This technology can be a game changer on a global scale. What do you folks think?
http://www.gizmag.com/audi-creates-e-diesel-from-co2/37130/
Thanks Jeff for moving this.
I'm going to move it to alternative methods board and ask people respect the rules of that board.
They aren't breaking any laws of physics because they are adding energy to the process. Effectively reversing the combustion process to get the CO2 and H20 back into hydrocarbons and oxygen. Basically the same way as a tree uses sunlight to turn the same chemicals into Cellulose, which can then used as a fuel.
Question is where you are going to get that energy from?
Hamsters in a wheel would proberly be the most ecnomical..
The costly input is electricity. Use nuclear generated electricity and it may be "sustainable?"
Why can't they use the CO2 for the big power plants? Let the companies that want to burn coal burn it, but require them to capture the CO2. Could be a win for both of them.
Bruce, they probably can and will, if it ever reaches that scale.
The possibility of this becoming a main stream fuel may very well cause the oil refiners to be a bit more realistic with the price of diesel. As long as there is a premium to pay for the blue fuel it will be at a disadvantage.
Back in the early 90's I was paying $.999/gal for highway diesel when gas was $1.399. Now gas locally is $3.729 and diesel is $4.259. If back then diesel was 76.9% of the price of gas, why is it now 114.2% of the price of gas?
We need some new competition in the fuels market. Yes, I realize it is better than last year at this time, but it is still too high.
Maple,
Back when I was working at the Defense Energy Support Center, we supply almost all of the diesel fuel to the military, I asked that same question. The people who purchase million gallons of fuel at a time told me the biggest reason for the big jump in fuel price was because of the 500 to 15 PPM mandate put out by the EPA. I was told it caused a $1.00 to $1.50 increase per gallon. Again, this is what I was told by the people who contract and purchase fuel by the millions and millions of gallons.
Bruce
Quote from: submarinesailor on May 31, 2015, 08:08:49 PM
Maple,
Back when I was working at the Defense Energy Support Center, we supply almost all of the diesel fuel to the military, I asked that same question. The people who purchase million gallons of fuel at a time told me the biggest reason for the big jump in fuel price was because of the 500 to 15 PPM mandate put out by the EPA. I was told it caused a $1.00 to $1.50 increase per gallon. Again, this is what I was told by the people who contract and purchase fuel by the millions and millions of gallons.
Brucer
That is correct Submarinesailor, the re-processing required to get low sulphur diesel is costly, the Federal mandates on a lot of things are the primary reason for cost increases on daily type commodities over the last umpteen years.
A company in california was making diesel out of algae. Murdock i will take the special sauce on my hamburger. :D
Here is an update on the algae for fuel status... consumes a lot of energy to just collect the algae, according to the article. Hopes but no success - yet.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/statoil/2015/02/27/is-algae-the-next-sustainable-biofuel/
Thanks for the info.
Here is some also good info i have seen for a while and downloaded these videos on U tube.
Nuclear Salt Reactor
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIDytUCRtTA
Top secret water
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJhogR7YLps
With time everything changes, as long as someone is thinking outside the box and looking for answers/solutions/options is the main thing. How profitable things are will determine if they last or not or if they were successful.
Rudolf Diesel developed and engine that would run on Vegetable Oil and would eliminate the need for petrol fuel. On his way to the United States to demonstrate his new engine he disappeared.
What would happen to anyone who could make a fuel cheaply enough to compete with Oil?
People make vegetable diesel everyday. Bio-diesel nothing much special about the engines. I've always thought it better to burn fossil fuel then your food.
Years ago a guy in England used to go around to restaurants and take away their used cooking oil (so they wouldn't have to pay to dispose of it). It turned out he was filtering it and using it for fuel. So no fossil fuels used and no food consumed ;D.
There was a post script to the story. The revenue people got wind of it and realized he wasn't paying any road tax on the fuel. But they couldn't figure out who he was and they couldn't find him. So the revenue cops parked outside a village where he was known to collect oil. They knew they'd found him when a car drove by smelling like french fries.
Yes, Brucer, I believe similar instances have occurred here in the US as well. One instance I heard or read about had a fellow who put a sticker on his car saying something like "this car runs on earth-friendly recycled vegetable oil" and the revenue cops caught him and fined him. Ticks me off. >:(
To be fair, tax is usually added to fuel to help maintain the roads. If you are running on an alternative fuel, then you get to use the roads for free. Here in NZ diesel isn't taxed (as much) at the pump, because a lot is used off road, or by heavy vehicles that are taxed on mileage. So if you run a car or light truck you have to pay "road used charges" based on the kms you drive. So if you drive with vege oil or something, you still need to pay the RUC.
Electric cars are going to be an issue if they become more popular. At the moment most places let them slip through the cracks, because they want to encourage their uptake. But if a significant number of vehicles were electric, not paying road taxes, then who's paying for the roads? There are already issues with cars becoming more economical, so less fuel is bought, and less tax collected.
Brucer, obviously most people do not eat used vegetable oil. Yet, the vegetable oil comes from plants such as soybeans and corn that people and other animals eat. I am sure there are exceptions, some oil producing plants may not be readily used for foodstuffs.
On the other hand, ethanol used in gasoline is a similar use of "food" for fuel. In my opinion and limited knowledge, fuel ethanol is much like a subsidy for corn farmers, albeit indirect. One good thing about ethanol production is that the byproduct can be fed to livestock as "distiller's grain." I don't know for certain but it seems like vegetable oil manufacture would result in a similar by product feedstuff for livestock.
fishpharmer explains my thoughts on the vegetable oil.
Its sorta like the people that think they are saving trees by planting fields of hemp for replacement fiber. That hemp field is the ultimate deforestation.
Bio diesel made from used vegetable oil does not increase fuel made from food one iota (unless you include the wvo not going into pet food as a flavor agent) or reduce the food supply. The seed stock is grown expressly for creating the cooking oil. It is then used for the intended purpose to cook food. Instead of the waste oil going to a an outfit that resells it to the pet food industry it gets used in place of fossil fuel. I believe more trees are cleared in the pursuit of fossil fuel than cleared to plant oil seed. Remember the fields growing rape, soy, sunflower, safflower and corn were cleared a long time ago.
Many states expressly exclude a certain amount of non fossil based fuels from taxation. In the USA there is still a need to pay the federal tax for fuels used on road.
Quote from: fishpharmer on December 12, 2015, 09:06:41 AM
On the other hand, ethanol used in gasoline is a similar use of "food" for fuel. In my opinion and limited knowledge, fuel ethanol is much like a subsidy for corn farmers, albeit indirect.
The same argument can be made by the original user for the alternative use for any raw material. Just because the original use was food should not disqualify any alternative use unless there is a shortage of food. Anyone not getting enough food?
Should the original user of timber, presumably logs or timber for home production protest the sawing of logs for structural components like studs because it is a subsidy for the timber producer because it may result in someone not having shelter? Or perhaps the original use was for firewood. The possibilities for protest are endless.
The scuttlebutt now that corn prices have fallen back to the $3 per bushel level, the talk is to kick the ethanol % from 10 up to 15 to increase ethanol production and also corn demand.. pushing corn prices back up (which is a temporary fix until supply and demand stabilizes again).
Interesting that the farmers planting and harvesting corn don't burn ethanol in their engines, but instead burn diesel.
With 10% ethanol, we get poorer fuel mileage by 10%. So the same gallons of gas are burned for the miles driven... with or without the added ethanol. No gas supply savings there.
Quote from: beenthere on December 12, 2015, 11:25:56 AM
The scuttlebutt now that corn prices have fallen back to the $3 per bushel level, the talk is to kick the ethanol % from 10 up to 15 to increase ethanol production and also corn demand.. pushing corn prices back up (which is a temporary fix until supply and demand stabilizes again).
Who is this "scuttlebutt" guy and just who is "pushing" and "kicking" the markets? Sounds a little fishy to me.
But go ahead and protest, you will regardless of what I say. It reminds me of what my father in law (yes, an old farmer) used to say. "You would protest if they hung you with a gold rope."
Gary
Farm Journal website... full of scuttlebutt. ;D
There's your problem Kent. You can get better farm market info by watching Market to Market on IPTV on Friday evening in the local markets. Don't know what time it would be on in Madtown. ;D
To be clear, I wasn't suggesting that we should produce vegetable oil to power vehicles. It makes a lot of sense to further process used vegetable oil to recover as much energy from it as possible.
On a small, low-tech scale you can easily filter the stuff yourself. A friend set up such a system in his 3 story barn/shed. He has a 5 gallon bucket on a table on the third story, with a spout and valve on the bottom of the bucket. A clear plastic line runs from their down to ground floor where he has a filter sitting on another table. The filtered oil drains into another 5 gallon bucket. For filters, he uses rolls of toilet paper with the cardboard core removed. When a filter starts to plug up, he uses the paper to light his woodstove :).
It takes a couple of days to filter a full bucket but you can speed up the process by using several filters in parallel.
Most European diesels can use filtered vegetable oil directly. Other brands may have to be modified first, so do your homework if you want to try this.
Quote from: Jeff on December 12, 2015, 09:10:56 AM
Its sorta like the people that think they are saving trees by planting fields of hemp for replacement fiber. That hemp field is the ultimate deforestation.
Well now I'm not so sure the hemp is to replace trees if you think about it . ;)
I've sat and listened to this argument many times, first a few things need to be kept in mind. When corn was started to be grown, there was only one need for it, feed livestock. Beans were grown for the oil in them, only later was it discovered the meal left over was high in protein and good for animal feed. Through science and experiment, there are now hundreds of products that come from the single corn and bean seed, once broken down, its no longer a single use product, but rather dozens of different things can be drawn from the SAME single seed, then split up even further down the road for more uses still.
Not to argue with Jeff on this one, since he can ban me, but today through science and those that think outside the box, there are hundreds of uses and needs for the same single seed of corn and bean and many at the same time, coupled with higher yields and acres that even a few years ago that couldn't sustain corn or beans, mainly due to area's too dry to support growing the crop in the first place, again due to science and efficiency now within the seed, again through science and experimentation. So to sum it all up, today verses even a few decades ago, there are many times over uses and needs for the corn and beans besides a fuel product, grown on many times more acres, not coming from timber production, but rather other crops and pasture that are not as efficient as corn and beans or needed as much as corn and beans. Not much corn is grown on side hills, swamps, marshes, mountain tops and valley's I've seen tree's grown on over the last 100 years plus. Yes there has been some coming from timber production, but at least in my area, I don't think you can call it timber production, but rather poorly managed neglected tracts that once used to be farm land, but became overgrown with garbage material, not timber, but due to technology and the ability for corn and beans to grown on marginal ground, the garbage is cleared off, AGAIN and is now growing crops, AGAIN.
To toss a little more fuel on the fire, we can discuss how efficiency in livestock production has lessened the amount of grain feed to livestock to get livestock to market weights and for milk production, wool which is going down in need every year and has for decades mainly due to synthetics, egg production and the list goes on in gains of efficiency from start to finish.
Then we can virtually eliminate the idea of subsidy to farmers, which isn't the case at all though the general public seems to think due to finger pointing and politics its geared that way. I've farmed for decades, I lived through the last crash of the 80's and remember well, corn going from 4 bucks a bushel in the early 80's to the low of under a buck a bushel for years in the mid 80's, all the while the ethanol mandate was there. So you can argue due to 7 or 8 dollar corn its due to ethanol and that drove up the price, lets think on that a second, the ethanol mandate has been there since the late 70's and nobody seems to remember the last time corn was under a buck a bushel, anyone care to shed light on this?? I'll help you out, the year was 2005 and corn at the end market I shipped to was 92 cents minus trucking of then 15 cents and ethanol was there the whole while helping subsidize the farmer to the ridiculous levels that all seem to remember of 8 bucks, none remember the reason it went that high at all, mainly due to demands for the product coming off a lean years of production, and none to be bought in large quantities, only a handful gained and sold at those levels, the other 99% had it marketed at a much lower price and had many less bushels to sell in the first place, you kind of need to put the price with the amount sold at those price levels, huge difference. Supply and demand drives the markets, not ethanol or farmers or anyone manipulating the markets in free trade area's, now in communist area's I can't say that's the case and since this a global forum, I'm in the USA.
As for grain based ethanol production being efficient, it isn't, cellulose based ethanol production is far more efficient and that comes from tree's and the biomass left behind after the grain is harvested on farms everywhere, the efficiency difference between the two methods is great, less than three to one with grain based technology compared to 13/15 to one with cellulose based technology for ethanol production, guess what's the next big thing to produce fuel?? How many eat corn stalks and bean stubble, or switchgrass?? Technology just needs to catch up, along with production costs to bring it to mainstream online production, hence the companies doing it, not the farmer, logger, rancher or whoever selling them the raw product. Despite what politicians may say to gain votes or competing companies may say to get more profit for THEIR product you do buy.
Then Randy, I won't say anything about the subsidy our WI farmers get from property tax assessment relief. $100 per acre for ag land, and $3000- $4000 per acre for productive, managed forest land.
Nor the fear among the conservationists when CRP (Conservation Reserve Program) land was converted back to corn and bean land when prices were high.
Nor my grandfathers' farm in Iowa that I remember in the early 50's walking (and squirrel hunting) through 100 acres of prime walnut and oak timber that since has been grubbed out and put into corn and beans.
There are many sides to this "happening".
This is only my opinion as I see it. Nothing against the opinion of others as they see it.
Beenthere, please explain the ag subsidy of 100 bucks an acre, the 3-4000k per acre for managed timbers, and how in my state of Iowa, how any farmer was allowed to grub 100 acres of land legally?? and without fines?? and if there were fines involved, how it's remained farm land?? I'd like some explanation of this.
As for the crp and that land going back into production, I'm not really sure I'd worry how they feel, on losing land they rented and didn't own being rented to anyone else for any reason, as for losing it to any higher paying renter, I think its called a free market system. The thing you need to remember how they got the land rented in the first place, and its not due to conservation, it had to do with the government paying the highest rent and nothing else, they outbid farmers. Not sure of your area, but it started at 80 bucks an acre in the 80's and now it over 220 an acre rent on crp and everyone is flocking to the office to sign their farm up, and the government is refusing to take it back, so it depends on who your listening to as far as crp is concerned. Toss into the mix, some farms being in for 20 to 30 years and getting kicked out of the program and required to go back into row crop production, guess the conservations are not in touch with all the farms that were enrolled in the crp.
We could also discuss just how many tax dollars have been spent on land that never should have been farmed in the first place, but again you'd have to look at the same office that's paying the rent checks to farmers, what they paid in the form of conservation practices subsidized by the government in hundreds of millions of dollars to put it into production in the first place, then millions again to take it back out, not sure anyone in those offices should be allowed to do much of any thinking when it comes to anything involving tax dollars, let alone spending them, but your right, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, I feel the crp is biggest waste of tax dollars ever conceived and largest failure ever set up, to give a direct subsidy to investors and non farmers ever devised, in the name of conservation.
Quote from: Randy88 on December 13, 2015, 12:58:47 PM
I feel the crp is biggest waste of tax dollars ever conceived and largest failure ever set up, to give a direct subsidy to investors and non farmers ever devised, in the name of conservation.
Most people not directly involved in farming seem to not be able to comprehend that very true fact. All farm programs that have ever been conceived were all carefully crafted to benefit the large agri businesses including the ethanol subsidity. The subsidity was a benefit to the ethanol producers and not directly the farmers. That was at least true until those ethanol plant builders blew the lid off of production capacity with too many plants and then left the agri finance lenders holding the papers on the excess capacity.
As far as beenthere is concerned, he forms his opinions based on scuttlebutt as he admitted earlier. ;D
Gary, like all government involved projects, what was set up originally as a good idea, was never managed by anyone with a half a brain cell in their head and the end result is usually a large debacle where some have figured out the scam to get the money and run on a large scale, hence the ethanol and crp programs both, you can toss in the welfare system on that one too, along with most other government handing out money programs, they are all based on good intentions and ideas blown out of proportion and never capped off.
Once mainstream technology catches up with science, grain based ethanol will be a thing of the past, then cellulose based ethanol will come into play on much larger scale than grain based ever was, and then hold onto your hat, you haven't seen anything yet as far as scale of operations and multimillion dollar setups going up to mass produce ethanol.
Its years off yet, but building strength in the mass production stage right now, the efficiency factor is so much larger, once the bugs get worked out, stand back and watch, it'll be impressive to someone.
All alternative energy needs to be looked at and considered, same goes for science and the medical field and many other entities, I'm a firm believer in science will find cures and solutions for many of the problems we have today, it always has and always will, and to an extent tax incentives and tax breaks need to be given to those doing the work to bring them online, there just needs to be cap on the help they receive after x number of years or once production reaches x amount.
As scary as it is to say, the government could do a very good thing by setting some guide lines for progress, but as we all know, that'll never happen, just follow the trail of money, it always leads the way to who's involved and who benefits.
Skuttlebutt, that's cute I like it, we have other terms we refer to those programs, papers and etc, too bad I can't print it, but you get the idea.