. I am not sure of that the presentation of political - commercial - influencing points are suitable in a table. Need to think more about it. Therefore I like to discuss the basics first and the table Characteristics, comparing Ethanol, Biodiesel and SVO. first. I do think that the table Characteristics, comparing Ethanol, Biodiesel and SVO. can be useful and ask you or others to suggest points that I maybe have missed. I must also underline that this is not a question of choice between them, they are all desperately needed and that is also covered in the table. On those points we agree. I have marked the points we agree on, in table at, http://energy.saving.nu/biofuels/biofuelorg.shtml from yours at http://journeytoforever.org/ethanol_compare.html The open points are: Possible crops: I changed this to Possible raw material sources, to be sure that I do not exclude trees and fruits. I like to have more discussions about this, but all that I have seen until now points to more source material for vegetable oil. Soil sensitivity: Here I am in deep water and need your expertise. It is a very important point and I would like you to analyze it further. Crop rotation problems: The same as previous point. But I thought with effective oil producing trees or more choices of crops, it would be easier to overcome. Fuel productivity per acre: Again, the production numbers I have seen for oil are better than for Ethanol. It is however a weak point, since we do not look at the total possible production of ethanol and veg oil from the same source. Possible bi-products: The same as for previous point. Veg. oil do opens up for a larger number of replacement applications, among those are many in the lubrication field. Chemical altering or distilling: I corrected this. Energy for production: I read a lot and I seems that ethanol is the most energy demanding process, oil pressing definitely is the least. Biodiesel as I understand the process, is much less energy demanding than alcohol. On producing raw material they are all similar, but distilling is a very energy demanding process. Net energy gain: The fossil fuel processes are also very energy demanding and not very effective, but it is mostly conversion processes to marketable products. Some of the raw material for ethanol, do contain more or less veg oil. We can maybe add this aspect also, but as I see it, it becomes a part of raw material evaluation. Cost to produce: See energy for production. End use efficiency: Needed clarification and I changed heading to End use efficiency for fuel/technology, this to clarify that a change in fuel/technology will achieve substantial energy savings. I do not think we will disagree with this. Needed quantity to replace fossil fuel: Water can be added to gasoline also, with similar energy savings. The difference is that the water/air have to be added at injection. All testimonies and technical adjustments point to more quantity use with replacement of gasoline with ethanol and unchanged quantities with replacements of diesel. Storage time: I corrected this. I do not cover combined production of ethanol and veg oil from the same source and it would be very useful to discuss this. Maybe it is not a biodiesel or ethanol business, it could be that you need to combine both for a good business. Hakan At 12:33 PM 12/5/2002 +0100, Hakan Falk wrote: Keith, Thank you, I will go through it and we will discuss the differences. Hakan At 08:02 PM 12/5/2002 +0900, you wrote: Hi Hakan It is difficult to make tables in mail, if you cannot use html. Therefore I also did the tables at the end of, http://energy.saving.nu/biofuels/biofuelorg.shtml Hakan Difficult too to discuss them by email, for the same reason, so I copied your tables and did an alternative version for comparison, here: http://journeytoforever.org/ethanol_compare.html Best Keith At 04:08 PM 12/4/2002 +0100, Hakan Falk wrote: Keith, Original draft for article at http://energy.saving.nu/biofuels/biofuelorg.shtml You just posted several press releases from oil companies and these are quite telling. They touch very much the subject of my article. The situation in Poland and the moonshine argument, show the relevance of this discussion. David have already started to think about it and I hope that we get more valuable views. To add to the discussion about centralization versus decentralization risk for Ethanol and biodiesel/SVO, I have done the following tables. I
Re: [biofuel] Forests (Long) - was Re: It all comes back to the sun
- Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 04:02 Subject: Re: [biofuel] Forests (Long) - was Re: It all comes back to the sun I don't think you've done so. You say the enviros are wrong-headed, stubborn lead-heads and the most extremist of the three groups involved, but you don't offer anything to support that. Several logging companies in the northwest have had equipment vandalized, because trees have been spiked some people at saw mills have been hurt or near hurt, an environmental group has claimed responsibility for fire bombing several structures here in Colorado. This is why I say they tend to be more extremist. Examples at: http://www.globalterrorism101.com/UTEnvironmentalTerrorism.html http://www.sandiegooffroad.com/2k01decterrorism.html http://www.naiaonline.org/body/articles/archives/ecoterr.htm There's been much said about the enviros being responsible for the problems caused by anti-fire policies. The refs I gave put the blame on the big logging companies, and the Forest Service. You say the government came before the companies, okay, but then why blame the enviros? The ENS report says this: Most of those projects had the full support of the conservation community, which has long called for controlled forest thinning to reduce the risk of fires that burn so hot they sterilize the soil beneath forests. Sorry, I missed that part. But you snipped that bit. You snipped everything about the GAO report. http://ens-news.com/ens/jul2002/2002-07-19-06.asp Green Groups Urge Fire Fuel Reduction, Not Logging WASHINGTON, DC, July 19, 2002 (ENS) Ok, I read that and in general have no problem, but, with the fallowing statement: conservation groups say they support most methods of fuel reduction and fire risk management, opposing only those projects that would log old growth trees in the name of fire prevention. My beef is that selective logging of old growth, is a viable tool. I'm not talking about total clear cutting, but, irregular patches of trees as well as non-viable trees ( dead diseased dying). This opens up parts of the forest for new growth. There's deliberate confusion by the big loggers and the Forest Service to disguise the one as the other, and blame the enviros for the problems. You don't seem to have any comment on this: Please do a search for Interfor and Boise Cascade, among others in the US, among destructive Big Logging companies worldwide. I did, I did a cut and paste to google Interfor and Boise Cascade, I came up with 4 responses, and each of them had to deal with envirogroup(s) trying to run possible liable ad(s) in newspapers, and getting turned down. Re this: That it's the environmentalists who tie any effective action up in law-suits is mistaken. You say no doubt it happens, but that referred to clear-cutting, not this. I gave a link to the GAO report that detailed just what happens, and is in conflict with the Forest Service report. I also gave a link to evidence that the big logging companies put pressure on the Forest Service to slant their reports. These references were sparing - there's plenty more. It seams that the report even says that there is some on going stuff (appeals). I would like to see the reason for the discreprency between the GAO and the Forest Service reports, before I make any final decision. Same internationally - a lot of pressure went into forming the Forest Stewardship Council and its forest certification system, endorsed by global conservation organizations as well as the timber industry. But they cheat - corporate interests hold sway, local communities and indigenous people are marginalized, unsustainable logging is certified and the products sold worldwide under the FSC label. Hmm, check out http://lists.essential.org/pipermail/corp-focus/2001/68.html ( this is one of those links that showed up when I ran the Interfor and Boise Cascade search ).
Re: [biofuel] One big corporation Was: Forests (Long)
Hi Curtis Corporatized that's an interesting term. Um, yes. Not my term though... I get this feeling, from watching all the news ... that the bottom line is that the US govt. has almost ... devolved ... into almost a division of big Corporate world. Like a subsidiary. Only a junkyard dog subsidiary. One that (sic 'em boy, sic 'em) gets used to growl at ... and takes bites out of any legs of anyone that Big Corporate sees as a threat. Protecting what's theirs ... you know, the WHOLE entire American countryside which it sometime seems they think they own. Only the countryside? Now, these are only impressions I get as I watch the news. That is.. putting two (and two and two) together of all the junk I see. Curtis Here you go: http://www.ssu.missouri.edu/faculty/jikerd/papers/OhioCorporatization1.html The Corporatization of America by John Ikerd, Professor Emeritus, University of Missouri We Americans are a fiercely independent people. Right? [more] http://www.thomhartmann.com/unequalprotection.shtml Unequal Protection: The rise of corporate dominance and theft of human rights, by Thom Hartmann Because of a mistaken interpretation of a Supreme Court reporter's notes in an 1886 railroad tax case, corporations are now legally considered persons, equal to humans and entitled to many of the same protections once guaranteed only to humans by the Bill of Rights - a clear contradiction of the intent of the Founders of the United States. The result of this corporate personhood has been: * Unequal taxes * Unequal privacy * Unequal wealth * Unequal trade * Unequal media * Unequal regulation * Unequal responsibility for crime * Unequal protection from risk * Unequal citizenship and access to the commons In Unequal Protection, author Thom Hartmann tracks the history of the modern corporation back to the founding of the East India Company in 1600, through the Boston Tea Party revolt against transnational corporate domination of the early American economy, the rise of corporations during the Civil War, and the ultimate theft of human rights before the Supreme Court in 1886. Quite a few chapters free online, good read. Best Keith Get your free newsletter at http://www.ezinfocenter.com/3122155/NL - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] But corporations seldom respond well to such initiatives unless finally forced to, and in the US especially the bureaucracy is rather thoroughly corporatized, and the USDA is no exception. 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/
Re: [biofuel] Bio fuel business-Tables
Dear James, I will be happy to, if it is a ready for use technology and anyone of us could start a bio fuel business around it. The concept of my article is bio fuel business. With the demand of ready for use technologies, the subject is surprisingly narrow and it says something about the real stage of things, on short and medium term. Toyota and Honda have just leased fuel cell cars and they say that production of the cars is planned to start in about 8-9 years. It will take at least 3-4 replacement cycles before it will have a major impact on the fleets. Maybe I will still be alive and in this case I am 100 years old, but I will remember it and include in the list at that time. If I forget it, I am sure that you or Keith will remind me. (do not feel offended by my joke, it is only their as a reminder of the time lines) It is however interesting and I have noted it down and will expand the table on a more long term subject. Hakan At 10:26 AM 12/5/2002 -0800, you wrote: Might you want to also provide a table with Hydrogen and producer gas also? Seems to me to be somewhat narrow, unless that is the intention. James Slayden On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Hakan Falk wrote: Hi Keith, Thank you for your response and I am somewhat uncomfortable with the second table. I am not sure of that the presentation of political - commercial - influencing points are suitable in a table. Need to think more about it. Therefore I like to discuss the basics first and the table Characteristics, comparing Ethanol, Biodiesel and SVO. first. I do think that the table Characteristics, comparing Ethanol, Biodiesel and SVO. can be useful and ask you or others to suggest points that I maybe have missed. I must also underline that this is not a question of choice between them, they are all desperately needed and that is also covered in the table. On those points we agree. I have marked the points we agree on, in table at, http://energy.saving.nu/biofuels/biofuelorg.shtml from yours at http://journeytoforever.org/ethanol_compare.html The open points are: Possible crops: I changed this to Possible raw material sources, to be sure that I do not exclude trees and fruits. I like to have more discussions about this, but all that I have seen until now points to more source material for vegetable oil. Soil sensitivity: Here I am in deep water and need your expertise. It is a very important point and I would like you to analyze it further. Crop rotation problems: The same as previous point. But I thought with effective oil producing trees or more choices of crops, it would be easier to overcome. Fuel productivity per acre: Again, the production numbers I have seen for oil are better than for Ethanol. It is however a weak point, since we do not look at the total possible production of ethanol and veg oil from the same source. Possible bi-products: The same as for previous point. Veg. oil do opens up for a larger number of replacement applications, among those are many in the lubrication field. Chemical altering or distilling: I corrected this. Energy for production: I read a lot and I seems that ethanol is the most energy demanding process, oil pressing definitely is the least. Biodiesel as I understand the process, is much less energy demanding than alcohol. On producing raw material they are all similar, but distilling is a very energy demanding process. Net energy gain: The fossil fuel processes are also very energy demanding and not very effective, but it is mostly conversion processes to marketable products. Some of the raw material for ethanol, do contain more or less veg oil. We can maybe add this aspect also, but as I see it, it becomes a part of raw material evaluation. Cost to produce: See energy for production. End use efficiency: Needed clarification and I changed heading to End use efficiency for fuel/technology, this to clarify that a change in fuel/technology will achieve substantial energy savings. I do not think we will disagree with this. Needed quantity to replace fossil fuel: Water can be added to gasoline also, with similar energy savings. The difference is that the water/air have to be added at injection. All testimonies and technical adjustments point to more quantity use with replacement of gasoline with ethanol and unchanged quantities with replacements of diesel. Storage time: I corrected this. I do not cover combined production of ethanol and veg oil from the same source and it would be very useful to discuss this. Maybe it is not a biodiesel or ethanol business, it could be that you need to combine both for a good business. Hakan At 12:33 PM 12/5/2002 +0100, Hakan Falk wrote: Keith, Thank you, I will go through it and we will discuss the differences. Hakan At 08:02 PM 12/5/2002 +0900, you wrote: Hi
[biofuel] It's just parents and children! Was: One big corporation
Well ... no. The actual observation that I have made and concluded actually go far, far greater than that. However, I didn't want wave my arms so much that I seemed outa-control and a whacko or anything. So I kept myself restricted ... to country-side. Here's my larger perspective if you're interested in my whacky way of looking at things: I think .. that to these powers-that-be people ... that the world is a planet called earth ... populated with people. Except (looking from space) that the people ... only consists of Corporations, governments ... and uh maybe churches. These are the only citizens of this planet ... that register on the radar. The only lifesigns .. on the global census (if that makes any sense). Rules are made ... to have a ... ahem ...Democracy ... among these citizens . and the world is a happy place to live (smile, smile, smile). End of story Now, how do us individuals fit in into that scenario?? Well, the Corporation/government/churches they register on the global census because in a global sense ... they are the ahem ...PARENTS ... you know ... the adults. The individual person ... they're thought of as the ... CHILDREN. The ones that live under the roof of the parent. The ones that Nah, don't know any better. Parents ... as you can see .. implies parental rights. If Dad suspects you're smokin' something ... as your Dad, he has a right to bust into your bedroom. Notice how this parallels with Companies spying on employees emails and the recent John Poindexter Total-Awareness-Information thingamajig. Parents ... as you can see ... implies that employees working for a Corporation . parallels children working for their parents in a family business. And parents don't need to pay their kids any big wage or anything ... they're not adults. Hence the move to maintain the individual's affording power as low as possible. No, you're 100% correct ... it's not just the countryside it's the whole global world. Well, that's my whacky conclusion I've come to from watching the news. Whacky, yet the only conclusion that seems to fit all the evidence / data. And makes all the data make sense. Curtis Get your free newsletter at http://www.ezinfocenter.com/3122155/NL - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] Protecting what's theirs ... you know, the WHOLE entire American countryside which it sometime seems they think they own. Only the countryside? Because of a mistaken interpretation of a Supreme Court reporter's notes in an 1886 railroad tax case, corporations are now legally considered persons, equal to humans and entitled to many of the same protections once guaranteed only to humans by the Bill of Rights - Introducing NetZero Long Distance 1st month Free! Sign up today at: www.netzerolongdistance.com 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/
Re: [biofuel] BioD - 70's Mercedes
Could someone point Lee to a Moonlighting Diesel Mech in the Bay Area. I know him personally and he would like to get his 300D going on BD (I have an interest here to make some fuel for him pro-bono for my own experience). So, if anyone knows of anyone, it would help him. Thanks, James Slayden On Tue, 3 Dec 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: craig, i have a 1980 merc. 300 d. what evperiance are you looking for? I'm looking for a mechanic to help me get it running. It has a rebuilt engine that is good but the fuel injection pump needs to be aligned. lee Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT 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 the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 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/
[biofuel] Interesting info for Bay Area BD proponents
While perusing the West Coast Biofuels page, I came across their Biodiesel Users area and what did I find: - San Jose Green Team Recycling and Trash services runs their equipment on B20 a blend of 20% BioDiesel and 80% petroleum diesel. Trash trucks travel at low speeds and operate thier equipment at high idle causing these trucks to be heavy polluters in our neighborhoods. Green Team has taken the lead to improve air quality and reduce harmful emissions. They have seen no difference in performance compared to petroleum diesel said, Todd Hanson, Director of Operations everyone notices the improved smell and that the exhaust cleaner using BioDiesel. -- Now to get them to utilize B100. Sigh James Slayden 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/
Re: [biofuel] Bio fuel business-Tables
Hi Hakan, I would counter what is ready for use? Seems to me there is quite a few CNG vehicles out there that would be able to run on producer gas without neary a hitch. As for Hydro, a gas conversion to a standard petro vehicle is possible now. The only thing that is missing on both is a fueling infrastructure. I believe there are now stand alone units for producing hydro at petro stations via natural gas and electrolysis. Well, unless one is in the midwest, E-85 really isn't an option, and to convert a standard engine would be about the same as converting to CNG or Hydro. The only true ready for use alternative fuel is BD. Not to say there isn't room for all of the above in varying stages of implementation, which is what I think your getting at. James Slayden On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Hakan Falk wrote: Dear James, I will be happy to, if it is a ready for use technology and anyone of us could start a bio fuel business around it. The concept of my article is bio fuel business. With the demand of ready for use technologies, the subject is surprisingly narrow and it says something about the real stage of things, on short and medium term. Toyota and Honda have just leased fuel cell cars and they say that production of the cars is planned to start in about 8-9 years. It will take at least 3-4 replacement cycles before it will have a major impact on the fleets. Maybe I will still be alive and in this case I am 100 years old, but I will remember it and include in the list at that time. If I forget it, I am sure that you or Keith will remind me. (do not feel offended by my joke, it is only their as a reminder of the time lines) It is however interesting and I have noted it down and will expand the table on a more long term subject. Hakan At 10:26 AM 12/5/2002 -0800, you wrote: Might you want to also provide a table with Hydrogen and producer gas also? Seems to me to be somewhat narrow, unless that is the intention. James Slayden On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Hakan Falk wrote: Hi Keith, Thank you for your response and I am somewhat uncomfortable with the second table. I am not sure of that the presentation of political - commercial - influencing points are suitable in a table. Need to think more about it. Therefore I like to discuss the basics first and the table Characteristics, comparing Ethanol, Biodiesel and SVO. first. I do think that the table Characteristics, comparing Ethanol, Biodiesel and SVO. can be useful and ask you or others to suggest points that I maybe have missed. I must also underline that this is not a question of choice between them, they are all desperately needed and that is also covered in the table. On those points we agree. I have marked the points we agree on, in table at, http://energy.saving.nu/biofuels/biofuelorg.shtml from yours at http://journeytoforever.org/ethanol_compare.html The open points are: Possible crops: I changed this to Possible raw material sources, to be sure that I do not exclude trees and fruits. I like to have more discussions about this, but all that I have seen until now points to more source material for vegetable oil. Soil sensitivity: Here I am in deep water and need your expertise. It is a very important point and I would like you to analyze it further. Crop rotation problems: The same as previous point. But I thought with effective oil producing trees or more choices of crops, it would be easier to overcome. Fuel productivity per acre: Again, the production numbers I have seen for oil are better than for Ethanol. It is however a weak point, since we do not look at the total possible production of ethanol and veg oil from the same source. Possible bi-products: The same as for previous point. Veg. oil do opens up for a larger number of replacement applications, among those are many in the lubrication field. Chemical altering or distilling: I corrected this. Energy for production: I read a lot and I seems that ethanol is the most energy demanding process, oil pressing definitely is the least. Biodiesel as I understand the process, is much less energy demanding than alcohol. On producing raw material they are all similar, but distilling is a very energy demanding process. Net energy gain: The fossil fuel processes are also very energy demanding and not very effective, but it is mostly conversion processes to marketable products. Some of the raw material for ethanol, do contain more or less veg oil. We can maybe add this aspect also, but as I see it, it becomes a part of raw material evaluation. Cost to produce: See energy for production. End use efficiency: Needed clarification and I changed heading to End use efficiency for fuel/technology, this to clarify that a change in fuel/technology
Re: [biofuel] Bio fuel business-Tables
Hi James, Yes, I want to catch what we can do today, because tomorrow is rapidly getting closer. I am European (actually Swedish nationality), the last 25 years I lived outside Sweden, actually some time in US also. In France, 100 km from where I live, they have biodiesel, Germany is quite big on it etc. So I tried that before .For the first time I visited Brazil one month ago and was driving around 1,500 km on 20-30% ethanol mix in 14 days, this is my first experience of running on the road on ethanol mix. It was positive. I have experiences in producing ethanol and participated in oil pressing. Getting experience of producing BD is something I hope to get this winter, not that I am going to be a producer, but I like hands on experiences. If somebody want to start a business on selling biofuels, it better be some market or at least an emerging one. Nothing is ready for use without users. In the whole world we have emerging markets for both ethanol and biodiesel/SVO, it is clearly a window of opportunity for business ventures. No difficult patent protections and/or other things that stop anyone. Only the usual politics and maneuvering to get a piece of the cake. It is going to be huge markets for ethanol and biodiesel/SVO. Hakan At 03:03 PM 12/5/2002 -0800, you wrote: Hi Hakan, I would counter what is ready for use? Seems to me there is quite a few CNG vehicles out there that would be able to run on producer gas without neary a hitch. As for Hydro, a gas conversion to a standard petro vehicle is possible now. The only thing that is missing on both is a fueling infrastructure. I believe there are now stand alone units for producing hydro at petro stations via natural gas and electrolysis. Well, unless one is in the midwest, E-85 really isn't an option, and to convert a standard engine would be about the same as converting to CNG or Hydro. The only true ready for use alternative fuel is BD. Not to say there isn't room for all of the above in varying stages of implementation, which is what I think your getting at. James Slayden On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Hakan Falk wrote: Dear James, I will be happy to, if it is a ready for use technology and anyone of us could start a bio fuel business around it. The concept of my article is bio fuel business. With the demand of ready for use technologies, the subject is surprisingly narrow and it says something about the real stage of things, on short and medium term. Toyota and Honda have just leased fuel cell cars and they say that production of the cars is planned to start in about 8-9 years. It will take at least 3-4 replacement cycles before it will have a major impact on the fleets. Maybe I will still be alive and in this case I am 100 years old, but I will remember it and include in the list at that time. If I forget it, I am sure that you or Keith will remind me. (do not feel offended by my joke, it is only their as a reminder of the time lines) It is however interesting and I have noted it down and will expand the table on a more long term subject. Hakan At 10:26 AM 12/5/2002 -0800, you wrote: Might you want to also provide a table with Hydrogen and producer gas also? Seems to me to be somewhat narrow, unless that is the intention. James Slayden On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Hakan Falk wrote: Hi Keith, Thank you for your response and I am somewhat uncomfortable with the second table. I am not sure of that the presentation of political - commercial - influencing points are suitable in a table. Need to think more about it. Therefore I like to discuss the basics first and the table Characteristics, comparing Ethanol, Biodiesel and SVO. first. I do think that the table Characteristics, comparing Ethanol, Biodiesel and SVO. can be useful and ask you or others to suggest points that I maybe have missed. I must also underline that this is not a question of choice between them, they are all desperately needed and that is also covered in the table. On those points we agree. I have marked the points we agree on, in table at, http://energy.saving.nu/biofuels/biofuelorg.shtml from yours at http://journeytoforever.org/ethanol_compare.html The open points are: Possible crops: I changed this to Possible raw material sources, to be sure that I do not exclude trees and fruits. I like to have more discussions about this, but all that I have seen until now points to more source material for vegetable oil. Soil sensitivity: Here I am in deep water and need your expertise. It is a very important point and I would like you to analyze it further. Crop rotation problems: The same as previous point. But I thought with effective oil producing trees or more choices of crops, it would be easier to overcome. Fuel productivity per acre: Again,
Re: [biofuel] Interesting info for Bay Area BD proponents
James, what webpage is this west coast one you're talking about? Mark At 02:56 PM 12/5/2002 -0800, you wrote: While perusing the West Coast Biofuels page, I came across their Biodiesel Users area and what did I find: - [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] 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/
Re: [biofuel] Forests (Long)
Greg wrote: - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 04:02 Subject: Re: [biofuel] Forests (Long) - was Re: It all comes back to the sun I don't think you've done so. You say the enviros are wrong-headed, stubborn lead-heads and the most extremist of the three groups involved, but you don't offer anything to support that. Several logging companies in the northwest have had equipment vandalized, because trees have been spiked some people at saw mills have been hurt or near hurt, an environmental group has claimed responsibility for fire bombing several structures here in Colorado. This is why I say they tend to be more extremist. Near hurt? There have been casualties on both sides when the situation becomes extreme. Rather a lot of the outright cheating by the big companies, often covered by the bureaucracies, can be classifiied as extreme. I don't hold with spiking trees, but I don't hold with clear-cutting old-growth forests either. It's a bit rich to say equipment has been vandalized when it's been done to stop that equipment being used to vandalize old forests. He hit me in the fist with his jaw, your honor. Examples at: http://www.globalterrorism101.com/UTEnvironmentalTerrorism.html http://www.sandiegooffroad.com/2k01decterrorism.html http://www.naiaonline.org/body/articles/archives/ecoterr.htm There's been much said about the enviros being responsible for the problems caused by anti-fire policies. The refs I gave put the blame on the big logging companies, and the Forest Service. You say the government came before the companies, okay, but then why blame the enviros? The ENS report says this: Most of those projects had the full support of the conservation community, which has long called for controlled forest thinning to reduce the risk of fires that burn so hot they sterilize the soil beneath forests. Sorry, I missed that part. But you snipped that bit. You snipped everything about the GAO report. http://ens-news.com/ens/jul2002/2002-07-19-06.asp Green Groups Urge Fire Fuel Reduction, Not Logging WASHINGTON, DC, July 19, 2002 (ENS) Ok, I read that and in general have no problem, but, with the fallowing statement: conservation groups say they support most methods of fuel reduction and fire risk management, opposing only those projects that would log old growth trees in the name of fire prevention. My beef is that selective logging of old growth, is a viable tool. I'm not talking about total clear cutting, but, irregular patches of trees as well as non-viable trees ( dead diseased dying). This opens up parts of the forest for new growth. They're talking about total clear-cutting and commercial logging disguised as fire-control. There's deliberate confusion by the big loggers and the Forest Service to disguise the one as the other, and blame the enviros for the problems. You don't seem to have any comment on this: Please do a search for Interfor and Boise Cascade, among others in the US, among destructive Big Logging companies worldwide. I did, I did a cut and paste to google Interfor and Boise Cascade, I came up with 4 responses, and each of them had to deal with envirogroup(s) trying to run possible liable ad(s) in newspapers, and getting turned down. They're two very large but *separate* companies. A Google search for Boise Cascade gets about 95,100 hits, for Interfor, or International Forest Products, 7,360. Or try this, better: Forest Conservation Portal http://www.forests.org/search/ Re this: That it's the environmentalists who tie any effective action up in law-suits is mistaken. You say no doubt it happens, but that referred to clear-cutting, not this. I gave a link to the GAO report that detailed just what happens, and is in conflict with the Forest Service report. I also gave a link to evidence that the big logging companies put pressure on the Forest Service to slant their reports. These references were sparing - there's plenty more. It seams that the report even says that there is some on going stuff (appeals). I would like to see the reason for the discreprency between the GAO and the Forest Service reports, before I make any final decision. It's given in the report I copied the first time, it puts both sides of the case: http://ens-news.com/ens/jul2002/2002-07-11-06.asp Conflicting Reports Shade Forest Fire Debate See what it says about the Center for Biological Diversity analysis. Same internationally - a lot of pressure went into forming the Forest Stewardship Council and its forest certification system, endorsed by global conservation organizations as well as the timber industry. But they cheat - corporate interests hold sway, local communities and indigenous people are marginalized, unsustainable logging is certified and the products sold worldwide under the FSC
Re: [biofuel] It's just parents and children! Was: One big corporation
Hi Curtis On the other hand, there are a hell of a lot of feral humans out there. Pretty nice critters, most of them. See (at the end): Prehistoric peoples could kill mammoths; how about corporations? http://archive.nnytech.net/index.php?view=16019list=BIOFUEL I like your looking from space metaphor, but literally, is that what you'd see? You wouldn't actually *see* any governments or corporations, just people, trees, mountains and stuff, cities and buildings and so on. They don't even exist, they're just an idea, and some of them are a really bad idea. Regards Keith Well ... no. The actual observation that I have made and concluded actually go far, far greater than that. However, I didn't want wave my arms so much that I seemed outa-control and a whacko or anything. So I kept myself restricted ... to country-side. Here's my larger perspective if you're interested in my whacky way of looking at things: I think .. that to these powers-that-be people ... that the world is a planet called earth ... populated with people. Except (looking from space) that the people ... only consists of Corporations, governments ... and uh maybe churches. These are the only citizens of this planet ... that register on the radar. The only lifesigns .. on the global census (if that makes any sense). Rules are made ... to have a ... ahem ...Democracy ... among these citizens . and the world is a happy place to live (smile, smile, smile). End of story Now, how do us individuals fit in into that scenario?? Well, the Corporation/government/churches they register on the global census because in a global sense ... they are the ahem ...PARENTS ... you know ... the adults. The individual person ... they're thought of as the ... CHILDREN. The ones that live under the roof of the parent. The ones that Nah, don't know any better. Parents ... as you can see .. implies parental rights. If Dad suspects you're smokin' something ... as your Dad, he has a right to bust into your bedroom. Notice how this parallels with Companies spying on employees emails and the recent John Poindexter Total-Awareness-Information thingamajig. Parents ... as you can see ... implies that employees working for a Corporation . parallels children working for their parents in a family business. And parents don't need to pay their kids any big wage or anything ... they're not adults. Hence the move to maintain the individual's affording power as low as possible. No, you're 100% correct ... it's not just the countryside it's the whole global world. Well, that's my whacky conclusion I've come to from watching the news. Whacky, yet the only conclusion that seems to fit all the evidence / data. And makes all the data make sense. Curtis Get your free newsletter at http://www.ezinfocenter.com/3122155/NL - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] Protecting what's theirs ... you know, the WHOLE entire American countryside which it sometime seems they think they own. Only the countryside? Because of a mistaken interpretation of a Supreme Court reporter's notes in an 1886 railroad tax case, corporations are now legally considered persons, equal to humans and entitled to many of the same protections once guaranteed only to humans by the Bill of Rights 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/
[biofuel] Re: home heating with biofuels
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Aaron Ellringer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello all. I'm trying to convince our state (Wisconsin, USA) renewable energy contracting/research firm to pursue biofuels in residential applications. If you orsomeone you know has used waste oil, fresh oil, and/or biodiesel to heat a residence(displacing fossil fuels) I would appreciate a contact. If you are aware of any researchprojects or demonstrations of such technologies, I would also appreciate your help. I can't assist with Bio-oil sources, but several manufacturers are making burners that use used engine Oil to produce space heat. I'm not aware of anyone using them for home heating, but many local Loggers use them to dispose of used engine oil from their equipment to heat their Shop areas. 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/
