Re: [biofuel] Bio fuel business-Tables
Hi Hakan Hi Keith, I like to give it a final round and then try to write something and like a response. Also to give some more people opportunity to input. I thought that this subject was important and worth an attempt. But to get everybody involved, hackers seems to be more interesting and I see nothing wrong in this, but. Everything's interesting! Life's too short. At 04:41 AM 12/10/2002 +0900, you wrote: Hi Hakan Keith, First I want to tell you that any loss of power in todays vehicles in my mind does very little change. I have a licence to drive anything on wheels and the practical experiences that it implies. During my life time I have been driving around 3,000,000 km in almost any vehicles that you can imagine. Me too, anything from a bulldozer to a Dassault Mirage, two wheels, four, as many as you like or none at all. Okay, I only flew a Mirage once. :-) That means that you also have a very pragmatic view about vehicles. I only had a Cessna Cardinal and flew it around 400 hours, never piloted a jet and never even got the possibility to get in a jet fighter as passenger -:( . Well, it sure was fun for a couple of hours, but I'd've preferred a Cessna, a lot more useful. At 61, I think I have to give up that dream, because of the G-forces. Same goes for 57. Even small aerobatic plane as passenger, feels uncomfortable now, age I guess. I tried one of those modern roller coasters last summer and got severe neck pain from it, rheumatic problems or what it is called in English when your bone structure starts to degrade, I am 2 centimeter shorter now. :-( Not, however, only one wheel. Little Japanese kids learn to ride unicycles, it's quite a common sight to see them spinning round the place on their one-wheelers, I'm filled with envy. They look incredibly cool. (I know when I'm beaten.) me too. With top speed limits between 55 to 85 miles per hour, most of current automobiles capacity has other values than pure and fast transportation. It is only in Germany that you have no speed limit and this is on a very low percentage of their roads. To talk about power loss in modern automobiles of around 10% does not really relate to any loss of efficiency in transportation. Talking about quantity used, have a direct relation to fuel produced. Therefore I am thinking more in fuel consumption than in power losses. You're right about the power loss, doesn't matter. Anyway, you still have the loss in fuel consumption, of up to 13%. Plus the 20% alcohol used in biodiesel (unless you recover, leaving average 13%), and the savings of being able to use 160-proof ethanol. I don't know how it compares, but these factors are not accounted for in the usual comparisons. When I was driving on biodiesel in Europe, I did not see any higher consumption in my cars. Seems to be there though, lots of reports, 10% higher or lower. Now when I was driving a VW Gol in Brazil the higher consumption compared with my wife's VW Golf was very noticeable. My wife's car is 4 years old and the Brazilian new, but I think that they are somewhat delayed in versions in Brazil and that it is comparable. Compared with a new Golf in Europe, it was very much higher consumption, nearly 100%. At 11:49 PM 12/7/2002 +0900, you wrote: Hi Hakan snip 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. The main by-product of each is stockfeed - DDG and seedcake, not much to choose between them. When I say byproducts, it is not only the stockfeed - DDG and seedcake. It is also the lubricant applications http://www.greenoil-online.com/hydraulc.html samples as Steve gave link to. http://www.carbohydrateeconomy.org/ceic/library/admin/uploadedfiles/H ow_Much_Energy_Does_it_Take_to_Make_a_Gallon_.html carefully and it says about Btu per gallon, Corn based, Industry average : net energy gain = (energy ethanol) 81,400 + (energy undefined co-products) 27,579 - (used energy) 81,090 = 30,589 (38% gain) Corn based, Industry best : net energy gain = (energy ethanol) 81,400 + (energy undefined co-products) 36,261 - (used energy) 57,504 = 62,857 (109% gain) Corn based, State of the Art Industry : net energy gain = (energy ethanol) 81,400 + (energy undefined co-products) 36,261 - (used energy) 47,948 = 62,857 (151% gain) Cellulose based, Industry : net energy gain = (energy ethanol) 81,400 + (energy undefined co-products) 115,400 - (used energy) 76,093 = 122,407 (162% gain) What are the co-products? Do they go in the tank? How do you use Gluten meal, Protein feed and Carbon dioxide in the tank? Why would you need to? You can, if you like, feed it (with great gain on the original
Re: [biofuel] Bio fuel business-Tables
Hi Hakan Keith, First I want to tell you that any loss of power in todays vehicles in my mind does very little change. I have a licence to drive anything on wheels and the practical experiences that it implies. During my life time I have been driving around 3,000,000 km in almost any vehicles that you can imagine. Me too, anything from a bulldozer to a Dassault Mirage, two wheels, four, as many as you like or none at all. Okay, I only flew a Mirage once. :-) Not, however, only one wheel. Little Japanese kids learn to ride unicycles, it's quite a common sight to see them spinning round the place on their one-wheelers, I'm filled with envy. They look incredibly cool. (I know when I'm beaten.) With top speed limits between 55 to 85 miles per hour, most of current automobiles capacity has other values than pure and fast transportation. It is only in Germany that you have no speed limit and this is on a very low percentage of their roads. To talk about power loss in modern automobiles of around 10% does not really relate to any loss of efficiency in transportation. Talking about quantity used, have a direct relation to fuel produced. Therefore I am thinking more in fuel consumption than in power losses. You're right about the power loss, doesn't matter. Anyway, you still have the loss in fuel consumption, of up to 13%. Plus the 20% alcohol used in biodiesel (unless you recover, leaving average 13%), and the savings of being able to use 160-proof ethanol. I don't know how it compares, but these factors are not accounted for in the usual comparisons. At 11:49 PM 12/7/2002 +0900, you wrote: Hi Hakan snip 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. The main by-product of each is stockfeed - DDG and seedcake, not much to choose between them. When I say byproducts, it is not only the stockfeed - DDG and seedcake. It is also the lubricant applications http://www.greenoil-online.com/hydraulc.html samples as Steve gave link to. http://www.carbohydrateeconomy.org/ceic/library/admin/uploadedfiles/H ow_Much_Energy_Does_it_Take_to_Make_a_Gallon_.html carefully and it says about Btu per gallon, Corn based, Industry average : net energy gain = (energy ethanol) 81,400 + (energy undefined co-products) 27,579 - (used energy) 81,090 = 30,589 (38% gain) Corn based, Industry best : net energy gain = (energy ethanol) 81,400 + (energy undefined co-products) 36,261 - (used energy) 57,504 = 62,857 (109% gain) Corn based, State of the Art Industry : net energy gain = (energy ethanol) 81,400 + (energy undefined co-products) 36,261 - (used energy) 47,948 = 62,857 (151% gain) Cellulose based, Industry : net energy gain = (energy ethanol) 81,400 + (energy undefined co-products) 115,400 - (used energy) 76,093 = 122,407 (162% gain) What are the co-products? Do they go in the tank? How do you use Gluten meal, Protein feed and Carbon dioxide in the tank? Why would you need to? You can, if you like, feed it (with great gain on the original product) to livestock, one possible co-product being methane, which indeed you can put in the tank. When I said this I referred to (energy undefined co-products) which are the ones used to boost the energy numbers for ethanol. If we go over to ethanol and biodiesel, the surplus for animal food might be too big to have any value. I do not have numbers on this, have you seen any? Others also think that might be a problem. There are already huge surpluses. Surplus is the true problem of agriculture, not shortage. But it is all obscured behind industrialized production systems and centralized planning such as the CAP, and highly inequitable free trade arrangements. However, in localized production, there are other options. Much as I say that biofuels crop production on a sustainable integrated farm need not require any exclusive land use, such excesses or wastes or by-products are easily absorbed without loss. You're not so much dependant on market swings. Localization is the best approach to gluts and dearths. Case - Europe is apparently experiencing a glut in glycerine as a result of biodiesel production there. (Yet this doesn't seem to have affected buying prices, as gluts of soy and corn don't seem to affect virgin oil prices in the US - but I'm sure it would affect selling prices for small producers.) A local producer has quite a few options with by-product glycerine. Read for Biodiesel that for 1 unit energy used it goes 3.2 units in the tank. For every 1 BTU of liquid fuel used to produce ethanol, there is a 6.34 BTU gain. (The Energy Balance of Corn Ethanol: An Update, Shapouri and Duffield, 2002) liquid fuel, when I read all of those references about energy balances, they specify things in different way. If you use bagasse or
Re: [biofuel] Bio fuel business-Tables
Hi Hakan, On the note of Socitial Acceptance, it is more than just a Big vs. Small issue, it is a usage issue by the public. If a consumer 'perceives' some sort of limitation in the acceptance and usage of a alternative fuel, then the business case will have to overcome and be able to sustain that perception for a period of time. Ethanol and Biodiesel are still somewhat stigmatized, although there is push to overcome this at many levels. Last year ADM was running ads on television for ethanol, which I can only assume is priming the market. Quite effective for prepairing folks to make a switch to an alterantive fuel. By the time they do sell E85 in a market, there will be enough interest to sustain that market until the economies of scale come into play. This actually benefits the small producer as his product is locally produced and sold, thus lowering his overhead. The small producer benefits from the blanket media infusion of a Big Alternative Fuels. The only thing the Big AF has to do is void the credability of the small producer to maintain the market. And the only thing the small producer has to do is secure enough local contracts to maintain the business. It then becomes more of a niche market for the local producer, which can also be very lucrative. Lots of niche markets survive out there and do extreemely well. If I was a small producer, I would try to distinguish my product from Big AF, maybe in utilizing an all organic feedstock, or maybe emphasizing my local community connections, or even the nature of my feedstock source such as using WVO as opposed to using GMO crop residue, etc. A great amount of marketing leaway here. ;-) James Slayden On Sat, 7 Dec 2002, Hakan Falk wrote: Hi James, Very good, a lot in a short message. This idea about biofuel business start to be more work than I originally thought. Taking the idea of a business, does put some real sustainable demands on the thoughts. Every time I get a few moments to think about it, several new ideas pops up in my mind, nearly as frequent as the irritating pop-up ads on Internet. 1. Crops and trees give some burnable residues for BD also. 2. Good point about WVO, so a sustainable BD business need to be based on SVO. 3. I see more and more recycling plants for WVO to BD. Large Spanish interests are putting up 4 of them and are starting to pay for WVO. This supports your thoughts. 4. Social acceptance is a good one and touch very much the table (presentation) big vs. small that I still thinking about. How do you present and evaluate this kind of things. Hakan At 08:36 PM 12/6/2002 -0800, you wrote: Hi Hakan, The net energy in Cellulose based ethanol might be higher if the lingin is burned for processing. Since there is issues burning the Glyc from BD it wouldn't add to the BD net energy. The window of opportunity is really dependent on feedstock availability which really isn't decreasing. It might be that with WVO as the feedstock a baseline commodity pricing structure will occur, but again as Keith just posted again that the average collection of WVO runs around 10% there is a good lead in period before pricing structures begin (in general). With Ethanol, the perception barrier to opposition and acceptance is the utilization of Cellulostic feedstock vs. food crop feedstock. Not that in the real world this is an issue, just a hyped perception issue by the media. As we well know that most of the grains in this counrty go to animal feed anyway. But acceptance will be based on this false assumption. Looking at the table, you might want to put a catagory like Socitial Acceptance to define some possible inhibitors. James Slayden On Sat, 7 Dec 2002, Hakan Falk wrote: Hi Keith, Thank you for the help, it is very useful. At 07:36 PM 12/6/2002 +0900, you wrote: snip 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. The main by-product of each is stockfeed - DDG and seedcake, not much to choose between them. Ethanol's use as an oxygenate additive to gasoline is comparable to the use of B5 as a lubrication booster for ULSD. Lubricants made from vegoils are not for backyard operations - centralized. I think the major difference is perhaps the heating oil application, and power generation. snip 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. See above. See also Butterfield still references above. Plant Performance Data
Re: [biofuel] Bio fuel business-Tables
Hi Keith, I like to give it a final round and then try to write something and like a response. Also to give some more people opportunity to input. I thought that this subject was important and worth an attempt. But to get everybody involved, hackers seems to be more interesting and I see nothing wrong in this, but. At 04:41 AM 12/10/2002 +0900, you wrote: Hi Hakan Keith, First I want to tell you that any loss of power in todays vehicles in my mind does very little change. I have a licence to drive anything on wheels and the practical experiences that it implies. During my life time I have been driving around 3,000,000 km in almost any vehicles that you can imagine. Me too, anything from a bulldozer to a Dassault Mirage, two wheels, four, as many as you like or none at all. Okay, I only flew a Mirage once. :-) That means that you also have a very pragmatic view about vehicles. I only had a Cessna Cardinal and flew it around 400 hours, never piloted a jet and never even got the possibility to get in a jet fighter as passenger -:( . At 61, I think I have to give up that dream, because of the G-forces. Even small aerobatic plane as passenger, feels uncomfortable now, age I guess. I tried one of those modern roller coasters last summer and got severe neck pain from it, rheumatic problems or what it is called in English when your bone structure starts to degrade, I am 2 centimeter shorter now. Not, however, only one wheel. Little Japanese kids learn to ride unicycles, it's quite a common sight to see them spinning round the place on their one-wheelers, I'm filled with envy. They look incredibly cool. (I know when I'm beaten.) me too. With top speed limits between 55 to 85 miles per hour, most of current automobiles capacity has other values than pure and fast transportation. It is only in Germany that you have no speed limit and this is on a very low percentage of their roads. To talk about power loss in modern automobiles of around 10% does not really relate to any loss of efficiency in transportation. Talking about quantity used, have a direct relation to fuel produced. Therefore I am thinking more in fuel consumption than in power losses. You're right about the power loss, doesn't matter. Anyway, you still have the loss in fuel consumption, of up to 13%. Plus the 20% alcohol used in biodiesel (unless you recover, leaving average 13%), and the savings of being able to use 160-proof ethanol. I don't know how it compares, but these factors are not accounted for in the usual comparisons. When I was driving on biodiesel in Europe, I did not see any higher consumption in my cars. Now when I was driving a VW Gol in Brazil the higher consumption compared with my wife's VW Golf was very noticeable. My wife's car is 4 years old and the Brazilian new, but I think that they are somewhat delayed in versions in Brazil and that it is comparable. Compared with a new Golf in Europe, it was very much higher consumption, nearly 100%. At 11:49 PM 12/7/2002 +0900, you wrote: Hi Hakan snip 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. The main by-product of each is stockfeed - DDG and seedcake, not much to choose between them. When I say byproducts, it is not only the stockfeed - DDG and seedcake. It is also the lubricant applications http://www.greenoil-online.com/hydraulc.html samples as Steve gave link to. http://www.carbohydrateeconomy.org/ceic/library/admin/uploadedfiles/H ow_Much_Energy_Does_it_Take_to_Make_a_Gallon_.html carefully and it says about Btu per gallon, Corn based, Industry average : net energy gain = (energy ethanol) 81,400 + (energy undefined co-products) 27,579 - (used energy) 81,090 = 30,589 (38% gain) Corn based, Industry best : net energy gain = (energy ethanol) 81,400 + (energy undefined co-products) 36,261 - (used energy) 57,504 = 62,857 (109% gain) Corn based, State of the Art Industry : net energy gain = (energy ethanol) 81,400 + (energy undefined co-products) 36,261 - (used energy) 47,948 = 62,857 (151% gain) Cellulose based, Industry : net energy gain = (energy ethanol) 81,400 + (energy undefined co-products) 115,400 - (used energy) 76,093 = 122,407 (162% gain) What are the co-products? Do they go in the tank? How do you use Gluten meal, Protein feed and Carbon dioxide in the tank? Why would you need to? You can, if you like, feed it (with great gain on the original product) to livestock, one possible co-product being methane, which indeed you can put in the tank. When I said this I referred to (energy undefined co-products) which are the ones used to boost the energy numbers for ethanol. If we go over to ethanol and biodiesel, the surplus for animal food might be too
Re: [biofuel] Bio fuel business-Tables
Hi James, In most bootstrapping businesses that I experienced and have seen, your comment is a very important part. In a market it is many activities of promotion. In the beginning most of them from local environment, but also from large players that want to prime the markets. This is going on now, with the new green look of Big oil and other things. They know that a change is coming and spend money on preparing, not on deliver products. This is a part of what creates the famous window of opportunity, were a small supplier can grow big. The phase after that is when the market is big and established enough for the large companies. That is when they buy the available market shares, in order to get the needed volumes, but many times some startups continue on their own and even buy others. This creates the newcomers in the Big companies. The moment that the buy up period starts, the window of opportunity closes rapidly. The ticket to entry the market get too expensive for a small/medium large company. Many of the startups also becomes important suppliers to the Big whatsoever. If you are too early in a market and want to be big, you have a good chance to fail. If you are too late, you cannot afford the ticket. If you hit the window, it is a fair chance to be successful. This is why the entrepreneur is so important. He enters early and small because of enthusiasm and is often stubborn enough to stay until the window of opportunity opens. He is successful not because of smartness, but because of enthusiasm and stubbornness and that is probably the only common factor among successful entrepreneurs. Hakan At 03:59 PM 12/9/2002 -0800, you wrote: Hi Hakan, On the note of Socitial Acceptance, it is more than just a Big vs. Small issue, it is a usage issue by the public. If a consumer 'perceives' some sort of limitation in the acceptance and usage of a alternative fuel, then the business case will have to overcome and be able to sustain that perception for a period of time. Ethanol and Biodiesel are still somewhat stigmatized, although there is push to overcome this at many levels. Last year ADM was running ads on television for ethanol, which I can only assume is priming the market. Quite effective for prepairing folks to make a switch to an alterantive fuel. By the time they do sell E85 in a market, there will be enough interest to sustain that market until the economies of scale come into play. This actually benefits the small producer as his product is locally produced and sold, thus lowering his overhead. The small producer benefits from the blanket media infusion of a Big Alternative Fuels. The only thing the Big AF has to do is void the credability of the small producer to maintain the market. And the only thing the small producer has to do is secure enough local contracts to maintain the business. It then becomes more of a niche market for the local producer, which can also be very lucrative. Lots of niche markets survive out there and do extreemely well. If I was a small producer, I would try to distinguish my product from Big AF, maybe in utilizing an all organic feedstock, or maybe emphasizing my local community connections, or even the nature of my feedstock source such as using WVO as opposed to using GMO crop residue, etc. A great amount of marketing leaway here. ;-) James Slayden On Sat, 7 Dec 2002, Hakan Falk wrote: Hi James, Very good, a lot in a short message. This idea about biofuel business start to be more work than I originally thought. Taking the idea of a business, does put some real sustainable demands on the thoughts. Every time I get a few moments to think about it, several new ideas pops up in my mind, nearly as frequent as the irritating pop-up ads on Internet. 1. Crops and trees give some burnable residues for BD also. 2. Good point about WVO, so a sustainable BD business need to be based on SVO. 3. I see more and more recycling plants for WVO to BD. Large Spanish interests are putting up 4 of them and are starting to pay for WVO. This supports your thoughts. 4. Social acceptance is a good one and touch very much the table (presentation) big vs. small that I still thinking about. How do you present and evaluate this kind of things. Hakan At 08:36 PM 12/6/2002 -0800, you wrote: Hi Hakan, The net energy in Cellulose based ethanol might be higher if the lingin is burned for processing. Since there is issues burning the Glyc from BD it wouldn't add to the BD net energy. The window of opportunity is really dependent on feedstock availability which really isn't decreasing. It might be that with WVO as the feedstock a baseline commodity pricing structure will occur, but again as Keith just posted again that the average collection of WVO runs around 10% there is a good lead in period before pricing structures begin (in general). With Ethanol, the perception
RE: [biofuel] Bio fuel business-Tables
Sounds good to me Good luck raw -Original Message- From: Hakan Falk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 11:32 AM To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [biofuel] Bio fuel business-Tables Hi James, In most bootstrapping businesses that I experienced and have seen, your comment is a very important part. In a market it is many activities of promotion. In the beginning most of them from local environment, but also from large players that want to prime the markets. This is going on now, with the new green look of Big oil and other things. They know that a change is coming and spend money on preparing, not on deliver products. This is a part of what creates the famous window of opportunity, were a small supplier can grow big. The phase after that is when the market is big and established enough for the large companies. That is when they buy the available market shares, in order to get the needed volumes, but many times some startups continue on their own and even buy others. This creates the newcomers in the Big companies. The moment that the buy up period starts, the window of opportunity closes rapidly. The ticket to entry the market get too expensive for a small/medium large company. Many of the startups also becomes important suppliers to the Big whatsoever. If you are too early in a market and want to be big, you have a good chance to fail. If you are too late, you cannot afford the ticket. If you hit the window, it is a fair chance to be successful. This is why the entrepreneur is so important. He enters early and small because of enthusiasm and is often stubborn enough to stay until the window of opportunity opens. He is successful not because of smartness, but because of enthusiasm and stubbornness and that is probably the only common factor among successful entrepreneurs. Hakan At 03:59 PM 12/9/2002 -0800, you wrote: Hi Hakan, On the note of Socitial Acceptance, it is more than just a Big vs. Small issue, it is a usage issue by the public. If a consumer 'perceives' some sort of limitation in the acceptance and usage of a alternative fuel, then the business case will have to overcome and be able to sustain that perception for a period of time. Ethanol and Biodiesel are still somewhat stigmatized, although there is push to overcome this at many levels. Last year ADM was running ads on television for ethanol, which I can only assume is priming the market. Quite effective for prepairing folks to make a switch to an alterantive fuel. By the time they do sell E85 in a market, there will be enough interest to sustain that market until the economies of scale come into play. This actually benefits the small producer as his product is locally produced and sold, thus lowering his overhead. The small producer benefits from the blanket media infusion of a Big Alternative Fuels. The only thing the Big AF has to do is void the credability of the small producer to maintain the market. And the only thing the small producer has to do is secure enough local contracts to maintain the business. It then becomes more of a niche market for the local producer, which can also be very lucrative. Lots of niche markets survive out there and do extreemely well. If I was a small producer, I would try to distinguish my product from Big AF, maybe in utilizing an all organic feedstock, or maybe emphasizing my local community connections, or even the nature of my feedstock source such as using WVO as opposed to using GMO crop residue, etc. A great amount of marketing leaway here. ;-) James Slayden On Sat, 7 Dec 2002, Hakan Falk wrote: Hi James, Very good, a lot in a short message. This idea about biofuel business start to be more work than I originally thought. Taking the idea of a business, does put some real sustainable demands on the thoughts. Every time I get a few moments to think about it, several new ideas pops up in my mind, nearly as frequent as the irritating pop-up ads on Internet. 1. Crops and trees give some burnable residues for BD also. 2. Good point about WVO, so a sustainable BD business need to be based on SVO. 3. I see more and more recycling plants for WVO to BD. Large Spanish interests are putting up 4 of them and are starting to pay for WVO. This supports your thoughts. 4. Social acceptance is a good one and touch very much the table (presentation) big vs. small that I still thinking about. How do you present and evaluate this kind of things. Hakan At 08:36 PM 12/6/2002 -0800, you wrote: Hi Hakan, The net energy in Cellulose based ethanol might be higher if the lingin is burned for processing. Since there is issues burning the Glyc from BD it wouldn't add to the BD net energy. The window of opportunity is really dependent on feedstock availability which really isn't decreasing. It might be that with WVO as the feedstock a baseline commodity pricing structure will occur
Re: [biofuel] Bio fuel business-Tables
Hi again James, I forgot to tell you that a natural defense area for the smaller companies, is precisely the niche markets or for one that wants to have a platform to enter the market in a late stage. The niches is safe territory to operate from, quite like how the military build its operations. It is not an accident that many of our leading business leaders are former strategists from the military and many of them are quite good too. Hakan At 02:31 AM 12/10/2002 +0100, you wrote: Hi James, In most bootstrapping businesses that I experienced and have seen, your comment is a very important part. In a market it is many activities of promotion. In the beginning most of them from local environment, but also from large players that want to prime the markets. This is going on now, with the new green look of Big oil and other things. They know that a change is coming and spend money on preparing, not on deliver products. This is a part of what creates the famous window of opportunity, were a small supplier can grow big. The phase after that is when the market is big and established enough for the large companies. That is when they buy the available market shares, in order to get the needed volumes, but many times some startups continue on their own and even buy others. This creates the newcomers in the Big companies. The moment that the buy up period starts, the window of opportunity closes rapidly. The ticket to entry the market get too expensive for a small/medium large company. Many of the startups also becomes important suppliers to the Big whatsoever. If you are too early in a market and want to be big, you have a good chance to fail. If you are too late, you cannot afford the ticket. If you hit the window, it is a fair chance to be successful. This is why the entrepreneur is so important. He enters early and small because of enthusiasm and is often stubborn enough to stay until the window of opportunity opens. He is successful not because of smartness, but because of enthusiasm and stubbornness and that is probably the only common factor among successful entrepreneurs. Hakan At 03:59 PM 12/9/2002 -0800, you wrote: Hi Hakan, On the note of Socitial Acceptance, it is more than just a Big vs. Small issue, it is a usage issue by the public. If a consumer 'perceives' some sort of limitation in the acceptance and usage of a alternative fuel, then the business case will have to overcome and be able to sustain that perception for a period of time. Ethanol and Biodiesel are still somewhat stigmatized, although there is push to overcome this at many levels. Last year ADM was running ads on television for ethanol, which I can only assume is priming the market. Quite effective for prepairing folks to make a switch to an alterantive fuel. By the time they do sell E85 in a market, there will be enough interest to sustain that market until the economies of scale come into play. This actually benefits the small producer as his product is locally produced and sold, thus lowering his overhead. The small producer benefits from the blanket media infusion of a Big Alternative Fuels. The only thing the Big AF has to do is void the credability of the small producer to maintain the market. And the only thing the small producer has to do is secure enough local contracts to maintain the business. It then becomes more of a niche market for the local producer, which can also be very lucrative. Lots of niche markets survive out there and do extreemely well. If I was a small producer, I would try to distinguish my product from Big AF, maybe in utilizing an all organic feedstock, or maybe emphasizing my local community connections, or even the nature of my feedstock source such as using WVO as opposed to using GMO crop residue, etc. A great amount of marketing leaway here. ;-) James Slayden On Sat, 7 Dec 2002, Hakan Falk wrote: Hi James, Very good, a lot in a short message. This idea about biofuel business start to be more work than I originally thought. Taking the idea of a business, does put some real sustainable demands on the thoughts. Every time I get a few moments to think about it, several new ideas pops up in my mind, nearly as frequent as the irritating pop-up ads on Internet. 1. Crops and trees give some burnable residues for BD also. 2. Good point about WVO, so a sustainable BD business need to be based on SVO. 3. I see more and more recycling plants for WVO to BD. Large Spanish interests are putting up 4 of them and are starting to pay for WVO. This supports your thoughts. 4. Social acceptance is a good one and touch very much the table (presentation) big vs. small that I still thinking about. How do you present and evaluate this kind of things. Hakan At 08:36 PM 12/6/2002 -0800, you wrote: Hi Hakan, The net energy in Cellulose based ethanol might be higher if the lingin is
Re: [biofuel] Bio fuel business-Tables
Hi James, Very good, a lot in a short message. This idea about biofuel business start to be more work than I originally thought. Taking the idea of a business, does put some real sustainable demands on the thoughts. Every time I get a few moments to think about it, several new ideas pops up in my mind, nearly as frequent as the irritating pop-up ads on Internet. 1. Crops and trees give some burnable residues for BD also. 2. Good point about WVO, so a sustainable BD business need to be based on SVO. 3. I see more and more recycling plants for WVO to BD. Large Spanish interests are putting up 4 of them and are starting to pay for WVO. This supports your thoughts. 4. Social acceptance is a good one and touch very much the table (presentation) big vs. small that I still thinking about. How do you present and evaluate this kind of things. Hakan At 08:36 PM 12/6/2002 -0800, you wrote: Hi Hakan, The net energy in Cellulose based ethanol might be higher if the lingin is burned for processing. Since there is issues burning the Glyc from BD it wouldn't add to the BD net energy. The window of opportunity is really dependent on feedstock availability which really isn't decreasing. It might be that with WVO as the feedstock a baseline commodity pricing structure will occur, but again as Keith just posted again that the average collection of WVO runs around 10% there is a good lead in period before pricing structures begin (in general). With Ethanol, the perception barrier to opposition and acceptance is the utilization of Cellulostic feedstock vs. food crop feedstock. Not that in the real world this is an issue, just a hyped perception issue by the media. As we well know that most of the grains in this counrty go to animal feed anyway. But acceptance will be based on this false assumption. Looking at the table, you might want to put a catagory like Socitial Acceptance to define some possible inhibitors. James Slayden On Sat, 7 Dec 2002, Hakan Falk wrote: Hi Keith, Thank you for the help, it is very useful. At 07:36 PM 12/6/2002 +0900, you wrote: snip 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. The main by-product of each is stockfeed - DDG and seedcake, not much to choose between them. Ethanol's use as an oxygenate additive to gasoline is comparable to the use of B5 as a lubrication booster for ULSD. Lubricants made from vegoils are not for backyard operations - centralized. I think the major difference is perhaps the heating oil application, and power generation. snip 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. See above. See also Butterfield still references above. Plant Performance Data http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel_library/Butterfield/butterfield1.ht ml#perf Any process that uses a change of state i.e. solid to liquid to gas, uses a lot of energy at boiling temperature. This even if you have a recuperating system. I also read the link, http://www.carbohydrateeconomy.org/ceic/library/admin/uploadedfiles/How_Much_En rgy_Does_it_Take_to_Make_a_Gallon_.html carefully and it says about Btu per gallon, Corn based, Industry average : net energy gain = (energy ethanol) 81,400 + (energy undefined co-products) 27,579 - (used energy) 81,090 = 30,589 (38% gain) Corn based, Industry best : net energy gain = (energy ethanol) 81,400 + (energy undefined co-products) 36,261 - (used energy) 57,504 = 62,857 (109% gain) Corn based, State of the Art Industry : net energy gain = (energy ethanol) 81,400 + (energy undefined co-products) 36,261 - (used energy) 47,948 = 62,857 (151% gain) Cellulose based, Industry : net energy gain = (energy ethanol) 81,400 + (energy undefined co-products) 115,400 - (used energy) 76,093 = 122,407 (162% gain) What are the co-products? Do they go in the tank? How do you use Gluten meal, Protein feed and Carbon dioxide in the tank? Read for Biodiesel that for 1 unit energy used it goes 3.2 units in the tank. If you do not mind, I will keep my evaluation for this. Sugar ethanol production tends to use the bagasse as an energy source. I think there are many such possibilities. Also there's the relative value of using non-mobile fuel to produce mobile fuel, which puts a different sort of value on it. (Same with biodiesel perhaps.) Yes, bagasse can be used as heating source or as feedstock, this is the same as they do for fossil fuel. Since we have not done comparable evaluation for
Re: [biofuel] Bio fuel business-Tables
Hi Hakan Hi Keith, Thank you for the help, it is very useful. You're welcome. At 07:36 PM 12/6/2002 +0900, you wrote: snip 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. The main by-product of each is stockfeed - DDG and seedcake, not much to choose between them. Ethanol's use as an oxygenate additive to gasoline is comparable to the use of B5 as a lubrication booster for ULSD. Lubricants made from vegoils are not for backyard operations - centralized. I think the major difference is perhaps the heating oil application, and power generation. snip 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. See above. See also Butterfield still references above. Plant Performance Data http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel_library/Butterfield/butterfield 1.html#perf Any process that uses a change of state i.e. solid to liquid to gas, uses a lot of energy at boiling temperature. This even if you have a recuperating system. I also read the link, http://www.carbohydrateeconomy.org/ceic/library/admin/uploadedfiles/H ow_Much_Energy_Does_it_Take_to_Make_a_Gallon_.html carefully and it says about Btu per gallon, Corn based, Industry average : net energy gain = (energy ethanol) 81,400 + (energy undefined co-products) 27,579 - (used energy) 81,090 = 30,589 (38% gain) Corn based, Industry best : net energy gain = (energy ethanol) 81,400 + (energy undefined co-products) 36,261 - (used energy) 57,504 = 62,857 (109% gain) Corn based, State of the Art Industry : net energy gain = (energy ethanol) 81,400 + (energy undefined co-products) 36,261 - (used energy) 47,948 = 62,857 (151% gain) Cellulose based, Industry : net energy gain = (energy ethanol) 81,400 + (energy undefined co-products) 115,400 - (used energy) 76,093 = 122,407 (162% gain) What are the co-products? Do they go in the tank? How do you use Gluten meal, Protein feed and Carbon dioxide in the tank? Why would you need to? You can, if you like, feed it (with great gain on the original product) to livestock, one possible co-product being methane, which indeed you can put in the tank. Read for Biodiesel that for 1 unit energy used it goes 3.2 units in the tank. For every 1 BTU of liquid fuel used to produce ethanol, there is a 6.34 BTU gain. (The Energy Balance of Corn Ethanol: An Update, Shapouri and Duffield, 2002) Biodiesel's co-products do not go in the tank. Some can be used for process heat, the others have other uses not related to energy. There's not much to choose between the overall energy efficiency of biodiesel and of ethanol, IMO, even though distillation considered by itself may be more energy-intensive than transesterification. If you do not mind, I will keep my evaluation for this. I don't think it's based on very much difference. Sugar ethanol production tends to use the bagasse as an energy source. I think there are many such possibilities. Also there's the relative value of using non-mobile fuel to produce mobile fuel, which puts a different sort of value on it. (Same with biodiesel perhaps.) Yes, bagasse can be used as heating source or as feedstock, this is the same as they do for fossil fuel. Since we have not done comparable evaluation for Biodiesel, the byproducts energy values are missing. I suspect that this and the less use of fertilizers, pesticides, irrigation, more manual labor etc. are the reasons why Ethanol from sugar cane are a definite positive energy producer in Brazil. Ethanol is also a definite positive energy producer with corn in the US. Sugar doesn't necessarily use any less fossil-fuel inputs than corn does, or sugar beet - or at least not via industrialized production. They can all do very well or better without any of those inputs when grown sustainably. (Not just theory, according widespread practical results in the field.) On the other hand, biodiesel co-products can also be used for process heat (including glycerine). 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. It's hardly explored - as I keep saying, what about the oil in the maize? And so on. See previous point. Cost to produce: See energy for production. See Butterfield refs. See Energy for production. End use efficiency: Needed clarification and I changed heading to End use efficiency for
Re: [biofuel] Bio fuel business-Tables
Hi Hakan Some stuff to be going on with. This doc has some useful US stats and comparisons: http://www.orau.gov/deer2002/Session4/McCormick.pdf Bob McCormick, National Renewable Energy Laboratory Renewable Diesel Fuels: Status of Technology and RD Needs Presented at 8th Diesel Engine Emissions Reduction Conference August 25-29, 2003 Coronado, California He must be running on high cetane if he presented it next year already! On Energy for production: Biodiesel yields 3.2 units of fuel product energy for every unit of fossil energy consumed in its life cycle. - from An Overview of Biodiesel and Petroleum Diesel Life Cycles, NREL, 1998 http://www.afdc.doe.gov/pdfs/3812.pdf Corn ethanol is energy efficient... For every BTU dedicated to producing ethanol there is a 34% energy gain... Only about 17% of the energy used to produce ethanol comes from liquid fuels, such as gasoline and diesel fuel. For every 1 BTU of liquid fuel used to produce ethanol, there is a 6.34 BTU gain. - from The Energy Balance of Corn Ethanol: An Update, by Hosein Shapouri and James A. Duffield, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of Energy Policy and New Uses, and Michael Wang of the Center for Transportation Research, Energy Systems Division, Argonne National Laboratory. Agricultural Economic Report No. 813 http://www.ethanolrfa.org/pr020801b.html Full report (Acrobat file, 176 kb): http://www.usda.gov/oce/oepnu/aer-814.pdf Using the best farming and production methods, the amount of energy contained in a gallon of ethanol is more than twice the energy used to grow the corn and convert it to ethanol. - from How Much Energy Does It Take to Make a Gallon of Ethanol?, David Lorenz and David Morris of the Institute for Local-Self Reliance (ILSR) http://www.carbohydrateeconomy.org/ceic/library/admin/uploadedfiles/Ho w_Much_Energy_Does_it_Take_to_Make_a_Gallon_.html That's for corn, sugar crops are more efficient. Corn ethanol has a positive energy balance of 125%, compared to 85% for gasoline. Have a look at the Farm-scale ethanol fuel production plant message I posted earlier today. See also: Appendix B - Plant Equipment Cost Appendix C - Plant Operating Costs http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel_library/Butterfield/butterfield2.html 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. Don't forget ethanol from cellulose. http://journeytoforever.org/ethanol_link.html#cellulose Even apart from that I don't think there's much difference. I do think that the potential crops for both ethanol and biodiesel have hardly been explored yet. Production of both from the same crop is also hardly explored, which means most or all of the grains at least. NewCrop SearchEngine at the Center for New Crops Plant Products at Purdue University gives 79 results for ethanol. http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/SearchEngine.html Including trees. Coconuts will produce both oil and sugar, maples and others produce sugar, any orchard can produce loads of ethanol. 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. No difference. 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. No difference. 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. It varies so much from crop to crop, and from farm to farm and cropping pattern to cropping pattern, that you're left with industrial comparisons (eg, soy vs maize, rapeseed vs sugar beet) that tell you little or nothing of the true potential. Possible bi-products: The same as for previous point. Veg. oil do opens up for a larger number of replacement
Re: [biofuel] Bio fuel business-Tables
Hi Keith, Thank you for the help, it is very useful. At 07:36 PM 12/6/2002 +0900, you wrote: snip 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. The main by-product of each is stockfeed - DDG and seedcake, not much to choose between them. Ethanol's use as an oxygenate additive to gasoline is comparable to the use of B5 as a lubrication booster for ULSD. Lubricants made from vegoils are not for backyard operations - centralized. I think the major difference is perhaps the heating oil application, and power generation. snip 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. See above. See also Butterfield still references above. Plant Performance Data http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel_library/Butterfield/butterfield1.html#perf Any process that uses a change of state i.e. solid to liquid to gas, uses a lot of energy at boiling temperature. This even if you have a recuperating system. I also read the link, http://www.carbohydrateeconomy.org/ceic/library/admin/uploadedfiles/How_Much_Energy_Does_it_Take_to_Make_a_Gallon_.html carefully and it says about Btu per gallon, Corn based, Industry average : net energy gain = (energy ethanol) 81,400 + (energy undefined co-products) 27,579 - (used energy) 81,090 = 30,589 (38% gain) Corn based, Industry best : net energy gain = (energy ethanol) 81,400 + (energy undefined co-products) 36,261 - (used energy) 57,504 = 62,857 (109% gain) Corn based, State of the Art Industry : net energy gain = (energy ethanol) 81,400 + (energy undefined co-products) 36,261 - (used energy) 47,948 = 62,857 (151% gain) Cellulose based, Industry : net energy gain = (energy ethanol) 81,400 + (energy undefined co-products) 115,400 - (used energy) 76,093 = 122,407 (162% gain) What are the co-products? Do they go in the tank? How do you use Gluten meal, Protein feed and Carbon dioxide in the tank? Read for Biodiesel that for 1 unit energy used it goes 3.2 units in the tank. If you do not mind, I will keep my evaluation for this. Sugar ethanol production tends to use the bagasse as an energy source. I think there are many such possibilities. Also there's the relative value of using non-mobile fuel to produce mobile fuel, which puts a different sort of value on it. (Same with biodiesel perhaps.) Yes, bagasse can be used as heating source or as feedstock, this is the same as they do for fossil fuel. Since we have not done comparable evaluation for Biodiesel, the byproducts energy values are missing. I suspect that this and the less use of fertilizers, pesticides, irrigation, more manual labor etc. are the reasons why Ethanol from sugar cane are a definite positive energy producer in Brazil. 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. It's hardly explored - as I keep saying, what about the oil in the maize? And so on. See previous point. Cost to produce: See energy for production. See Butterfield refs. 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. I suppose that you agree 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. You don't use much water that way, though it does improve efficiency. You can use as little as 160-proof ethanol with the water in solution, which saves on energy in distillation and the need for the zeolyte step. Compare with the 20% alcohol you'll be using to make biodiesel (if you don't recover the excess). SVO doesn't require alcohol and isn't really comparable on this basis, but it's not a proven fuel either. See also injection here: Ron Novak's Do-It-Yourself Water Injection System http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel_library/ethanol_motherearth/me3.html Do not forget that I am talking about quantities of fuel here. All testimonies and technical adjustments point to more quantity use with replacement of gasoline with ethanol and unchanged quantities with replacements of diesel. All testimonies and technical adjustments point to more quantity use with replacement of gasoline
Re: [biofuel] Bio fuel business-Tables
Hi Hakan, The net energy in Cellulose based ethanol might be higher if the lingin is burned for processing. Since there is issues burning the Glyc from BD it wouldn't add to the BD net energy. The window of opportunity is really dependent on feedstock availability which really isn't decreasing. It might be that with WVO as the feedstock a baseline commodity pricing structure will occur, but again as Keith just posted again that the average collection of WVO runs around 10% there is a good lead in period before pricing structures begin (in general). With Ethanol, the perception barrier to opposition and acceptance is the utilization of Cellulostic feedstock vs. food crop feedstock. Not that in the real world this is an issue, just a hyped perception issue by the media. As we well know that most of the grains in this counrty go to animal feed anyway. But acceptance will be based on this false assumption. Looking at the table, you might want to put a catagory like Socitial Acceptance to define some possible inhibitors. James Slayden On Sat, 7 Dec 2002, Hakan Falk wrote: Hi Keith, Thank you for the help, it is very useful. At 07:36 PM 12/6/2002 +0900, you wrote: snip 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. The main by-product of each is stockfeed - DDG and seedcake, not much to choose between them. Ethanol's use as an oxygenate additive to gasoline is comparable to the use of B5 as a lubrication booster for ULSD. Lubricants made from vegoils are not for backyard operations - centralized. I think the major difference is perhaps the heating oil application, and power generation. snip 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. See above. See also Butterfield still references above. Plant Performance Data http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel_library/Butterfield/butterfield1.html#perf Any process that uses a change of state i.e. solid to liquid to gas, uses a lot of energy at boiling temperature. This even if you have a recuperating system. I also read the link, http://www.carbohydrateeconomy.org/ceic/library/admin/uploadedfiles/How_Much_En rgy_Does_it_Take_to_Make_a_Gallon_.html carefully and it says about Btu per gallon, Corn based, Industry average : net energy gain = (energy ethanol) 81,400 + (energy undefined co-products) 27,579 - (used energy) 81,090 = 30,589 (38% gain) Corn based, Industry best : net energy gain = (energy ethanol) 81,400 + (energy undefined co-products) 36,261 - (used energy) 57,504 = 62,857 (109% gain) Corn based, State of the Art Industry : net energy gain = (energy ethanol) 81,400 + (energy undefined co-products) 36,261 - (used energy) 47,948 = 62,857 (151% gain) Cellulose based, Industry : net energy gain = (energy ethanol) 81,400 + (energy undefined co-products) 115,400 - (used energy) 76,093 = 122,407 (162% gain) What are the co-products? Do they go in the tank? How do you use Gluten meal, Protein feed and Carbon dioxide in the tank? Read for Biodiesel that for 1 unit energy used it goes 3.2 units in the tank. If you do not mind, I will keep my evaluation for this. Sugar ethanol production tends to use the bagasse as an energy source. I think there are many such possibilities. Also there's the relative value of using non-mobile fuel to produce mobile fuel, which puts a different sort of value on it. (Same with biodiesel perhaps.) Yes, bagasse can be used as heating source or as feedstock, this is the same as they do for fossil fuel. Since we have not done comparable evaluation for Biodiesel, the byproducts energy values are missing. I suspect that this and the less use of fertilizers, pesticides, irrigation, more manual labor etc. are the reasons why Ethanol from sugar cane are a definite positive energy producer in Brazil. 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. It's hardly explored - as I keep saying, what about the oil in the maize? And so on. See previous point. Cost to produce: See energy for production. See Butterfield refs. 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
[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
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] 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
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,
