“… if BP can’t bring cellulosic ethanol to market, can anyone?”
11 Replies to “We Don’t Need No Stinking French Fry Grease”
“if BP can’t bring cellulosic ethanol to market, can anyone?”
Certainly,a properly …er…subsidized plant could do it with no problem.
The U.S. needs an Obama government to bring this to reality.
Lord this is discouraging,do the green fuel weenies have ANY ideas that work?
Typical leftard hopey-changey,pixie dust and unicorn fart reality.They think that by passing a law,or a regulation,even Mother Nature will obey,and reveal all kinds of new greenie technology to us.Oh well. Even if he loses Tuesday,the Zero still has a couple of months to blow a few trillion more on the green ponzi scam.God help us all.
1 US barrel = 42 US gallons… 6,000,000 gallons of ethanol / year…
So, 857,142.857 barrels a year / 365 days = 2,348.33659 barrels a day. Well let’s round up a bit to 2,350 barrels a day, and not figure in any down or maintenance time.
Just to put it in perspective against the typical oil refineries that produce 100,000 – 200,000 barrels / day.
I think it’d be helpful to use typical measurements instead of gallons per year, and not like my socialist family tells me, “billions of litres of water are being wasted in the tar sands” … when I ask them, “where is the tar?” they say they just call it that, it’s just a name.
When I ask to see their water bill, which I know is billed by the cubic metre in Regina, they have no idea why this is necessary for the conversation.
A few times, I’ve asked them to start measuring their inflated figures in cups, or perhaps “fluid ounces” for more impact.
Some day, I’m going to tell them how many haitians can be fed each year for the same $Billion we waste on the CBC nuance each year.
Two proteins shy of a dream…
Importation of ethanol into the USA from third world countries where
it can be most efficiently produced without any subsidies is banned.
Almost everything to do with biofuels in the US is a taxpayer ripoff.
Another thing green zombies never realized is that alcohol is to be taken internally in small pleasing recreational doses, not mass produced and guzzeled by Detroit and Tokyo clunkers. 😉
Ethanol isn’t made from French Fry Grease — DOH
Silly Biofools can’t get their facts straight.
Hmmm. Florida, using sugar-cane. A high-biomass-yielding plantation crop, flat terrain, dependable rainfall. Pretty much optimum conditions, with an 800-pound gorilla like BP doing the heavy lifting. If it doesn’t work in that scenario, it doesn’t work anywhere.
Sell.
As Occam noted, recreational use of ethanol is one of its primary valid uses. Other valid uses include using ethanol as a solvent and a chemical feedstock. Using ethanol as a fuel is way down the list of possible uses.
Yes, the stuff burns, but long chain hydrocarbons are a far more practical fuel. For one, they’re very hydrophobic which is something one wants given the effects of water in internal combustion engines. Energy density of ethanol is significantly less than that of gasoline.
Why someone would want to convert cellulose to ethanol is something I just can’t understand. Burning cellulose gives one a far greater fraction of its energy content in a useful form. That would mean going back to external combustion engines but redesigning the Stanley Steamer would likely be a far better use of research funds. The advantage of external combustion engines is that one can never run out of “gas”. As long as there are sources of dry cellulose around, one can refuel.
Likely one could combine pellet stove technology with more modern steam technology to create a much less offensive piece of retro technology (offensive pieces of retro technology are windmills). Such a vehicle could likely be produced far more cheaply than the electric vehicles which have gone nowhere and would be a better way for the US to achieve energy independence. Acceleration wouldn’t be great, but range would be essentially unlimited as long as one had cellulose and water. In southern central BC, one would just have to carry a chainsaw along and refuel at a stand of beetle killed pine.
Food for fuel is stupid, even the greentards now agree. So now its cellulose or some other product to the rescue.This is so stupid on so many different levels, that its impossible to comment on it.
Food for fuel is stupid…
Posted by: Peter at November 5, 2012 6:34 AM
No, no, no,
The Ontario Federation of Agriculture told me so.
“if BP can’t bring cellulosic ethanol to market, can anyone?”
Certainly,a properly …er…subsidized plant could do it with no problem.
The U.S. needs an Obama government to bring this to reality.
Lord this is discouraging,do the green fuel weenies have ANY ideas that work?
Typical leftard hopey-changey,pixie dust and unicorn fart reality.They think that by passing a law,or a regulation,even Mother Nature will obey,and reveal all kinds of new greenie technology to us.Oh well. Even if he loses Tuesday,the Zero still has a couple of months to blow a few trillion more on the green ponzi scam.God help us all.
1 US barrel = 42 US gallons… 6,000,000 gallons of ethanol / year…
So, 857,142.857 barrels a year / 365 days = 2,348.33659 barrels a day. Well let’s round up a bit to 2,350 barrels a day, and not figure in any down or maintenance time.
Just to put it in perspective against the typical oil refineries that produce 100,000 – 200,000 barrels / day.
I think it’d be helpful to use typical measurements instead of gallons per year, and not like my socialist family tells me, “billions of litres of water are being wasted in the tar sands” … when I ask them, “where is the tar?” they say they just call it that, it’s just a name.
When I ask to see their water bill, which I know is billed by the cubic metre in Regina, they have no idea why this is necessary for the conversation.
A few times, I’ve asked them to start measuring their inflated figures in cups, or perhaps “fluid ounces” for more impact.
Some day, I’m going to tell them how many haitians can be fed each year for the same $Billion we waste on the CBC nuance each year.
Two proteins shy of a dream…
Importation of ethanol into the USA from third world countries where
it can be most efficiently produced without any subsidies is banned.
Almost everything to do with biofuels in the US is a taxpayer ripoff.
Another thing green zombies never realized is that alcohol is to be taken internally in small pleasing recreational doses, not mass produced and guzzeled by Detroit and Tokyo clunkers. 😉
Ethanol isn’t made from French Fry Grease — DOH
Silly Biofools can’t get their facts straight.
Hmmm. Florida, using sugar-cane. A high-biomass-yielding plantation crop, flat terrain, dependable rainfall. Pretty much optimum conditions, with an 800-pound gorilla like BP doing the heavy lifting. If it doesn’t work in that scenario, it doesn’t work anywhere.
Sell.
As Occam noted, recreational use of ethanol is one of its primary valid uses. Other valid uses include using ethanol as a solvent and a chemical feedstock. Using ethanol as a fuel is way down the list of possible uses.
Yes, the stuff burns, but long chain hydrocarbons are a far more practical fuel. For one, they’re very hydrophobic which is something one wants given the effects of water in internal combustion engines. Energy density of ethanol is significantly less than that of gasoline.
Why someone would want to convert cellulose to ethanol is something I just can’t understand. Burning cellulose gives one a far greater fraction of its energy content in a useful form. That would mean going back to external combustion engines but redesigning the Stanley Steamer would likely be a far better use of research funds. The advantage of external combustion engines is that one can never run out of “gas”. As long as there are sources of dry cellulose around, one can refuel.
Likely one could combine pellet stove technology with more modern steam technology to create a much less offensive piece of retro technology (offensive pieces of retro technology are windmills). Such a vehicle could likely be produced far more cheaply than the electric vehicles which have gone nowhere and would be a better way for the US to achieve energy independence. Acceleration wouldn’t be great, but range would be essentially unlimited as long as one had cellulose and water. In southern central BC, one would just have to carry a chainsaw along and refuel at a stand of beetle killed pine.
Food for fuel is stupid, even the greentards now agree. So now its cellulose or some other product to the rescue.This is so stupid on so many different levels, that its impossible to comment on it.
Food for fuel is stupid…
Posted by: Peter at November 5, 2012 6:34 AM
No, no, no,
The Ontario Federation of Agriculture told me so.