Hi MM I'm not entirely convinced either, but it's a good angle, maybe they'll buy it. Worth a try.
I've given some figures a couple of times on how much WVO is produced in the US. I've said "estimates", and they vary quite widely, from a low of 500 million gallons of WVO per year (but the same person later said 1 billion gallons) to a high of about 4 billion gallons. This guy said in 2000: "It is estimated that total raw material availability from these sources is around 2 billion pounds." http://www.usda.gov/agency/oce/waob/oc2000/speeches.htm speeches from ag outlook forum 2000 NEW MARKETS FOR BIO-BASED ENERGY AND INDUSTRIAL FEEDSTOCKS Bio-diesel - Will There Be Enough? John B. Campbell, Vice President, Agriculture Processors http://www.usda.gov/oce/waob/oc2000/speeches/campbell.txt Somewhat less than 2 billion gallons. How can these estimates be out by possibly as much as 100%? A bit telling. And he presumes it's all collected. Judging by what goes on in other industrialized nations, probably about 10% of it is collected. He also doesn't seem to have figured that there's no future in rendering it for livestock feed, the BSE debacle will put paid to that, as it's doing in other parts of the world and starting to do in the US too. Effective waste collection just doesn't happen unless it's fully localised, at point of use, and that's not the case with waste oils anywhere that I know of. In the US much of it ends up in sewers and landfills, and most biodieselers and the SVO folks find it's free for the taking. Biodieselers are a great way to localise the collection of waste oils effectively. I also saw this, but haven't managed to confirm it: "Every year, U.S. businesses throw away enough waste vegetable oil to replace 10% of the petroleum products consumed in the country." U.S. Petroleum Consumption - 19,649,000 Barrels / Day Dependence on Net Petroleum Imports - 54.3% Barrel: A unit of volume equal to 42 U.S. gallons. I guess anyone who takes up this issue should maybe try to find an "official" figure for WVO production in the US and its eventual fate. Another possible issue is ag surpluses, a different kind of "waste". Currently 2.1 billion - 2.5 billion pounds of surplus soy oil. In 2000 there was a surplus of about a billion bushels of corn, probably more than that now (cheap enough to burn in your stove). That's a LOT of oil being maintained at the taxpayer's expense, for what? 1 Bushel of corn = 3.6 gallons of fuel oil. A typical bushel of corn weighs 56 pounds. 1 bushel provides 2.5 gallons of ethanol fuel, 14.4 pounds of feed, 1.6 pounds of corn oil. (Of course it needn't take 3.6 gallons of fuel oil to produce 1 bushel of corn, nor any at all, but it does.) Funny, with all this crap put about by David Pimentel on the alleged energy inefficiency of ethanol from corn (NOT), I've never seen the corn oil brought into the picture. Different lobbies I suppose, ne'er the twain shall meet. Much agree with you that we've all got much more in common than not. I was going to mention hybrids, but Curtis did it already, very nicely - good point of contact between EVers and biodieselers. We used to have quite a lot of stuff about EVs here. I filed whatever EV news I came across, others did the same and discussed it. Then, awhile back, a very cranky EV guy made some preposterous claims and a row developed. Some of us had some doubts about promoting EVs in 3rd World countries, where there's no infrastructure for battery recycling, for instance. He went into furious denial about it. It emerged that, according to his own figures, between four million and seven million batteries a year get dumped, not recycled, in the US, where there's good infrastructure for recycling. But he insisted on calling this THE recycling success story. And so on, very tedious. When people here wouldn't accept that, he started putting it about that we're anti-EVs on this list. I got rather cross about that and said so - maybe we were anti-him, a different matter. But the damage seemed to be done, and there's not been much about EVs since. I'd be glad if that changed (hint hint), especially in the area of synergy between EVs and biofuels, but not only. Regards Keith >Dec. 5+6 California ZEV Sacramento ARB workshop > >http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/2003rule/1202wkshp.pdf > >Notice that attendance is possibly going to be significant enough that >they have requested that members of the public intending to comment at >the meeting should regist this through a form provided at the site. > >I suggest that if biowaste is used in the making of biofuel for a >vehicle (such as grease put into biodiesel) that one could argue, in >the ARB forum and others, that the vehicle is a net air-cleaner, since >it prevents the biowaste from braking down and becoming methane in a >landfill, which is what might normally happen. In that way of looking >at things, it has superior emissions even compared to a true >Zero-Emission Vehicle such as a RAV4 EV or a Hydrogen Fuel Cell >vehicle whose only emission might be water and a little bit of this or >that, but which do not have net-cleaning of the air (though they can >be true zero, if they are solar powered, which a half-dozen or so of >them are). > >I think this is a somewhat strained way of looking at things, because >if you were to get to the point where a significant percentage of >drivers were using biodiesel, then a lot of the fuel would start >coming from crops presently slated for other use, so that would not >largely qualify as using what is presently waste, but in the "early" >stage of use, I think you'd really be impacting in that area >in-need-of impact, namely the waste-to-fuel area. > >This could be an idea in need of some wider dissemination and public >debate. > >For example, we see school districts in California and Elsewhere >wringing their hands wondering how they can make their Diesel Busses >have less-polluting fumes, and we read articles touting not biodiesel, >but rather more complex or arguably less-good solutions as Natural Gas >or cleaner dino-diesel. Yet, biodiesel can work in present engines >with little or no modification, and it can be made partly from waste >thus killing two birds with one stone for districts in need of good >local waste-disposal strategies and jobs, and in need of a better way >to protect public health. > >I suggest to any biofuel advocate who might be proximitous enough to >consider attending and delivering a public comment: > >You would be having I think the opportunity to present ideas to Dr. >Lloyd who I think recently has emerged as not entirely antipathetical >to good diesel advocacy. Also, other board members and EV advocates >car industry lawyers or flacks might be present. > >EV people may present ideas contrary to diesel. The situation has >been held up to them, and to ARB, as "either-or" for conventional >hydrocarbon-ish fuels or Electicity, because the auto industry has >been *extremely* hostile to pure electric vehicles. I would like to >suggest that anyone preparing a speech not attempt to pick a fight >with EV people, even if tempted to do so. My reason is that a lot of >EV folks and perhaps some biofuel folks do not understand that in many >respects they should be on the same side, and the deck is >stacked-enough against them as it is. We should be working together. > >We both advocate what we believe to be a more sustainable way of >fueling things, and, in particular, we are the only people (perhaps >outside of H2 advocates) advocating fuels and car engines which are >not inherently directly fossil-fueled. The Oil Industry and Auto >Industry are formidable-enough opponents, that we should see if we >don't needlessly add others. > >Never mind the petty rejoinders (biofuels use fossil fuels in the farm >fields, EV's use valuable electricity sourced in a dirty fashion, blah >blah blah). Both sides should see that there is a commonality to the >objections we have to deal with on a daily basis. Those objections >sometimes have enough truth to them to satisfy the misinformed or >unintelligent, while enough untruth to damage a good cause. > >Anyway, I don't know whether or not presentation of biofuel ideas >would be welcomed at this meeting, since biofuel cars are not Zero >Emission Vehicles. This I think is the main reason that I have >suggested that anyone who does give consideration to presenting also >respect the fact that it's probably not precisely the right forum, or >at least you might be perceived as intruding even if in reality you >might have something intelligent to contribute. Perhaps it would be >best not to contribute, but maybe I just wrote all this out because it >occurred to me that it could be argued that in a way biofuels have >less-than-zero emissions, if they come from waste. On balance, I'm >not sure if I'd buy my own argument. > >Anyway, thanks for reading, and anyone planning to attend please post >your ideas. For example, if you call ARB and ask them whether it >would be ok to present for 10 minutes on biofuels, whether they say it >is not ZEV. Probably they would. Biofuels at Journey to Forever http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel at WebConX http://webconx.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech: http://archive.nnytech.net/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
