|
Train Reckoning
While the
current effort to find an alternative answer to our run away ‘pump pulmonary’ and
‘addiction’ to foreign oil is deserving of praise, is it a clear track
to salvation….or a
disaster in the making. Reports are starting to appear in the press and in
scientific proclamations
that, perhaps the ethanol and biodiesel craze might not be the answer.
News of
inadequate performance of the finished product, unforunately attacks on the engines
themselves, and worse yet, the devastating ripple effect on the food economy, gives
many, engineers, and politicos alike, pause in this headlong rush.
We at Energy Visions are striving not to be painted
with that same brush.
Ethicol & BioMess
Ethanol Fueling More Controversy Than Cars
It’s another one of those situations where you ask, “Whose side
are they on?”
Increased ethanol production will eat into the world’s food supply
and require more farmland to be used for growing corn to produce the alternative
fuel, warns a new study by a Washington DC-based think tank.
The study “Biofuels, Food, or Wildlife? The Massive Land Costs of
U.S. Ethanol” was released in September by the Competitive Enterprise
Institute, which describes its mission as “advancing the principles of free
enterprise and limited government”.
The Institute made news in May when it released a pair of TV ads
attacking Al Gore’s film “An Inconvenient Truth”, his epic on global warming.
The Institute, which argues that there are environmental, health
and economic benefits in the rising amounts of carbon dioxide, ended its ads with the
line, “They call it pollution;
we call it life.” According to sourcewatch.org, the Institute
receives funding from ExxonMobil Foundation and some conservation foundations.
The latest salvo in the ongoing battle between ethanol supporters
and critics, the new study puts forward ‘green’ arguments against developing
crop-based alternative fuels.
Asserting that there are ‘significant trade-offs’ in expanding the
production of corn and other crops for fuel, the study states that the main
trade-off “would be a shift of major amounts of the world’s food supply to
fuel use when significant elements of the human population remain ill-fed.”
To produce ‘economically significant amounts’ of ethanol, the
U.S. might have to clear an additional 50 million acres of forest, the study states.
In addition to using up cropland now enrolled in the Conservation Reserve and
resulting in a rise in soil erosion, “ethanol mandates may force the local loss
of many wildlife species, and perhaps trigger some special extinction,” the study asserts.
The full study is available at cei.org.
— Jack Bess


KDV; No food
was harmed in the making of this oil...


Ethanol Companies as Alternative Energy Sources.
The present heavy use of ethanol is a mixed blessing although I am
always just a little suspicious when I see huge government subsidies and mandatory
regulations necessary for a fuel to compete with ordinary gasoline. The farm states love
ethanol.
Another major problem with the ethanol
producers in the immediate future is the price of corn from which most ethanol
is produced. The price has just gone over $4 per bushel, double its’ previous
worth, and is rising. Breakeven point for most ethanol producers is a corn
price of $4.50 to $5.00, so a further rise in corn prices is going to greatly
affect the ethanol market, and the overall economy as well.
Biodiesel
Out With the Bathwater
Biodiesel production facilities operate at below
capacity most times due to enormous quantities of water called for. Regrettably,
it becomes contaminated during production. Copious flows of water are required to
wash the biodiesel. Caustic catalyst was found to contaminate the runoff,
necessitating a three times wash of the each batch of biodiesel before all traces of the catalyst and methanol
have been removed. Methanol is nasty stuff to incorporate in any operation because of its’
inherient health risks.
For this reason local water utility companies
are reluctant to provide plants with the commodity they need as the end product
comes out loaded with the resultant spoils. Huge ‘evaporation’ ponds receive &
ferment the water; at this point unsuitable even for irrigation.
The other downside is the glycerol, an
increasing ‘unforeseen consequence’ biodiesel firms are coming to face. This by-product,
is possibly a major market for the KDV as we can dispose of it with a 20% yield; but
then again maybe not, as the glycerol is also tainted with toxins. Sanitizing
the glycerol requires excessive costs - so it too becomes waste even we can’t use.
Bio-fuels could be a misnomer in terms of
finding/formulating a ‘genuine’, bio,eco and/or environment-friendly fuel - it’s
a misnomer indeed to come-up with an alternative energy that the same would contain
inorganic petrol-base (methanol & ethanol) and acidic/toxic Sodium/Potassium
Hydroxide Catalytic Reactants, that could lead to corrosion and damage on
engine parts.
Bio-diesel is just for mixture at 5%-20% to petrol-diesel, If it goes beyond 10-percent or 20-percent use, it will not be good for the vehicle.
"We cannot use100 percent (B-100) of coco fuel in the engine”, according to Under Secretary Eduardo Mañalac, former Under Secretary of the Department of Energy, regarding Baguio testing use of fuel Ecology.
Bio-ethanol is just a
mixture of 10% ethanol & 90% petro-gasoline. It would not be good also
for the engine if the mixture would go beyond 35% because it will eat-up the
rubber & plastic parts of the engine, and thus increase the engine
temperature
Biodiesel
Drawbacks 
Biodiesel can cause problems.
Incredibly, this register of problems do not befall
the distinct KDV parameters.
For example:
Gelling Temperature: mineral Biodiesel gels at a higher
temperature {32 degrees}than standard #2 diesel {at -15 degrees}.
This isn’t a problem with biodiesel/petro-diesel blends of 20% or less (B20 -
B2) but it makes the use of B-100 unworkable in a commercial vehicle. This dents the
expectations many in the country who saw the rush into Biodiesel production
as the ‘save-all’ solution to America’s ‘oil addiction’.
Lower BTU Rating: …A study done by the University of
North Dakota indicated that, while there are significant fluctuations, #2
diesel contains about 140,000 BTUs per gallon while B-100 contains
about 130,000 BTUs. (B-20 contains 138,000 BTUs.)
KDV contains upwards of 140,000.
Higher Nitrogen Oxide Emissions: Since biodiesel contains no nitrogen, the increase in NOx emissions is probably due to the higher cetane rating and the high oxygen content of biodiesel. These two qualities are thought to cause the nitrogen contained in the air to be converted into NOx during combustion
Higher Solvent Properties: Because biodiesel acts as a
solvent it’s likely, when used in an engine that ran previously on
petro-diesel, that any sediment in the fuel system might be washed into the
engine’s filters and fuel injectors. Rubber gaskets and hoses will also
degrade at a higher rate.
This means that filters will need to be changed within 1000
miles of changing to a biodiesel blend and the hoses and gaskets will
eventually need to be changed to something that doesn’t react to biodiesel;
like Fluorinated Viton.
Methanol is intoxicating but not directly
poisonous. It is toxic by its breakdown (toxication) by the enzyme alcohol
dehydrogenase in the liver by forming formic acid and formaldehyde, which
cause blindness by destruction of the optic nerve.
Methanol ingestion can also be fatal due to its CNS
depressant properties in the same manner as ethanol poisoning. It enters the
body by ingestion, inhalation, or absorption through the skin. Fetal tissue
will not tolerate methanol.
If methanol has been ingested, a doctor should be contacted
immediately. Duh…
Since January 1, 2004, California’s gasoline has been
blended with ethanol instead of MTBE (methyl-tertiary butyl ether) as an
oxygenate to help the gas burn more cleanly. During the summer of 2006, other
states are also changing to MTBE-free gasoline because of the problems that
additive has caused in water supplies. As the rest of the country makes
this transition from MTBE for the first time, competition for valuable
gasoline blend stocks could raise the cost of making gasoline in California
and the rest of the country.
The debate over the energy balance of biodiesel is ongoing.
Transitioning fully to biofuels could require immense tracts of soy-and,
especially severe for nations with large economies, since energy consumption
scales with economic output. If using only traditional vegetation, most such
nations do not have sufficient arable land to produce biofuel for their
vehicles.
Nations with smaller economies (hence less energy consumption) and
more arable land may be in better situations, although many regions cannot
afford to divert land away from food production. For third world
countries, biodiesel sources that use marginal land could make more sense, e.g.
honge oil nuts grown along roads or jatropha grown along rail lines
Locations where oil-producing plants grow are of increasing
concern to environmentalists, one of the prime worries being that countries
will clear cut large areas of tropical forest in order to grow such lucrative
crops, in particular, oil palm.
This has already occurred in the Philippines and Indonesia. Both
countries plan to increase their biodiesel production levels significantly,
which will lead to the deforestation of tens of millions of acres if
these plans materialize.
Loss of habitat on such a scale could endanger numerous species of
plants and animals.
A particular concern which has received considerable attention is
the threat to the already-shrinking populations of orangutans on the Indonesian
islands of Borneo and Sumatra, which face possible extinction.
 |
Speculation runs among the science/academia population
that the major oil companies are getting involved with the
alternative ‘fuels rushing in’ trend until it hits the crash.
Then they can hang their hat on the environmental support
image, at the same time silencing for good, the debate on
alternative attempts to curb imported crude oil.
A tropical forest that has stood for thousands of years –
now stands in the way of a plantation of palm trees.
Our rain forest provide the planet with it’s oxygen. |
The underside of the environment coin is, that where $$$ is involved, some men have no conscience
[Ethanol and Biodiesel] [Downsides] [Animal Residue Specifications] [Gas Prices]
[Cultural Clash] [Differences]
go back to Scientific Facts
|