The things you’ll never see at the CBC;
Gevo, a prominent advanced-biofuels company that has received millions in U.S. government funding to develop fuels made from cellulosic sources such as grass and wood chips, is finding that it can’t use these materials if it hopes to survive. Instead, it’s going to use corn, a common source for conventional biofuels. What’s more, most of the product from its first facility will be used for chemicals rather than fuel.
Another White elephant in the making. Tax con gone wild.
But, but, Corn based ethanol is just temporary until we learn how to make cellulosic ethanol. (sarc)
The good news is that as of Jan 1, the tariff on imported ethanol is gone and the subsidy for domestic ethanol is gone too. (in the US)
Link to Ethanol Subsidy story (source-instapundit)
http://www.autoblog.com/2011/12/27/30-year-old-corn-ethanol-subsidy-nixed-by-washington/
Of course, using corn as a feedstock in manufacturing ethanol has already led to increased food prices world-wide, and was one of the underlying factors driving the “Arab Spring” uprisings that have displaced more-or-less secular (and at least partially pro-Western) dictatorships in North Africa, installing quasi-democratic Islamicist regimes in their place. Thanks a lot, Greens!
Somewhere, Dr. Fruit Fly is sad.
Very, very sad that all his efforts to gin-up the great con all proving to be futile.
Well what do you know, alternatives to gas and oil are expensive and alternatives to conventionally produced electricity are expensive and both without massive government subsidies will never survive, now there is a head slapper. Guess what if these things were economical and practical private business would have been doing both for years. The sad thing is the waste and cost of proving these things are wrong when someone could just tell the proponents they have their heads up their a$$es, but no we have to be politically correct and let the opportunists make their millions first.
What does any of this have to do with making diesel fuel from used fryer oil?
“”Suppose we’re in a world where we’re making huge quantities of fuels and displacing petroleum. We could come to the point where we’re running in a conflict of food versus fuel,” he says. “We should use only excess carbohydrates to make fuels.” Even so, eventually the company plans to use nonfood sources. “The feedstock in the U.S. right now is corn starch,” he says. “That’s the right feedstock for us. In the future it will be cellulosics.””
That is quite the supposition for an industry that is unable to be viable without massive government subsidies to compete with conventional fuel. Nonetheless, the conflict between food and fuel can be entirely avoided by simply stopping using food products for fuel.
The butanol part was interesting but I am skeptical that it is actually cheaper to produce it using their process than from petroleum. It wouldn’t be the first time a journalist accepted a statement from a green industry without follow-up questions or confirmation of accuracy.
Oh, Goody! Corn-sourced etahanol!
Now, I know that extensive studies have been done to show that fuel produced from corn-sourced ethanol is energy negative (takes more energy to produce it than it yields), but Ontario’s McGuinty government has obviously come up with a new hybrid that is economically viable.
Actually, it has more to do with growing conditions than genetic modification. Just cover it all with bullshit, make sure everything’s in the dark, and bring out some cheerleaders to chant ‘Amazing Maize’, and Presto… a viable, green economy!
I mean, what are all the other dummies doing wrong?
It would probaly be cheaper and more effective to use ground up liberals as a fuel source. But, unfortunately, it would somehow be against the law.
It’s all about closed minds and preconceived ideas, and an overriding attitude of “I know how I feel, don’t confuse me with facts”.
Science by it’s very nature is open minded; politics by it’s very nature is closed minded.
dont pay any attention to that Nicola Tesla over there
~illiterate who can’t find the shift key
And so your commie pals in China don’t pay any attention, regardless of the proven practicality of Tesla’s technology, eh?
Why is it do you suppose that the ChiComs are producing wind turbines and solar panels for the rest of the world, yet trying to corner the market on carbon based energy instead of carpeting their own nation with wind turbines and solar panels?
Because the ChiComs are practical people(within the limitations of their communist beliefs) and the alternative energy sources championed by the Warmists are impractical, that’s why.
Let’s stick to crude oil.
There’s hundreds of years of it left in the ground, and at $1.25 per litre it’s dirt cheap.
By then something sensible will come up.
If cellulosic biodiesel and all the other alternative energy sources are so promising and so valuable, why isn’t there an an abundance of private venture capital in the game already?
@North of 60
Surely you must still be stinging from the monstrous stomp you got on solar panels a week ago. You can hardly expect us to take you seriously when you don’t understand seventh grade math and science.
Point them at the sun, indeed! Glad you’re here to solve the world’s energy problems with the tap of a few keys.
..and personal attacks instead of factual rebuttal is all you’ve got here too? ROTFL
The economics of alternative energy is dependent on the belief that fossil fuels are bad and must be replaced at any cost. The arguments for this POV are justified by discredited peak oil/gas concerns to CO2 “pollution”. Anyone not afflicted with fossil fuel phobia can clearly see the renewable energy quest as charade that redistributes taxpayer money to well-connected political cronies and uses various government agencies to hobble competition.
Here is an article that exemplifies the cozy relationship between politicians, government agencies, business class environmentalists.
MF Global chief missing $1.2B is financial adviser to EPA
“It’s unclear how Mr. Abelow landed the chairmanship of the EPA financial panel, a position he noted in his biography on the MF Global website, which has since been removed.
He has ties to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson through former New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine. Each served at different times as the governor’s chief of staff. When Mr. Corzine lost his bid for re-election and later joined MF Global, Mr. Abelow followed.”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/dec/27/mf-global-chief-missing-12b-financial-adviser-epa/?page=1
No sane society burns food.
North of 60
‘..and personal attacks instead of factual rebuttal is all you’ve got here too? ROTFL”
an man an his opinion are one and the same
Confused voter:
Tesla’s AC grid wasn’t praised as the elixir of life for a few generations by the pathologically innumerate nor was Edison systematically demonized by the Church police for decades prior to that technological evolution. Tesla’s technology didn’t need the state to politicize and corrupt the process. Their respective technological merits could stand the test of cost-benefit analysis, something the Green Church Police of today won’t allow.
“The use of corn for fuels and chemicals is controversial, in part because growing and processing corn releases significant amounts of greenhouse gas, and in part because using corn for fuel may affect food markets.”
Methinks the a&^hole has got the “may” in the wrong spot. But then he’s a greenie,so the journos will never question his absurd statments.
Agreed jema54
Darn physics.
How come Coca-cola’s name is always attached or linked to the greenie articles? Time to finish up the christmas stock and to hell with them. They are one of the major enablers of this B.S.
We do a lot better job of producing small organic molecules from oil and natural gas than plants do via photosynthesis. Plants excel at producing complex organic molecules, eg essentially all of the worlds morphine and oxycodone comes from poppies (oxycodone via thebaine). Also, the world market in opiates is a few hundred tons/year, not the billions of tons of simple hydrocarbons that one needs to fuel a modern economy.
Until there are some major developments in really really cheap enzymes to convert cellulose to more useful chemicals, the primary use of cellulositic biofuels in energy production will remain unchanged. I currently burn large quantities of cellulose in my wood stove during the winter and can’t see any easy way to improve on this process that was perfected several millenia ago.
What Jema 54 said @ 7:31.
wuberman, we have not purchased any coke products since 2009 when we realized that they were a sponsor of the Copenhagen shakedown. We check all the drink products to see if they are a coke cola product.
..and personal attacks instead of factual rebuttal is all you’ve got here too?
Factual rebuttal is what got your head stomped last week.
Point the solar panels at the sun. LOL
Loser.
Point the solar panels at the sun
learn how to use Google, you might actually learn something,
yeah, even you.
tracking solar panel
And the Ontario Federation of Agriculture and the Christian Farmers were dancing in the streets over McDinky’s ‘initiatives’ to turn corn stalks and straw into ethanol.
‘Course, it’s gonna be economically viable here with Ol’ Dildo’s geniuses at the helm.
learn how to use Google, you might actually learn something
The issue at question, you MORON, was the effectiveness of solar panels at higher latitudes.
At higher latitudes, the angle of incidence of the sun is lower – the sun’s rays are more INDIRECT. This phenomenon, by the way, is why we get this thing called “WINTER” every year.
Effect of sun angle on climate
What that means, IDIOT, is that a given area of the Earth’s surface (say, an area covered by a solar panel) will receive LESS solar radiation at higher latitudes, particularly during Winter months.
Also during Winter, the tilt of the Earth’s axis means that solar panels will receive solar radiation for a shorter period of time. We call this period of time “DAY.”
So we’re not arguing about whether we should point solar panels at the sun, you NIMROD. That is something we always want to do. Many solar panels happen to be fixed on one side of a sloping roof and CANNOT be pointed at the sun. The mechanism for keeping solar panels pointed at the sun is an additional expense.
We were arguing about the ability of solar panels to collect sufficient energy to do the work that is required, and your retort about “pointing at the sun” was juvenile.
If there is any surplus of energy collected by solar panels in the summer, it cannot be stored for use in the winter.
That’s why I said you got your head stomped last week. You were railing on about other people not knowing what they were talking about, and you don’t understand the physical factors that cause “DAY” and “WINTER”.
Class dismissed, drooler.