Keith, >Right Todd, more big-central stuff, with a cast of millions (of >dollars)
Being cynical is fine and quite often healthy. Being oblivious to what surrounds one is often to one's own and other's detriment. There are over 15,000 commercial boilers in the US. We're not speaking of just hot water to take showers, but multi-million btu boilers with thousands of tons of CO2 going out the stack and to no other use than more global warming. Now that's a jolly happy prospect, yes? (Not!!!) And that doesn't even touch the tip of the iceberg. The number fails to include industrial kilns, furnaces and ovens. Ever seen the enormous flares off a steel mill? More often than not, no co-gen. No nothing. Just waste. Do you think that maybe we should just let business be conducted as usual, or do you think that perhaps at least one responsible approach is to show the "greedy, capitalist pigs" that they can make a profit by doing something that reduces global warming? This isn't advocacy of consumption, not at present levels or increased. Nor is it an acceptance of the mis-programming that "stuff" is where the joy of life is to be found. It is, on the other hand, an acceptance of the fact that something has to be done to get these damn fools to stop their waste and the inevitable destruction, even if it means that some or many will try to greenwash the effort. If they can be induced by profit to make an environmental gain? Would you prefer that they do nothing instead? So just for grins and giggles, how about we divide 15,000 by, oh...., let's see..., maybe 50 states? That works out to be 300 bio-reactors/biodiesel plants per state, or approximately one plant every radius a skosh less than nine miles. (3,539,224 sq miles in the US.) Seems to me that were it a perfect world, that would come very close to being micro-regional. Unfortunately, commercial kilns, boilers, furnaces and ovens aren't necessarily spaced in such a fashion, but you surely get the gist of the matter. And it doesn't mean that micro-regional plants using WVO or SVO have to be abolished just because larger industry might take on a larger share of biodiesel production. It's a very large world and the primary focus/purpose is to prevent it from being destroyed, not necessarily to dry up the cash flow of the wealthy, albeit not an extremely unattractive notion. >no interest whatsoever for local projects, Please see above... >and, as yet, no >production Well? As of yet I'm not fifty. But short of calling the hand of a gun-toting card cheat in the middle of a poker match, it's more than a fair bet that I'll get there. We didn't use to have steel mills and coal-fired power plants either. Funny how things transpire, both good, bad and in between. They often need the permission of neither of us. >should we perhaps sell everything so we can invest in >the new fossil-fuel plants it will help to paint green too? Did I say "everything?" I thought not. Would you rather a barge load of green paint or the inevitable consequences of continuing global warming and in most probability global destruction, or at least the destruction of human un-civilization as we know it? Personally? I'd rather forestall the latter for as long as possible. Todd Swearingen Keith Addison wrote: >>Tom, >> >>Per horizontal acre, with the algae growing vertically. >> >>http://www.greencarcongress.com/2005/12/greenshift_lice.html >> >>Bookmark that page and think about buying stock in the manufacturers >>of the technology. That is if you have all your credit cards payed >>off first. >> >>Todd Swearingen >> >> > >Right Todd, more big-central stuff, with a cast of millions (of >dollars), no interest whatsoever for local projects, and, as yet, no >production - should we perhaps sell everything so we can invest in >the new fossil-fuel plants it will help to paint green too? > >Best > >Keith > > > > > >>Tom Irwin wrote: >> >> >> >>>Hi Todd and all, >>>Do you mean acre-foot of seawater? Do you have any idea how much >>>phosphorus would be required for growing this kind of mass even if >>>the algae can fix atmospheric nitrogen? Let me diplomatic and say >>>this seems to be an overestimation. >>>Tom >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> *From:* Keith Addison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> *To:* biofuel@sustainablelists.org >>> *Sent:* Tue, 01 Aug 2006 02:46:51 -0300 >>> *Subject:* Re: [Biofuel] Future car: What will you be driving? >>> >>> >And/or 100,000 gallons of oil per acre when growing algae. >>> > >>> >Todd Swearingen >>> >\ >>> >>> Um, where exactly are these acres of algae each producing 100,000 >>> gallons of oil? Anywhere here on Planet Earth in August 2006? >>> >>> :-) >>> >>> Keith >>> >>> >>> >Kirk McLoren wrote: >>> > >>> > > 1000 gallons methanol per acre with hemp if using pyrolytic >>> distillation. >>> > > >>> > > Kirk >>> > > >>> > > */Jason& Katie <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>/* >>> wrote: >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > WHAT!?!?!?!?!? >>> > > >>> > > > Could we replace all our oil with bio-fuels? Well... maybe. But >>> > > it would >>> > > > be an extraordinary effort. A fifty-fifty mix of bio-diesel and >>> > > ethanol >>> > > > would require putting three times the productive farm land in >>> > > >Iowa toward >>> > > > nothing but the production of fuel just to match what we >>> > > currently import. >>> > > > Make it five Iowas to solve the whole problem. Trouble is, that >>> > > much farm >>> > > > land is not readily available. There's also >the little nit of >>> > > figuring >>> > > > out what we eat while every scrap of land is busy working for >>> > > our gas >>> > > > tanks. >>> > > > Naturally, if we combine bio-fuels with the two hoped for goals >>> > > in regular >>> > > > cars -- more efficient engines and lighter weight vehicles -- we >>> > > can >>> > > > shrink the requisite greenspace. Brazil, which generates >>> > > >ethanol from >>> > > > sugar cane, has been systematically raising the amount of >>> > > ethanol in their >>> > > > fuel supply, and Brazilian manufacturers have been adding small >>> > > flex-fuel >>> > > > vehicles that can run on anything from E0 to >E100. Zap is >>> > > bringing at >>> > > > least one of these vehicles to US consumers next year. >>> > > >>> > > im all for the efficiency argument, but COME ON PEOPLE! doesnt >>> anyone >>> > > believe in using something OTHER than corn and soy? they are NOT >>> > > the best >>> > > feedstocks anyone could use for fuel! move to a better supply, not >>> > > a higher >>> > > yield. this is ridiculous! if the supply was a high density stock >>> > > the land >>> > > requirement would be porportionally lower. >>> > > >>> > > for diesel replacement assume we used castor in the USA: >>> > > -oil yield would be roughly 151 gallons per acre compared to 48 >>> > > gallons of soy oil. >>> > > -THEREFORE one acre of castor would eliminate the need for more >>> > > than 3 acres of soy. >>> > > which means those other 2 acres of new empty field could be >>> > > used for food or- OH NO! TREES! >>> > > >>> > > for gasoline replacement assume we use sugarbeets (not very good, >>> > > but more >>> > > climate friendly) in the USA: >>> > > -ethanol yield would be 412 gallons per acre compared to 214 >>> gallons >>> > > of corn ethanol >>> > > -THEREFORE one acre of sugarbeets would eliminate the need for >>> > > 1.9 acres of corn. >>> > > you see where im going with this? >>> > > >>> > > by selective breeding of some of the more tropical varieties of >>> > > high density >>> > > stock, we can slowly push the growing regions further north, >>> > > increasing the >>> > > supply density, and lowering the acreage needed to supply the same >>> > > amount. >>> > > WE DONT NEED CORN OR SOY FOR FUEL! i might be raving like an >>> > > idiot, but >>> > > noone can seem to understand that corn and soy are not the only >>> > > crops in the >>> > > world. >>> > > >>> > > Jason >>> > > ICQ#: 154998177 >>> > > MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >>> > > >_______________________________________________ >Biofuel mailing list >Biofuel@sustainablelists.org >http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org > >Biofuel at Journey to Forever: >http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html > >Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): >http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ > > > > > > _______________________________________________ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
