RE: Algae - was Re: [Biofuel] Gasoline Prices
Hello Keith, I've been doing a bit of research on microalgae production for energy and found there is some research going on around the world in various places. The NREL's 'Aquatic Species Program' research closed in the mid 1990's due, among other things, to pressure for DOE funding and the decision to focus their research budgets on ethanol production. Also in the 1990's the Japanese took the idea on in a big way, spending more than $250 million on research into hi-tec bioreactors with optical fiber devices etc but found they were too expensive to be economical. I believe research is continuing there but on a smaller scale; China and Israel are also leaders in applied phycology and have done work on biofuels from algae. Michael Briggs, of UNH, and his team are currently focusing on enclosed systems where the algae will process wastewater too. John Benemann, who was involved in the NREL research, is now an independent consultant and heading up an international network who are researching into it: their website gives a good overview http://www.co2captureandstorage.info/networks/Biofixation.htm . http://www.co2captureandstorage.info/networks/documents/01roadmp.pdf Other links... NREL research http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy04osti/34796.pdf http://govdocs.aquake.org/cgi/reprint/2004/915/9150010.pdf Further studies http://www.unh.edu/p2/biodiesel/pdf/algae_salton_sea.pdf http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/energy/pdf/36_qingyu_wu_en.pdf Discussion forum exchanges http://biodiesel.infopop.cc/eve/ubb.x?a=tpcs=447609751f=719605551m=932606061r=932606061#932606061 http://forums.biodieselnow.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=3153. http://forums.biodieselnow.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=3414whichpage=1 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/oil_from_algae/ Algal biodiesel plant planned for California?? (I don't know anything more about it) http://www.bfi.org/Trimtab/spring02/biodiesel.htm US Company making algal biodiesel from power station gases http://www.greenfuelonline.com/index.htm I find the last link particularly interesting. My only problem with it - and with John Benemann's network - is the idea of putting CO2 from coal power stations into algae. All that fossil carbon still ends up in the atmosphere eventually: we need to focus on ways of locking it up permanently. Also, as an alternative to algae, a lot of research is being done on biomass-to-liquid technology which could turn trees into a very pure diesel fuel with fewer pollutants than biodiesel and one that can be used 100% in all diesel cars without adjustment. Do you think such technology might be preferable? Could it be used to encourage more forests to be planted around the world and managed in a semi-natural way for the benefit of the environment? Finally, does such gasification allow carbon capture and sequestration, making it carbon negative? I've gone off-subject a bit: perhaps this is something for a new discussion stream but I'd be interested to have others' thoughts. Craig Jamieson. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Keith Addison Sent: 12 April 2005 20:03 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Algae - was Re: [Biofuel] Gasoline Prices Hello John Perhaps a better solution for Hawaii would be an algae based oil source. I have seen several references to it but haven't investigated as of yet. It seems you could use all kinds of land not currently used for agriculture. Would you like me to supply some links? Mike Briggs at UNH is at the forefront of this work. http://www.unh.edu/p2/biodiesel/article_alge.html So people keep saying, and they've been saying it for quite awhile, but I don't see anything coming out of it other than this one article. And what have we here? http://www.green-trust.org/biodiesel.htm How much land is needed to replace fossil fuels used for transportation? by Michael S. Briggs :-) As I often find with people chasing after algae (not with O'Neil though, the list member I referred to, he just wants to produce his own oil independently, same with others), they're tempted by the promised high yields and go chasing after the holy grail of how we can get to continue our amazingly wasteful and profligate gas-guzzling and avoid the cold turkey. It ain't going to work that way, algae or no algae. The party's over, especially for the OECD and more especially for the US: On a per capita basis, the US, with 4.6% or world's population, uses 5.4 times more than its fair share of the world's energy, the EU 2.6 times its share, Germany 2.6 times its share, France 2.8 times its share, Japan 2.7 times its share, Australia 3.8 times its share. India uses one-fifth of its fair share, Sudan less than one-fifth its share, Nepal less than one-fifth its share. The average American uses twice as much energy as the average European or Japanese and 155 times as much as the average Nepalese. In terms of production, Americans produce more per head than
Re: [Biofuel] Re: Evolution: Was :The Lunatic over unity device
Dr. Garza - Valdes studied smear samples from the occipital region of the shroud's dorsal image sing a microscope, histochemical techniques (including Mallory's Prussian blue reaction and Wright's stain), and immunohisto-chemical techniques. He concluded that the smears present on the shroud consist of cellular material, rather than crystalline substance, as would be the case had the smears been produced by pigment. These smears have been almost entirely replaced by fungi and bacteria, though some cell structures remain. (They won't, however, for long!) ...or maybe the shroud was just Sun bleached from hanging in front of a stained glass window. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1351996/posts Mike The problem with that solution to the shroud origin theory is that it doesn't account for the human blood, nor can it explain the physical evidence of bioplastic residue, oak splinters and pollens native to the Middle East found on the fabric. These things could have been planted on the cloth, but why would a Medieval forgery artist even contemplate doing so when the technology to detect trace compounds required centuries to develop? I'm not defending those who claim the Shroud of Turin is the authentic burial cloth of Jesus Christ. I'd like you and others in this forum to fully understand that evidence presented to support a given view can be interpreted differently by equally well educated people. robert luis rabello The Edge of Justice Adventure for Your Mind http://www.authorhouse.com/BookStore/ItemDetail.aspx?bookid=9782 Ranger Supercharger Project Page http://www.members.shaw.ca/rabello/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: Algae - was Re: [Biofuel] Gasoline Prices
Hello John Mike Briggs at UNH is at the forefront of this work. http://www.unh.edu/p2/biodiesel/article_alge.html So people keep saying, and they've been saying it for quite awhile, but I don't see anything coming out of it other than this one article. Mike has made some coy references at tdiclub that suggest that a commercial venture may be in the works, but yes, the silence is rather deafening, isn't it. Here's an interesting 3rd party financial analysis of Mike's algae paper. Well, it's interesting for us 'Merkins, anyway. :) http://www.americanenergyindependence.com/biodiesel.html jh ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] Biodiesel in Chelsea Quebec
This took its time getting to me from my small network of dead-tree readers. The Ottawa Sun, February 12, 2005 page 36 Fuel for thought === (Picture of man holding jar of amber coloured fluid appears above article with caption SEAN McADAM, president of Veggie Gas, holds up a jar of biodiesel that's made from either new or used vegetable oil. Photo credit: Errol McGihon) Veggie Gas hopes drivers will give biodiesel green thumbs-up By ANNE HOWLAND IT'S WHAT makes his Hummer hum. Chelsea resident Sean McAdam has spent thousands of dollars of his own money creating Veggie Gas, a pilot project to test whether drivers are interested in powering their vehicles with the ecologically friendly biodiesel fuel. Biodiesel is made from wast fryer oil that McAdam collects from local restaurants that would otherwise pay to have it picked up, or from virgin oils such as corn and canola. Operating from a small research plant in Chelsea, McAdam powers his Hummer on the fuel, which he says reduces greenhouse gas emissions by about three tons annually. People used to give me the finger when they saw me driving my Hummer, said McAdam, whose vehicle sports a large, colourful Veggie Gas logo on the side. Now they stop and ask me about biodiesel. All diesels can use it Any car with a diesel engine can use biodiesel fuel, or a mix of biodiesel and petroleum diesel, McAdam said. Not only is the biodiesel good for the car's engine, it produces almost no sulphur or carbon dioxide, making it an environmentally friendly choice. I have been encouraged by the response, said McAdam, a land developer by trade, who has been enticing local residents with the new fuel for just over a year. He first learned about biodiesel on the Internet from other Hummer owners who use it to power their vehicles. But McAdam sees his future market in selling to large fleet operators, such as municipalities across Canada. We're in the far end of planning for a commercial plant in the region, either on the Quebec or Ontario side, that will produce 20 million litres of the fuel per year, said McAdam, who operates Veggie Gas with project manager Peter Schneider. But while McAdam said there are few if any drawbacks to the fuel, which he hopes to sell for about the same price as regular diesel, the Canadian Renewable Fuels Association points to several challenges. Biodiesel is not exactly a household world, [sic] and the fuel is not in wide commercial use, the association writes on its website. The challenges that the industry faces (are) to increase awareness of potential consumers of biodiesel, finalize the best combination of chemical and mechanical additives to optimize the emissions benefits of biodiesel ... and, of utmost importance, make sure it is available and price competitive in the marketplace with other alternative fuels and technologies. Time for change McAdam would be the first to agree. On his own website, www.veggiegas.ca, he writes: Remarkably, in spite of the fact that biodiesel is becoming the norm in Europe and increasingly common in the U.S., there is very little, if any, access to biodiesel in Canada. I think we should change that. [EMAIL PROTECTED] === -- Darryl McMahon http://www.econogics.com/ It's your planet. If you won't look after it, who will? ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: Algae - was Re: [Biofuel] Gasoline Prices
Hey Keith, I did some reading, but have not taken any concrete actions yes. I don't buy the whole hexane separation thing. Why would algae be any different than any other oil feedstock? Squeeze it hard enough and we should get oil! I forget the name of the type of press, but the schematics of it look like a screw mounted horizontally. The algae would be fed in one end and as the squeezed material gets closer to the other end the internal pressure increases. This kind of press is used to extract oil from seeds I don't see why it wouldn't work with algae. Perhaps a hexane solution would increase the amount of oil extracted from the same amount of algae, but, so what! Who wants to play with hexane? I don't and I don't want a dependence upon materials I cannot make/source myself. Large scale presses like this are used for waste treatment. I guess they take sludge and run it through this press to get hardened waste pellets and cleaned waste water. So if oil can be extracted from algae with this basic design then the industrial sized presses are available and are a known entity. (read reduced risk) I will have access to a large amount of algae in a month or two. Does anyone on the list have a press and are willing to try an experiment? I can dry it out, box it up and ship it. A couple of kilograms should be sufficient for a first run. Cheers, O'Neil. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Keith Addison Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 3:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Algae - was Re: [Biofuel] Gasoline Prices Hello John Perhaps a better solution for Hawaii would be an algae based oil source. I have seen several references to it but haven't investigated as of yet. It seems you could use all kinds of land not currently used for agriculture. Would you like me to supply some links? Mike Briggs at UNH is at the forefront of this work. http://www.unh.edu/p2/biodiesel/article_alge.html So people keep saying, and they've been saying it for quite awhile, but I don't see anything coming out of it other than this one article. And what have we here? http://www.green-trust.org/biodiesel.htm How much land is needed to replace fossil fuels used for transportation? by Michael S. Briggs :-) As I often find with people chasing after algae (not with O'Neil though, the list member I referred to, he just wants to produce his own oil independently, same with others), they're tempted by the promised high yields and go chasing after the holy grail of how we can get to continue our amazingly wasteful and profligate gas-guzzling and avoid the cold turkey. It ain't going to work that way, algae or no algae. The party's over, especially for the OECD and more especially for the US: On a per capita basis, the US, with 4.6% or world's population, uses 5.4 times more than its fair share of the world's energy, the EU 2.6 times its share, Germany 2.6 times its share, France 2.8 times its share, Japan 2.7 times its share, Australia 3.8 times its share. India uses one-fifth of its fair share, Sudan less than one-fifth its share, Nepal less than one-fifth its share. The average American uses twice as much energy as the average European or Japanese and 155 times as much as the average Nepalese. In terms of production, Americans produce more per head than Europeans and about the same as Japanese, but they use twice as much energy as the Japanese to do it. From: World energy use http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_404.html#energyuse As I said, it's mostly waste. Have a look at some of Hakan's previous posts about building efficiency for instance. Average fuel consumption of US vehicles is higher now than it was 20 years ago. Etc etc. Nothing about this is sustainable, especially perhaps the inequity of it, military adventurism in pursuit of commandeering world energy supplies notwithstanding. This is simply the wrong question: How much land is needed to replace fossil fuels used for transportation? Here are some better answers to better questions: http://archive.nnytech.net/sgroup/BIOFUELS-BIZ/1395/ How much fuel can we grow? http://archive.nnytech.net/sgroup/BIOFUELS-BIZ/1801/ Re: Biofuels hold key to future of British farming As we so often say here, merely substituting biofuels for fossil fuel use is not nearly enough, a rational and sustainable energy future requires great reductions in energy use, great improvements in energy efficiency, and, most important, decentralisation of supply to the local level, with all ready-to-use renewable technologies used in combination as local conditions demand. Best wishes Keith ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
RE: Algae - was Re: [Biofuel] Gasoline Prices
Hi All, Having worked many years in the wwt industry getting the water out of the algae is no easy problem. Yes, there are things like belt filter presses and cyclones but they only yield a filter cake with 50% water maybe a bit better. That still leaves an awful lot of water in the algae. What are the cost of removing the water per liter of oil produced this way? How much oil do you get from Algae anyway? How much algae/oil do you produce per hectare of pond? What are the inputs? I«ve read a little about this idea but dismissed it because of the water removal problems seemed so great. Was I wrong? Tom Irwin -Original Message- From: O'Neil Brooke To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 12/04/05 22:20 Subject: RE: Algae - was Re: [Biofuel] Gasoline Prices Hey Keith, I did some reading, but have not taken any concrete actions yes. I don't buy the whole hexane separation thing. Why would algae be any different than any other oil feedstock? Squeeze it hard enough and we should get oil! I forget the name of the type of press, but the schematics of it look like a screw mounted horizontally. The algae would be fed in one end and as the squeezed material gets closer to the other end the internal pressure increases. This kind of press is used to extract oil from seeds I don't see why it wouldn't work with algae. Perhaps a hexane solution would increase the amount of oil extracted from the same amount of algae, but, so what! Who wants to play with hexane? I don't and I don't want a dependence upon materials I cannot make/source myself. Large scale presses like this are used for waste treatment. I guess they take sludge and run it through this press to get hardened waste pellets and cleaned waste water. So if oil can be extracted from algae with this basic design then the industrial sized presses are available and are a known entity. (read reduced risk) I will have access to a large amount of algae in a month or two. Does anyone on the list have a press and are willing to try an experiment? I can dry it out, box it up and ship it. A couple of kilograms should be sufficient for a first run. Cheers, O'Neil. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Keith Addison Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 3:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Algae - was Re: [Biofuel] Gasoline Prices Hello John Perhaps a better solution for Hawaii would be an algae based oil source. I have seen several references to it but haven't investigated as of yet. It seems you could use all kinds of land not currently used for agriculture. Would you like me to supply some links? Mike Briggs at UNH is at the forefront of this work. http://www.unh.edu/p2/biodiesel/article_alge.html So people keep saying, and they've been saying it for quite awhile, but I don't see anything coming out of it other than this one article. And what have we here? http://www.green-trust.org/biodiesel.htm How much land is needed to replace fossil fuels used for transportation? by Michael S. Briggs :-) As I often find with people chasing after algae (not with O'Neil though, the list member I referred to, he just wants to produce his own oil independently, same with others), they're tempted by the promised high yields and go chasing after the holy grail of how we can get to continue our amazingly wasteful and profligate gas-guzzling and avoid the cold turkey. It ain't going to work that way, algae or no algae. The party's over, especially for the OECD and more especially for the US: On a per capita basis, the US, with 4.6% or world's population, uses 5.4 times more than its fair share of the world's energy, the EU 2.6 times its share, Germany 2.6 times its share, France 2.8 times its share, Japan 2.7 times its share, Australia 3.8 times its share. India uses one-fifth of its fair share, Sudan less than one-fifth its share, Nepal less than one-fifth its share. The average American uses twice as much energy as the average European or Japanese and 155 times as much as the average Nepalese. In terms of production, Americans produce more per head than Europeans and about the same as Japanese, but they use twice as much energy as the Japanese to do it. From: World energy use http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_404.html#energyuse As I said, it's mostly waste. Have a look at some of Hakan's previous posts about building efficiency for instance. Average fuel consumption of US vehicles is higher now than it was 20 years ago. Etc etc. Nothing about this is sustainable, especially perhaps the inequity of it, military adventurism in pursuit of commandeering world energy supplies notwithstanding. This is simply the wrong question: How much land is needed to replace fossil fuels used for transportation? Here are some better answers to better questions: http://archive.nnytech.net/sgroup/BIOFUELS-BIZ/1395/ How much fuel can we grow?
Re: [Biofuel] Re: Evolution: Was :The Lunatic over unity device
I consider myself to have an open mind and will certainly concede to a good argument if the person I'm sparring with makes a better case than me. But, I don't see the ambiguity here. The fact that there are trace elements on a piece of cloth which is at least 600 years old seems very logical and I would suspect that any cloth that old would have all kinds of stuff on it. As for the cloth being some kind of hoax or forgery, The motivation for exposing the cloth to sunlight (assuming that this is the true cause) is a separate argument. I find this explanation very believable. The fact that it also gives a logical explanation as to the image having 3-dimensional qualities because of the apparent movement of the sun, is even more compelling. Mike robert luis rabello [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Michael Redler wrote: Dr. Garza - Valdes studied smear samples from the occipital region of the shroud's dorsal image sing a microscope, histochemical techniques (including Mallory's Prussian blue reaction and Wright's stain), and immunohisto-chemical techniques. He concluded that the smears present on the shroud consist of cellular material, rather than crystalline substance, as would be the case had the smears been produced by pigment. These smears have been almost entirely replaced by fungi and bacteria, though some cell structures remain. (They won't, however, for long!) ...or maybe the shroud was just Sun bleached from hanging in front of a stained glass window. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1351996/posts Mike The problem with that solution to the shroud origin theory is that it doesn't account for the human blood, nor can it explain the physical evidence of bioplastic residue, oak splinters and pollens native to the Middle East found on the fabric. These things could have been planted on the cloth, but why would a Medieval forgery artist even contemplate doing so when the technology to detect trace compounds required centuries to develop? I'm not defending those who claim the Shroud of Turin is the authentic burial cloth of Jesus Christ. I'd like you and others in this forum to fully understand that evidence presented to support a given view can be interpreted differently by equally well educated people. robert luis rabello The Edge of Justice Adventure for Your Mind http://www.authorhouse.com/BookStore/ItemDetail.aspx?bookid=9782 Ranger Supercharger Project Page http://www.members.shaw.ca/rabello/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] US gas hogs and 40 mpg
April 3, 2005 ADVICE: PERSONAL FINANCE Detroit boneheads still push gas hogs U.S. imports oil, risks its security on cars unsuited for rest of world By SCOTT BURNS Universal Press Syndicate HoustonChronicle.com http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/business/mym/3114747 Nearly 35 years ago General Motors asked a consulting firm to examine a problem. Imported cars, mostly Japanese, had captured 25 percent of the California car market. GM management was worried. While the Big Three still had 90 percent of the national market, the top brass at GM saw California as the future. So they had the problem studied. Today, General Motor's market share is down to 25 percent. The Big Three have seen their share shrink to 57 percent. Our domestic carmakers (including Chrysler) have lacked foresight and innovation for so long they are now fighting to hold market share in the big categories essential for survival: midsize cars, SUVs and minivans. Management will blame this on intractable labor costs. While labor costs are definitely a problem, it's time to consider a larger problem: intractable bonehead management. The same Japanese managements that are derided for their conformity and slow decision-making are eating Detroit's breakfast, lunch and dinner. Today, General Motors and Ford are well-positioned to be dinosaurs. So is Chrysler. Worse, they are threats to national security. Here are problems How is this happening? Here are three main thrusts: ð The industry has consistently lobbied against any changes to the Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency (CAFE) rules, even as our dependence on imported energy has increased. The domestic carmakers talk about a global industry but have acted as though the United States was peculiarly immune to rising energy costs. One side effect is that domestic cars are unsuited for foreign markets because foreign markets are geared to fuel efficiency. ð The industry has focused its profitability on gas guzzlers that are either supersized ÷ like the Hummer 2 (10/13 mpg), the Lincoln Navigator (13/18 mpg), the Chevrolet Suburban (14/18 mpg) and the Cadillac Escalade ESV (13/17 mpg) ÷ or on an array of super-muscle cars that are remarkably fuel efficient relative to their forebears but still send plenty of money to bomb throwers in the Middle East. ð Rather than innovate and invest in hybrid technology, as Toyota and Honda have done, the U.S. industry has repeatedly labeled the most successful new car in a decade as a niche market car. Ford, belatedly, is licensing Toyota technology for its first hybrid. When fuel efficiency becomes crucial, American consumers will have two ugly choices: Send enormous amounts of money to the Middle East for oil, or send enormous amounts of money to Japan for efficient cars. The consequences of all this are neither good for the country nor pleasant. As some talk about $3 gasoline by summer, no remedies are available in auto dealer showrooms and lots. That's a pretty good reason to brand General Motors, Ford and Chrysler as major risks to national security. Buy fuel-efficient cars Is there something we can do? I believe there is. A recent survey showed that two out of three Americans, including NASCAR fans and conservatives, think buying more fuel-efficient cars is patriotic. Skeptics should check out http://www.40mpg.org a new organization devoted to convincing the other boneheads ÷ the ones in Congress ÷ that government-enforced, higher fuel-efficiency standards are essential. Conservatives have regularly defeated efforts to raise the CAFE standards, arguing against government intrusion in the private economy. I consider myself a conservative, but it's time to recognize that our national security is being threatened by Detroit. The 40mpg Web site offers an online calculator that shows the benefits of moving from any mileage you put in to 40 miles per gallon. You can also check the three online calculators on my Web site (www.scottburns.com) to see the economic benefits of driving a more fuel-efficient car. Questions about personal finance and investments may be sent to: SCOTT BURNS, P.O. Box 655237, Dallas 75265; e-mail can be sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Burns' Web page is www.scottburns.com ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] End of cheap oil is a blessing
End of cheap oil is a blessing MITCHELL ANDERSON Apr. 13, 2005 Canada http://www.thestar.com Enraged about the high price of gas? A trip to the corner store might provide a much-needed reality check to the indignation over excessive fuel costs. Have a quick look at what you can buy for a dollar a litre. Milk? Nope. Bottled water? Not likely. Roofing tar? No way. For all the shrill outrage about rising prices, gas remains by far the most outrageously underpriced commodity in the world. Consider the long journey that a litre of gas makes from faraway oil fields to your local filling station. Oil deposits must first be found ÷ often on the other side of the world or on the bottom of the ocean. After massive infrastructure is developed, oil is extracted, transported across the globe, refined, and trucked thousands of kilometres to where you live. Let's not forget the massive military expenditures from countries like the U.S. to secure foreign oil supplies and the political and human turmoil that this creates. Considering all that, why then should gas cost about half as much as bottled water? One reason is perverse government subsidies that promote things we are actually trying to discourage, such as fossil fuel consumption. Last year, Ottawa shovelled $5.9 billion of your tax dollars to the fossil-fuel industry. This is far larger than current government support for sustainable energy technologies that will no doubt become the cornerstone of our future economy. In the absence of either political will or personal restraint, we should be grateful that high gas prices might save us from ourselves. For instance, there is little doubt that governments would continue with perverse subsidies for fossil fuels, imperilling the future of the Canadian economy by hitching our wagon to the dying horse. Likewise, we would continue to endanger the future health of our planet by driving vehicles that actually get far worse mileage than the Model T did for the simple reason that gasoline happens to be cheaper than water. Artificially low gas prices have long stifled conservation efforts and alternative technologies, while fuelling a boom in vehicles so grotesquely inefficient that I suspect our children will someday marvel at them in a museum. SUVs are a fine example of the irrational behaviour in the waning days of cheap oil. The only reason such gas-guzzlers are even legal is that technically they are considered farm implements. Rather than investing in innovative technologies that would produce more efficient cars, automakers have invested in highly successful lobbying efforts in order to ensure that they don't have to. The recent accord between the federal government and car makers is a good case in point. After literally years of gentle coddling from the federal government, the automakers agreed to voluntary efficiency requirements that will actually allow emissions to rise by 18 per cent between 1990 and 2010. The last time Ottawa signed such a non-binding agreement in 1982, it failed completely to improve the average fuel efficiency of Canadian vehicles because there was no legal requirement to do so. It is noteworthy that governments possess a unique power called regulation that makes such protracted and fruitless negotiations unnecessary. Not to fear, the market of Adam Smith will succeed where all else has failed. Higher fuel costs will foster much needed interest, innovation and investment in conservation and alternative technologies. Some oil companies may turn their massive resources to developing these clean-energy alternatives rather than choosing to go down with their ship. A study by Shell International found that renewable sources could supply 50 per cent of the world's energy needs by 2050. Rather than posing for photo ops with the car industry, the federal government should seize the opportunity to make some long overdue policy changes. These include shifting gasoline tax revenue to public transit, increasing green infrastructure investment in cities, and expanding investment in renewable energy ÷ the fastest growing energy sector in the world. A side benefit from this vast global shift away from oil is the small matter of the fate of the planet. Aside from a few well-known pseudo-scientists shilling on behalf of big oil, virtually the entire scientific community is united in the knowledge that climate change is real, it is happening right now and that it is very, very dangerous. Some, like our beleaguered farmers, should be insulated from ballooning fuel costs. As for the rest of us, rather than griping about how much it costs to top up your SUV, consider instead the fact that you might well have been an idiot to buy such a vehicle in the first place. Times change and we must change with them. The end of cheap oil is a blessing and we should welcome it. Mitchell Anderson is
[Biofuel] rereacting poor fuel
methanol durring the mixing process. Brent ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device
wrote: big snip http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v9/i1/dating.asp?vPrint=1 Humor me for a minute, and have a read. I'd be very interested in your critique of the article. Remember, I'm interested in truth and if the article has flaws or errors or whatever I'd like to know about it. There are other articles that address the problems in the other processes cited above. first consider the source: Dr Andrew Snelling is a geologist with a B.Sc. (Hons) from The University of New South Wales and a Ph. D. from The University of Sydney, but now also works full-time with the Creation Science Foundation where he contributes to Creation Ex Nihilo magazine and edits the Creation Ex Nihilo Technical Journal. He resides in Brisbane, Australia. Second, the example you cite doesn't negate the technique, it just calls for caution in selecting a site with an appropriate geomorphology to ensure an accurate date, free from confounding variables. what the article really says is that Koongarra, Australia is not a good site for dating. I have no problem with the report other than the o so loaded publication- UPHOLDING THE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE FROM THE VERY FIRST VERSE -- Now tim, you have claimed that measurements are off by orders of magnitude. could you provide me with such evidence? Who has reproducibly got such variance? And I don't mean due to incompetence. I'm trying to find the actual paper (to make sure that I can read the context), but my reference includes the following: Processes of rock alteration may render a volcanic rock useless for potassium-argon dating . . We have analyzed several devitrified glasses of known age, and all have yielded ages that are too young. Some gave virtually zero ages, although the geologic evidence suggested that devitrification took place shortly after the formation of a deposit. *J.F. Evernden, et. al., K / A Dates and Cenozoic Mannalian Chronology of North America, in American Journal of Science, February 1964, p. 154. Granted, there have been a number of 'studies' done that have hand selected rock samples that exhibit discordant ages. However, so frauds have occured. they don't negate the theory. We should be able to examine the processes in use, and discuss flaws in reasoning as well as results. By the way, many of the presuppositions of these methods you've stated have primary flaws in reasoning that invalidates their results. Such as I've explained in a prior post about radioactive half life. As I recall you questioned the stability of the half-lives of radioactive isotopes? Doesn't your computer(s) keep track of time via an atomic clock? at least by reference ? Again I would like to see any any evidence as to the variance in half-lives. I'm not suggesting that radio-active half-lives have changed. What's in view is variances between the different methods used. For example, the isotope ratio at the time of the formation of the sample, or ion migrate in and out of the sample (the assumption of a closed system). vide infra radiometric dating, when performed by experienced scientists, and reviewed by peers, is the best method for determining the ages on lots of stuff, and far and away better than consulting the often transcribed oral history of a desert tribe from thousands of years ago. Look, an unobserved series of historical events happened. No transitional species have ever been found (notwithstanding several publications' attempts to present them from time to time) that has stood up to scrutiny. what? just in terms of human evolution, australopithecenes evolutionarily precede homo genera. Within Homo, are a series of species such as erectus, habilis, and on and on. And if you look at the dna the relationships are overwellminingly obvious. There is a gradual change in the dna as you move across the spectrum of life. My dna is more like a chimpanzee's than the chimpanzee's is like a gorilla's. Put another way, the dna of a sea squirt is more like mine than it is to a salmonella bacteria. One must really try hard to not see the relationships among life. So you're saying that DNA has been collected from all the skeleton fragments that were used to construct this tree of descent? I'd be interested to see that. What is the degree of sequence match between the australopithecenes skeleton and one of us? dna doesn't survive more than a few ten's of thousands of years, under the best of circumstances. Fossils don't have dna. The dna is from extant species. the closer the dna sequences, the closer the phylogenetic relationship. Since there are no DNA sequences in the fossils, then how do you make the link? Do I understand you to mean that you look at living species today that seem to have the characteristics of the fossils? I mean, at one point dinosaurs were believed to be
Re: [Biofuel] Re: Evolution: Was :The Lunatic over unity device
Tom Irwin wrote: Hi All, I really dont care much for this so Ill keep it quick. I agree with your comments Bob. Folks who dont understand DNA well have great difficulty with this evolution stuff. Additionally, some of us who understand DNA well have great difficulty accepting this evolution stuff as fact. It's a theory and should be understood as such. whoa, full circle, you and I can't even agree on the meaning of the term theory. -- Bob Allen http://ozarker.org/bob Science is what we have learned about how to keep from fooling ourselves Richard Feynman --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] A Cornucopia of Death
A Cornucopia of Death By Arianna Huffington, AlterNet Posted on April 12, 2005, Printed on April 13, 2005 http://www.alternet.org/story/21738/ Paint the last month black. It's been an orgy of mourning; a cornucopia of death. We've had Terri Schiavo, Pope John Paul, Prince Rainier, and Charles and Camilla's wedding--which felt as grim as any funeral. All brought to us in no-longer-living color. If nothing else, the media have outed themselves as the ultimate necrophiliacs. I expect CNN and Forest Lawn to announce a sponsorship agreement any day now. The pope's interminable interment was the magenta-colored cherry on the death sundae. The TV coverage was so over-the-top and utterly uncritical, it was as if John Paul had been, well, the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. Or, at least, Jim Caviezel. Now, I'm certainly not suggesting that the last week should have been spent trashing the late pontiff. His many achievements--taking on communism, embracing the Third World, speaking out for the poor, and standing up against war--surely deserved recognition and praise. But you'd think the wall-to-wall coverage would have included some serious discussion of the two tragic failures of his reign: his woeful mishandling of the church's child molestation scandal, and how his archaic position on condoms contributed to the deaths of millions of people, especially in Africa. The molestation outrage is a black mark that can't be whitewashed. Over 11,000 children were sexually abused and close to $1 billion in settlement money has been paid out, but the pope did not go much beyond decrying the sins of some of our brothers. He never met with any victims, he never offered practical solutions to dealing with the problem, he never addressed the decades-long cover-up of the abuse. He even rejected a zero tolerance policy calling for the immediate removal of molester-priests, concerned that it was too harsh. Too harsh?! This is a man who wouldn't allow a priest to become a bishop unless he was unequivocally opposed to masturbation, premarital sex and condoms. So, in his perversion pecking order, you had to be dead-set against self-love but when it came to buggering little kids, there was some wiggle room. And let's not forget that the Pope appointed Cardinal Bernard Law, who was one of the architects of the sex scandal cover-up, and who even faced potential criminal prosecution for his role in the concealment. But instead of making an example out of Law, the pope gave him a cushy sinecure in the Vatican. Adding insult to the grievous injury suffered by the abuse victims, Law was one of the nine cardinals specially chosen to preside over the pope's funeral masses. It is a disgrace--and an indication of how detached the Vatican became under this pope. The other stain on the pope's legacy is his tireless opposition to the use of condoms--even in places like Africa, where AIDS killed 2.3 million people last year alone, and where the disease has driven life expectancy below 40 years in many countries. But even in the face of that kind of suffering, he fought tooth and nail against condoms. Any time a church official even suggested that people infected with HIV should use condoms, they were either removed from office or censured by the Vatican. We were told again and again last week about how committed John Paul was to promoting a culture of life. I guess the 20 million people who have died from AIDS are the exception that proves the rule. On the other hand, the pope's passing might have saved the political skin of one of his culture-of-life cohorts, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. If you have a series of looming ethics scandals about to come crashing down on your head, having the media focused 24/7 on something else is a very lucky break indeed. But, in the end, it's going to take a huge celebrity dying every three days for the next few months to keep The Hammer from going down. The presence of DeLay at the pope's funeral in Rome, along with President Bush, the First Lady, Condoleezza Rice, Bill Clinton, Nancy Pelosi and Bush Sr., was a stark reminder of our perverted priorities. The pope dies and it's Must Holy See TV; 1,547 American soldiers die in Iraq and President Bush and Laura have yet to attend a single one of their funerals. Not a single one. Maybe the president only goes to funerals of people whose death he wasn't involved in. -- AntiFossil Mike - MN, USA We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. George Orwell Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. In the first stage of life the mind is frivolous and easily distracted, it misses progress by failing in consecutiveness and persistence. This is the condition of children and barbarians, in which instinct has learned nothing from experience. George Santayana ___ Biofuel
Re: [Biofuel] US gas hogs and 40 mpg
Good article! Though, I think it still doesn't truly address the issue entirely. And I don't begin to believe that American society remotely understands this issue. But, the problem begins there. We have accepted and even encouraged poor fuel economy ourselves. As far as I can tell, fuel economy hasn't changed since the 1970's. Yet, with all the advancement in other technologies, we don't expect efficiency. No, we expect raw horsepower - and gadgets. We expect safety but, how is it that when discussing safety, clean air and healthy water don't fit into the equation? I owned a 1981 VW Rabbit diesel that I purchase because the engine in my '77 VW camper blew. I intended to run biodiesel in it but, never truly made the effort (I'm guilty). That 81 Rabbit got an advertised 51 mpg - it actually got around 54. Today you can buy a 2005 VW Beetle TDI that gets around 47 mpg. That's a disgrace! But, not near so disgraceful as that we as a society allow it or again even encourage it. My friends wouldn't have chuckled at me had my 81 Rabbit have the power that the new TDI does but, that again describes the problem - this is why the lobbying works. In a culture that is so closely tied to the romance of the automobile, and a society that prides itself on power, in all forms, only necessity will change our driving habits. And 40 mpg ain't near enough! Not for me anyway. I have to wonder what would happen if we did all drive hybrid-diesels with regenerative braking and beyond that, curbing our driving habits by reducing the amount of hours we are on the road. Imagine an auto industry trying to stay afloat with a consumer base that purchases a vehicle with a power plant that will last 300,000 miles while only driving 7,000 miles a year. The car would reasonably last for 40 years. The only way that such a setting would work would be for the auto industry to reduce the quality of the vehicle. This I expect to be a reality. The lobbyist will make it so. And as a society, we will accept it. There is a piece of the puzzle that amazes me when we discuss renewable resources. There is always that faction that says that renewables destabilize the petro industry as a whole (the oil companies, the auto industry, textiles, transportation, etc). That it will cost money and people will lose jobs. However, these same people fail to mention that those folks who are left without employment, will have opportunities in newly created and much safer positions - jobs manufacturing, transporting, distributing, installing and maintaining safe, friend, renewable products and services. Same goes for reducing emissions from power plants and factories. It will cost too much is the common argument. But where is the money spent to perform the reductions? Hopefully, back to the U.S. economy. But, the American public is will to believe the arguments and accept it. It MIGHT be a different story when the American auto industry goes by the way of the rest of the manufacturing industry. Still, we will continue to subsidize oil. We will prop of the Big 3 with emergency protections when necessary - in the interest of the American people. And we will accept it. By the people, for the people doesn't mean much anymore does it? Sorry for the rant! Do good things, Ken MH [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: April 3, 2005 ADVICE: PERSONAL FINANCE Detroit boneheads still push gas hogs U.S. imports oil, risks its security on cars unsuited for rest of world By SCOTT BURNS Universal Press Syndicate HoustonChronicle.com http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/business/mym/3114747 Nearly 35 years ago General Motors asked a consulting firm to examine a problem. Imported cars, mostly Japanese, had captured 25 percent of the California car market. GM management was worried. While the Big Three still had 90 percent of the national market, the top brass at GM saw California as the future. So they had the problem studied. Today, General Motor's market share is down to 25 percent. The Big Three have seen their share shrink to 57 percent. Our domestic carmakers (including Chrysler) have lacked foresight and innovation for so long they are now fighting to hold market share in the big categories essential for survival: midsize cars, SUVs and minivans. Management will blame this on intractable labor costs. While labor costs are definitely a problem, it's time to consider a larger problem: intractable bonehead management. The same Japanese managements that are derided for their conformity and slow decision-making are eating Detroit's breakfast, lunch and dinner. Today, General Motors and Ford are well-positioned to be dinosaurs. So is Chrysler. Worse, they are threats to national security. Here are problems How is this happening? Here are three main thrusts: The industry has consistently lobbied against any changes to the Corporate Average
RE: Algae - was Re: [Biofuel] Gasoline Prices
Hey, I got some news out of you! :-) Thanks. Hey Keith, I did some reading, but have not taken any concrete actions yes. I don't buy the whole hexane separation thing. Neither do I. Why would algae be any different than any other oil feedstock? Squeeze it hard enough and we should get oil! And soy? Will squeezing soy give you oil? How do you get oil out of corn (maize)? (I don't know.) I forget the name of the type of press, but the schematics of it look like a screw mounted horizontally. The algae would be fed in one end and as the squeezed material gets closer to the other end the internal pressure increases. This kind of press is used to extract oil from seeds I don't see why it wouldn't work with algae. Perhaps a hexane solution would increase the amount of oil extracted from the same amount of algae, but, so what! Who wants to play with hexane? I don't and I don't want a dependence upon materials I cannot make/source myself. I fully agree. That's very important to us too, and it's the basis of Appropriate Technology after all - if we're not into that then why not. Large scale presses like this are used for waste treatment. I guess they take sludge and run it through this press to get hardened waste pellets and cleaned waste water. So if oil can be extracted from algae with this basic design then the industrial sized presses are available and are a known entity. (read reduced risk) As Tom says, you have to get the water out first - I guess, or most of it. Whatever happens, you'll be hefting a lot of water about the place and getting not a lot of dried algae out of it. Enough to be worth it? It'll be interesting to know. You're right, I reckon, you need a machine where you just have to dump it in the top and water comes out one end and algae pellets out the other. Hopefully a machine that doesn't cost too much or use too much power. I will have access to a large amount of algae in a month or two. Does anyone on the list have a press and are willing to try an experiment? I can dry it out, box it up and ship it. A couple of kilograms should be sufficient for a first run. Last time we discussed it I tried to be both sceptical and encouraging at the same time, not easy but I hope that's the message you got. I'd really like to hear about a good backyard approach to this. If you've got a small(ish) mixed farm it's not that difficult to produce a useful amount of oilseed as a by-product (if you rig it right growing it will already have paid for the trouble in other ways, and so will the seedcake). Growing a smallish crop on a biggish garden plot might be feasible, up to a point, but a good backyard algae system would certainly help. But I agree with Tom, good questions, lots of problems - and indeed, how much oil do you get from algae anyway? How much algae/oil do you produce per hectare of pond? Especially with ordinary, whatever-grows algae. I'm sceptical because I haven't seen any ready backyard answers to those and Tom's other questions yet, nor to other questions besides, and I can't think of any myself. But then it's not me who's doing it. So strength to yer arm, O'Neil. Keep in touch! Best wishes, thanks again Keith Cheers, O'Neil. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Keith Addison Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 3:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Algae - was Re: [Biofuel] Gasoline Prices Hello John Perhaps a better solution for Hawaii would be an algae based oil source. I have seen several references to it but haven't investigated as of yet. It seems you could use all kinds of land not currently used for agriculture. Would you like me to supply some links? Mike Briggs at UNH is at the forefront of this work. http://www.unh.edu/p2/biodiesel/article_alge.html So people keep saying, and they've been saying it for quite awhile, but I don't see anything coming out of it other than this one article. And what have we here? http://www.green-trust.org/biodiesel.htm How much land is needed to replace fossil fuels used for transportation? by Michael S. Briggs :-) As I often find with people chasing after algae (not with O'Neil though, the list member I referred to, he just wants to produce his own oil independently, same with others), they're tempted by the promised high yields and go chasing after the holy grail of how we can get to continue our amazingly wasteful and profligate gas-guzzling and avoid the cold turkey. It ain't going to work that way, algae or no algae. The party's over, especially for the OECD and more especially for the US: On a per capita basis, the US, with 4.6% or world's population, uses 5.4 times more than its fair share of the world's energy, the EU 2.6 times its share, Germany 2.6 times its share, France 2.8 times its share, Japan 2.7 times its share, Australia 3.8 times its share. India uses one-fifth of its fair share,
Re: Algae - was Re: [Biofuel] Gasoline Prices
Keith Addison wrote: Hello John Mike Briggs at UNH is at the forefront of this work. http://www.unh.edu/p2/biodiesel/article_alge.html So people keep saying, and they've been saying it for quite awhile, but I don't see anything coming out of it other than this one article. Mike has made some coy references at tdiclub that suggest that a commercial venture may be in the works, but yes, the silence is rather deafening, isn't it. It's a familiar sort of silence, there are other such silences that make a similar noise. Here's an interesting 3rd party financial analysis of Mike's algae paper. Well, it's interesting for us 'Merkins, anyway. :) http://www.americanenergyindependence.com/biodiesel.html Thankyou! Interesting (though it had me chuckling too). The holy grail: In his paper, under the section titled: How much biodiesel, Michael Briggs concluded that 140,800,000,000 (140.8 billion) gallons of biodiesel could replace 100% of the petroleum transportation fuels consumed in the United States annually, without requiring a big change in driving behavior or automotive technology. Look ma, no cold turkey! All we need is $300 billion 1991 dollars (and more by the day), and massive capital works projects over a huge area. :-) Did you read the Water For All paper too? Well, you knew I'd chuckle. I enjoyed reading it, and I wish you 'Merkins well, but I do rather tend to think you're just going to have to come off it anyway, huge top-down industrialised monocrop and monosolutions projects notwithstanding. This is perhaps the most realistic bit: Keep in mind that it may not be wise to focus entirely on only one type of renewable fuel etc. But then he gets into ethanol from switchgrass, same thing, and same question: has anybody actually produced any biodiesel from algae outside a laboratory, has anybody actually made any usable ethanol from switchgrass? Regards Keith jh ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: Algae - was Re: [Biofuel] Gasoline Prices
Hello Keith, I've been doing a bit of research on microalgae production for energy and found there is some research going on around the world in various places. The NREL's 'Aquatic Species Program' research closed in the mid 1990's due, among other things, to pressure for DOE funding and the decision to focus their research budgets on ethanol production. Were those the only reasons? I thought there were some negative reasons about algae too, could always be wrong though. Also in the 1990's the Japanese took the idea on in a big way, spending more than $250 million on research into hi-tec bioreactors with optical fiber devices etc but found they were too expensive to be economical. I believe research is continuing there but on a smaller scale; I haven't heard of any such research here, and I'm a bit sceptical. As with biodiesel itself - it's quite easy to get the impression that there's lots of fancy stuff going on here, especially if you listen to several quite noisy people, and there are indeed some fancy Japanese patents, but in fact biodiesel hardly exists here, some (or most) of the few projects that do exist are very bad, to the extent that emissions tests for exemption from the restrictions of the anti-diesel campaign here (Tokyo and some other places) will no longer allow biodiesel because they've found it's so badly made it wrecks the machinery. Tests of our biodiesel have shown it would pass and wouldn't mess up any machinery, but they made a blanket rule: NO biodiesel, great, thanks guys. More and more people are making their own now, since we got involved (not boasting, that's what's happened), high-quality fuel, but it doesn't count, too bad. Same with ethanol, lots of good research, lots of schemes, but nothing happens. Yet. China and Israel are also leaders in applied phycology and have done work on biofuels from algae. Michael Briggs, of UNH, and his team are currently focusing on enclosed systems where the algae will process wastewater too. Have they made any biodiesel from it yet? John Benemann, who was involved in the NREL research, is now an independent consultant and heading up an international network who are researching into it: their website gives a good overview Thanks, I'll take a look. http://www.co2captureandstorage.info/networks/Biofixation.htm . http://www.co2captureandstorage.info/networks/documents/01roadmp.pdf Other links... NREL research http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy04osti/34796.pdf http://govdocs.aquake.org/cgi/reprint/2004/915/9150010.pdf Further studies http://www.unh.edu/p2/biodiesel/pdf/algae_salton_sea.pdf http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/energy/pdf/36_qingyu_wu_en.pdf Discussion forum exchanges http://biodiesel.infopop.cc/eve/ubb.x?a=tpcs=447609751f=719605551m =932606061r=932606061#932606061 Um... (burp), no thanks. http://forums.biodieselnow.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=3153. http://forums.biodieselnow.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=3414whichpage=1 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/oil_from_algae/ Algal biodiesel plant planned for California?? (I don't know anything more about it) http://www.bfi.org/Trimtab/spring02/biodiesel.htm US Company making algal biodiesel from power station gases http://www.greenfuelonline.com/index.htm I find the last link particularly interesting. My only problem with it - and with John Benemann's network - is the idea of putting CO2 from coal power stations into algae. All that fossil carbon still ends up in the atmosphere eventually: we need to focus on ways of locking it up permanently. Like just leaving it where it is now, for instance, nicely locked up and causing no trouble (apart from the odd war and so on). Some hope. Also, as an alternative to algae, a lot of research is being done on biomass-to-liquid technology which could turn trees into a very pure diesel fuel with fewer pollutants than biodiesel and one that can be used 100% in all diesel cars without adjustment. Do you think such technology might be preferable? I've not much time for any of it. That's the SunFuel that Mercedes and VW are so enamoured of (and seem to be heading for vehicles that can use SunFuel but not biodiesel, uh-huh). Fischer-Tropsch stuff (oil from coal too), there's quite a lot about it in the archives. Centralised high-tech high-investment plants, nice and controllable, you won't have a bunch of backyard hooligans like us butting in and spoiling it all for the big guys (though so far it's the big guys who've done all the spoiling as far as bad-quality biodiesel is concerned). Could it be used to encourage more forests to be planted around the world and managed in a semi-natural way for the benefit of the environment? Industrialised monocrop forests don't benefit the environment any more than industrialised monocrop anything else does, and that's surely what nearly all of it will be. It can be done well, of course, at least the forestry part of it can, and economically too,
Re: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device
snip This is a fascinating idea (tapping into the energy of the ether) that seems to be producing results. The Japanese are reported to be the world leaders in this field. It is easy to see why the interest is so intense there. It's easy to see why they might be interested in alternative energy sources, since they have to import so much of their energy and have their Kyoto Protocol commitments to meet, but if you lived here you'd hardly know it, except for all the solar. But saying that of course they'd be interested shores up the preceding claim that the Japanese are world leaders in this research. Westerners seem very ready to believe that the Japanese would be way ahead in this or that advanced field, and the ever-practical Japanese wouldn't bother if it were all nonsense, would they? What's really attractive about it is that it's so difficult to check, it proves nothing if you can't find anything in English. So the idea seems to be regularly coopted by people needing some credence for perhaps dubious claims. No doubt there are Japanese researchers fiddling with all sorts of exotic things in various physics labs (though their nuclear power industry fails to impress), but we're rather involved in alternative energy issues here in Japan and we've heard nothing of anyone here leading the world by tapping into the energy of the ether, nor of any interest in such a thing. I'm not saying it's not true, but I'd like to see some references, especially urls. They can be in Japanese, that's okay with us. If you can't find any references maybe you should stop saying this, because there's a good chance it isn't true. Subjects such as these are fraught with hogwash and fraud and hearsay and rumour and conspiracisms, you need to pick your way through it all with great care if you're not going to be gulled. snip Sorry for talking too much. Best wishes, D. Mindock That's what it's for. However, please note what it says in the list rules: Anything that has to do with energy has relevance for biofuels issues. Similarly, though the focus is on ready-to-use technologies, discussion of all alternative energy technologies and topics is welcome. (Free energy scams might not be very welcome.) http://wwia.org/pipermail/biofuel/Week-of-Mon-20040906/05.html Best Keith - Original Message - From: Chuck Elsholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 11, 2005 7:33 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device Hi. I was just wondering where the over-unity power is coming from. Also, has anyone referenced Dr. Bruce DePalma or the Space Power Generator, or the work of Dr. Searl and his devices? Happy to see great interest in a better and smarter world. Thanks, Chuck ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] Massachusetts BioHeat Seminar
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Language: en The Massachusetts State Energy Office is co-sponsoring a free seminar, intended especially for professionals in the energy business, on the use of BIODIESEL in home heating applications. Attached is a brochure on this seminar. Pre-registration is required. The seminar is titled Bioheat A Seminar for the Oilheat Industry in Massachusetts April 28, 2005 10:00 - 2:30 Mass. Technology Collaborative Campus, Marlboro, MA For registration, contact: MA Division of Energy Resources 617-727-4732 x 40143 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Speakers will include: Robert Cerio Warwick, RI Public School District http://www.warwickschools.org/default.htm Larry Chretien MassEnergy Consumers Alliance http://www.massenergy.com/ Rex D’Agostino Northeast Biodiesel Co. http://www.northeastbiodiesel.com/ Michael Ferrante Massachusetts Oilheat Council http://www.massoilheat.org/ Gene Gebolys World Energy Alternatives, LLC http://www.worldenergy.net/ Tom Leue Northeast Biodiesel Co. Paul Nazzaro Advanced Fuel Solutions, Inc. http://www.fuelsolution.com/ Bob Warren Mass Biofuel http://www.massbiofuel.com/ Tom Leue - Homestead Inc. www.yellowbiodiesel.com ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Re: Evolution: Was :The Lunatic over unity device
whoa, full circle, you and I can't even agree on the meaning of the term theory. This surprises you? : - ) robert luis rabello The Edge of Justice Adventure for Your Mind http://www.authorhouse.com/BookStore/ItemDetail.aspx?bookid=9782 Ranger Supercharger Project Page http://www.members.shaw.ca/rabello/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: Algae - was Re: [Biofuel] Gasoline Prices
Hello Irwin, Hello Tom, - Original Message - From: Tom Irwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2005 2:55 PM Subject: RE: Algae - was Re: [Biofuel] Gasoline Prices Hi All, Having worked many years in the wwt industry getting the water out of the algae is no easy problem. Yes, there are things like belt filter presses and cyclones but they only yield a filter cake with 50% water maybe a bit better. That still leaves an awful lot of water in the algae. What are the cost of removing the water per liter of oil produced this way? It was suggested that 3 phase centrifuges would help. But more work was needed on this.. How much oil do you get from Algae anyway? From NREL/TP-580-24190 A Look Back at the U.S. Department of Energy's Aquatic Species Program:Biodiesel from Algae biodiesel_from -algae.pdf. I do not have the original url but you may be able to locate it at the NREL website. Detailed Analyses of Microalgal Lipids In addition to the in-house research being conducted in the area of strain collection and screening, there was an effort by Dr. Thomas Tornabene and others to characterize various strains via detailed lipid compositional analyses. Dr. Tornabene's laboratory at SERI (and later at the Georgia Institute of Technology) served as the focal point for the analysis of lipids in algal samples supplied by various researchers in the ASP. This section will describe the results of these analyses, and will provide details about the analytical methods used, as these methods were the most comprehensive used in the program. An early report by Tornabene et al. (1980) described the lipids that were present in the halophilic alga Dunaliella that had been isolated from the Great Salt Lake in Utah. The cells were grown to late logarithmic phase, harvested, and extracted with chloroform/methanol via the method of Bligh and Dyer (1959). Additional extraction by acetate buffer, followed by refluxing with an alkaline methanol/water mixture was then performed, followed by partitioning of lipids into petroleum ether. The extracted lipids were fractionated on the basis of polarity using silicic acid columns via differential elution with hexane, benzene, chloroform, acetone, and methanol. In this procedure, the lipids are eluted as follows: 1. hexane: acyclic hydrocarbons 2. benzene: cyclic hydrocarbons, polyunsaturated acyclic hydrocarbons, sterols, 3. chloroform: mono-, di- and triacylglycerols, free fatty acids, and phaeophytin a 4. acetone: glycolipids, carotenoids, and chlorophyll a and b; and 5. methanol: phospholipids and chlorophyll c.The various lipid classes were further analyzed via Si gel thin layer chromatography (both one- and two-dimensional), wherein lipids were detected via the use of iodine vapors (and autoradiography in the case of 14C-labeled lipids). In addition, lipids containing amino groups were detected via the ninhydrin reagent, and phospholipids were detected by the use of molybdate/H2SO4. Fatty acids were analyzed via gas chromatography using either flame ionization or mass spectroscopic detection after being converted to their methyl ester derivatives in the presence of methanolic HCl. The head groups of the polar lipids were identified via gas chromatography after being converted to alditol acetates. These and related methods were These analyses indicated that lipids comprised 45%-55% of the total organic mass of Dunaliella cells. Based on the distribution of 14C after labeling the cells with 14C-bicarbonate, neutral lipids accounted for 58.5% of the lipid mass, whereas phospholipids and galactolipids were 22.9% and 10.9% of the lipid mass, respectively. Isoprenoid hydrocarbons (including ?-carotene) and aliphatic hydrocarbons (in which the major components were tentatively identified as straightchain and methyl-branched C17 and C19 hydrocarbons with various degrees of unsaturation) represented 7.0% and 5.2% of the lipids, respectively. The major fatty acids present were palmitic (20.6%), linolenic (12.5%), linoleic (10.7%) and palmitoleic (7.8%), but no attempt was made to ascertain whether any of these fatty acids predominated a particular lipid class. The high hydrocarbon content of this alga is rather atypical of most of the strains characterized in the ASP. These types of hydrocarbons would probably require catalytic conversion into a usable fuel source, which would perhaps limit their utility as a production organism. The typical yiled was in the range of 45-55% on dry weight basis. How much algae/oil do you produce per hectare of pond? The projected yields range from 25 tons/hectare/year to 150 tons/hectare/year with some extremes reported on both sides.based mostly on projections from lab/bench/small scales. What are the inputs? N in the form of urea/ammonia/nitrate (300 to 600 micro M) depending on cost alongwith C in the form of 1% CO2 in air bubbled constantly in the presence of 40 to 60% sunlight appeared to yield the best results.
[Biofuel] Article from deseretnews.com
Tamsyn ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) thought you might be interested in reading the following story, which appeared on deseretnews.com on Wednesday, April 13, 2005. Do not reply to this messsage. To send a message to the sender, use the address here: [EMAIL PROTECTED] NOTE FROM SENDER: This news is somewhat troublesome ... we'll have to see how far the government goes with this, but it's scary (VERY scary) to think that instead of using the current oil situation to start moving beyond dependence on fossil fuels and developing renewables, the government is hungrily looking for more oil reserves tam VAST 'OIL' RESERVES IN UTAH MAY TEMPT FEDS TO HELP OUT Utah, Colorado and Wyoming sit on a massive fortune in untapped oil -- maybe more oil than in the Middle East -- if they could just figure out a way to harvest it. FULL STORY: http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/1%2C1249%2C600125803%2C00.html ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device
first consider the source: Dr Andrew Snelling is a geologist with a B.Sc. (Hons) from The University of New South Wales and a Ph. D. from The University of Sydney, but now also works full-time with the Creation Science Foundation where he contributes to Creation Ex Nihilo magazine and edits the Creation Ex Nihilo Technical Journal. He resides in Brisbane, Australia. So he's a creationist. Big deal! You're wearing a wizard's hat on your web site. Does that detract from your credibility or the legitimacy of the arguments you espouse? I understand and accept that you do not ascribe the origin of life and the environment that sustains it to supernatural means, (despite your wizard's hat!), but I expect that a man of your intellect and education should limit commentary to the substance of the argument. Second, the example you cite doesn't negate the technique, it just calls for caution in selecting a site with an appropriate geomorphology to ensure an accurate date, free from confounding variables. what the article really says is that Koongarra, Australia is not a good site for dating. Did you miss the introduction? Let me quote it for you: However, it is important to remember that all radiometric dating methods are based on three main assumptions:- 1. The physico-chemical system must have always been closed. Thus no parent, daughter or other decay products within the system can have been removed, and no parent, daughter or other decay products from outside the system can have been added. 2. The system must initially have contained none of its daughter elements or decay products, or at the very least we need to know the starting conditions/state of the decay system. 3. The decay rate, referred to as the half-life of the radioactive parent element, must have always been the same, that is, constant. The highly speculative nature of all radiometric dating methods becomes apparent when one realizes that none of the above assumptions is either valid or provable. Put simply, none of these assumptions can have been observed to have always been true throughout the supposed millions of years the radioactive elements have presumed to have been decaying. This is hardly calling for caution in the Koongarra, Australia case alone. The author calls into question the underlying assumptions of all radiometric dating methods, according to what he has written above. Dr. Snelling criticizes the application of uranium - thorium - lead in general, then presents 5 points from the Koongarra mineralization data to demonstrate why this particular formation cannot be accurately dated by the U - Th - Pb method. Here's another quote: Indeed, the U- Th-Pb system is well known to be prone to open system behaviour, with U being particularly geochemically mobile, meaning that U is readily lost from the crystal lattices of the minerals used for 'dating', including zircons. Pb is also prone to diffusion from minerals. Thus it is questionable as to why this radiometric 'dating' method is still used. Instead, it is increasingly being applied in more sophisticated ways to geological 'dating' problems. He's indicting the whole process with statements of this nature. Now, geology is not my field, but I read English well enough to comprehend that this man disputes long age chronology using radiometric methods because he contends: As with all the other apparent isochron 'ages', these results from the weathered rocks and soils have no apparent geological meaning, because there is no geological event to which these 'ages' might correlate. Now you write here: radiometric dating, when performed by experienced scientists, and reviewed by peers, is the best method for determining the ages on lots of stuff, and far and away better than consulting the often transcribed oral history of a desert tribe from thousands of years ago. But Dr. Snelling is not arguing that the Hebrew creation poem presents a superior, scientific explanation. He's claiming that the conclusions drawn from radiometric dating methods that he describes as an open system present an invalid means of determining the age of geologic formations. That is the essence of his argument. In the event that you haven't actually read the oral history of that particular desert tribe, nowhere does it state the age of the earth. Short age creation chronology is a problem codified on our behalf by Bishop Ussher, not the Hebrews. Lets talk about protein first, the stuff dna codes for. Hemoglobin is a good example. It is the oxygen carrier for distribution of oxygen in a great number of animals. If I look at the specific amino acid sequence in hemoglobin, I see that is my hemoglobin is essentially identical to the hemoglobin of every human on the planet. (ok if you have tay-sachs disease or sickle cell anemia, you have a single amino acid
[Biofuel] converting shortening to bio-diesel
I have been lurking at this group for a couple of weeks as I discover the process of WVO conversion to bio-diesel. Just today I chose to contact a few local sources, the first to respond replied with a message that he uses shortening (I assume vegetable source) for his potato chip wagon. Can shortening be used for this purpose? Is it more complicated than other sources? Thank you for any help Wes ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
