Re: More Infor on BioDiesel

In article <3Xupc.6751$gr.523470@attbi_s52>, L0nD0t.$t0we11
<"L0nD0t.$t0we11"@ComcastDot.Net> wrote:

> Roughly 5/13/04 23:32, Austin Shackles's monkeys randomly typed:
>
> > On or around Fri, 14 May 2004 02:42:56 GMT, Alan Connor <[email protected]>
> > enlightened us thusly:
> >
> >>But you are certainly right about "bio-diesel" not being a reasonable
> >>substitute
> >>for petroleum. It's a laughable idea: The fellow here who offered the idea
> >>is
> >>not real fond of arithmetic or careful research. He just skims a couple of
> >>web pages and goes off the deep end...
> >
> > in what way? are you saying it's not viable due to the number involved?
> > 'cos if so, I expect you're right. Technically, it can be done - you can
> > also do ethanol for spark-ignition engines.
>
> Which takes land, water, fertilizer, etc. Worst of the resources
> needed is the water.

I saw the table listing avocadoes as having the highest yield of oil
per acre.

As someone who has has 6 avocadoes (mostly young, planted within the
past several years...maturity takes 6-18 years, depending on variety,
other factors), I can assure everyone that gibberish about how
avocadoes can be used to more economically (than
gasoline/petrol/diesel) fuel vehicles has never priced an avocado in a
supermarket.

And, yes, I spent a fair amount of mine fertlizing them, watering them,
pruning them, and babying them. All so that I will have avocadoes to
eat, not avocado oil to somehow fuel a vehicle with.

And in the places where avocadoes grow best, land tends to be
expensive. An acre of land for avocadoes can never conceivably be paid
for with a mere 200 gallons of oil per year, even if the water and
fertilizer and prunng and harvesting were to be free. Do the math.


--Tim May

Tim May wrote:
>
>
> I saw the table listing avocadoes as having the highest yield of oil
> per acre.
>

The listing was just for their oil content not weather they were an
economical source of oil.

In all the post I have concentrated on Rape seed (a poisonous from of
canola oil) as the most economical to produce, in terms of water, land,
fertilization, pesticides etc.

If I remember correctly there were some higher yielding plants, (palm
oil was the highest if I remember right. Jojoba oil was up there too.
However that stuff is worth its weight in gold. Jojoba oil has all the
qualities of sperm whale oil (doesn't spoil or go rancid and doesn't gum
up under heat and pressure). Almost all of that stuff goes into
government contracts for the lubrication of precision ball bearings in
guidance systems. Some of it goes into the cosmetic industry.

The Independent


> As someone who has has 6 avocadoes (mostly young, planted within the
> past several years...maturity takes 6-18 years, depending on variety,
> other factors), I can assure everyone that gibberish about how
> avocadoes can be used to more economically (than
> gasoline/petrol/diesel) fuel vehicles has never priced an avocado in a
> supermarket.
>
> And, yes, I spent a fair amount of mine fertlizing them, watering them,
> pruning them, and babying them. All so that I will have avocadoes to
> eat, not avocado oil to somehow fuel a vehicle with.
>
> And in the places where avocadoes grow best, land tends to be
> expensive. An acre of land for avocadoes can never conceivably be paid
> for with a mere 200 gallons of oil per year, even if the water and
> fertilizer and prunng and harvesting were to be free. Do the math.
>
> --Tim May

On or around Sat, 15 May 2004 16:47:52 -0400, "Steve W." <[email protected]>
enlightened us thusly:

>>
>
>Show me all the large ships that burn Diesel fuel. Most are burning
>Bunker C oil, along with power plants and other large industrial
>burners. It is the leftovers after refining crude mixed with lighter oil
>just to make it flow some.


well, aye. probably I should have said "boats".

However, my point stands - refining crude is probably equally to make diesel
(and kerosene - all that AVTUR for the jest engines??) rather than all the
other oils being "byproducts" of the process of refining gasoline.

Commercial vehicles in most countries, buses in most countries, all run on
diesel.

I grant you that in the early days they may have been, however, I imagine
that in the very early days, oil refining was presumably about refining lamp
oil, it was only later that someone deiced to try and run engines on it.

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.fsnet.co.uk my opinions are just that
"If you cannot mould yourself as you would wish, how can you expect
other people to be entirely to your liking?"
Thomas À Kempis (1380 - 1471) Imitation of Christ, I.xvi.

> however, we *will* deplete the oil supply if we carry on as we are, so we
> need some sort of alternative. And the much in-vogue hydrogen is a long way
> from practical too.

Hydrogen is not an energy source.. It's an energy storage medium.
The only advantage to hydrogen is that it lets you combine your
energy generation plants to a few central places where it's easier
to blow them up... er... easier to control the polution, because it's
a point-source.

--Goedjn

Denis F <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Wed, 12 May 2004 13:09:24 +0100, in
> <[email protected]>, Steve
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Have we enough land ?
>
> unfortunately. I don't think so

However we could make a significant saving by using waste fats for fuel.
It doesn't need to be created by esterification either, that's just
stupid piddling about. Many diesel engines will run quite happily on
vegetable oil provided that the oil has been thinned with a small
proportion (about 5ml per litre) of kerosene.

What makes it uneconomic to do this in the UK is stupid government
policy which taxes vegetable oil used as fuel at the same level as
fossil fuel.

Vegetable oil can be obtained for about 24p/litre - around the same
price as central heating oil. Also it can be used twice, since your
engine really doesn't care if the oil has been used for frying first.
Hence there's less need to dedicate land to growing crops just for fuel.
And a 5% saving on fossil fuel use is worth making.

--
Having problems understanding usenet? Or do you simply need help but
are getting unhelpful answers? Subscribe to: uk.net.beginners for
friendly advice in a flame-free environment.

On or around Sat, 15 May 2004 15:17:11 -0300, Chris Phillipo
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>In article <[email protected]>, austin@ddol-
>las.fsnet.co.uk says...
>> On or around Fri, 14 May 2004 22:47:29 -0300, Chris Phillipo
>> <[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>>
>> >What idiot farmer is going to farm something that yeilds less than $90
>> >per acre.
>>
>> I venture to suggest that it'd yield more than that if it was used in the
>> production of vehicle fuel in a fossil-fuel-depleted world.
>>
>>
>
>It would yield less than that unless you are suggesting that the world
>will be willing to pay double the current price of gasoline for it.

some of us already do... :-(

however. if the oil supply does become limited, prices will go up.

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.fsnet.co.uk my opinions are just that
"My centre is giving way, my right is in retreat; situation excellent.
I shall attack. - Marshal Foch (1851 - 1929)

On or around Sat, 15 May 2004 06:40:27 -0700, The Independent
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>Actually that brings up an interesting question. How is the electricity
>made for the production of hydrogen. Seems to me that not only do you
>have to produce the hydrogen but you must have a way of collecting it
>and then storing it.
>
>The only thing I can think of is you need to have sufficient solar
>cell capacity to run electrolysis of water and a small electric driven
>compressor to compress the hydrogen into a tank of some sort.
>
>In any case while you think you are getting the energy from the hydrogen
>you are really using solar energy that has been stored for use later.

There was a website about it... ermmm...

"Energy demand growth is a global issue, but to get a feel for numbers,
let’s begin with the scale of energy use in the US alone. The US vehicle
fleet accumulated 2600 billion miles in 1997 [Ref 2]. Assuming success in
building a hydrogen-powered automobile fleet, we would need 0.013kg of
hydrogen for every mile driven to replace the gasoline and diesel fuel [Ref
3]. If we were to manufacture the hydrogen by electrolysis we would need 240
gigawatts of new electrical generating capacity. That is almost exactly one
half of the total electrical generating capacity of the US."

that's from

http://www.world-nuclear.org/sym/2002/walters.htm

which addresses the possibility of using nuclear power to electrolyze water.
It also includes comparisons with other generating techniques including
renewable sources such as biomass, solar and wind.

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.fsnet.co.uk my opinions are just that
Satisfying: Satisfy your inner child by eating ten tubes of Smarties
from the Little Book of Complete B***ocks by Alistair Beaton.

In article <1gdsfw0.h3p84wxhizeyN%%steve%@malloc.co.uk>, Steve Firth
<[email protected]> wrote:

> Denis F <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 12 May 2004 13:09:24 +0100, in
> > <[email protected]>, Steve
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > >Have we enough land ?
> >
> > unfortunately. I don't think so
>
> However we could make a significant saving by using waste fats for fuel.
> It doesn't need to be created by esterification either, that's just
> stupid piddling about. Many diesel engines will run quite happily on
> vegetable oil provided that the oil has been thinned with a small
> proportion (about 5ml per litre) of kerosene.

As with the earlier poster (maybe it was you, I can't easily check),
you just don't realize what a "piddling" (to use your own words) amount
of deep fryer fat and frying pan fat is available. Besides the issue
that most households use very little vegetable fat (that is
recoverable, as opposed to being eaten, thrown out with the dregs,
etc.), even restaurants and fast food places are using less today than
in earlier years.

A rough measure of this can be seen by noting the traffic of gas
tankers (a lot!) compared to the "waste vegetable oil tankers" (rare!).

If used vegetable oil totals up to even 2% of gas and diesel supplies,
I'll be very surprised.

In other words, inconsequential to even worry about.

Sure, a tiny percentage of people can figure out some source (probably
intermittent, requiring them to store on their sites) of used deep fat
fryer oil, and the local newspapers will run the usual bull****
articles like "Local man runs diesel tractor on restaurant grease!,"
but the impact is inconsequential.


--Tim May


>
> What makes it uneconomic to do this in the UK is stupid government
> policy which taxes vegetable oil used as fuel at the same level as
> fossil fuel.
>
> Vegetable oil can be obtained for about 24p/litre - around the same
> price as central heating oil. Also it can be used twice, since your
> engine really doesn't care if the oil has been used for frying first.
> Hence there's less need to dedicate land to growing crops just for fuel.
> And a 5% saving on fossil fuel use is worth making.

On or around Sat, 15 May 2004 20:26:43 GMT, "L0nD0t.$t0we11"
<"L0nD0t.$t0we11"@ComcastDot.Net> enlightened us thusly:

>Insufficient inbound solar radiation to perform this task. Worse
> would be the lack of real estate where solar collectors could be
> placed.

see my other post nearby for a link which says you'd need 3000 sq. miles of
solar collectors to supply current US vehicle fule requirements.

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.fsnet.co.uk my opinions are just that
"The breezy call of incense-breathing Morn, The swallow twittering
from the strawbuilt shed, The cock's shrill clarion, or the echoing
horn, No more shall rouse them from their lowly bed."
Thomas Gray, Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard.

On or around Sat, 15 May 2004 20:22:07 GMT, "L0nD0t.$t0we11"
<"L0nD0t.$t0we11"@ComcastDot.Net> enlightened us thusly:

>
> Except of course for that nasty little prerequisite of electricity.
> Or the water itself...

the water is reusable though, once the hydrogen has been used in the car it
goes back to being water.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.fsnet.co.uk my opinions are just that
"The breezy call of incense-breathing Morn, The swallow twittering
from the strawbuilt shed, The cock's shrill clarion, or the echoing
horn, No more shall rouse them from their lowly bed."
Thomas Gray, Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard.

On or around Sat, 15 May 2004 08:24:08 GMT, Gunner <[email protected]>
enlightened us thusly:

>On Sat, 15 May 2004 07:42:05 +0100, Austin Shackles
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>nothing, or rather, nothing unusual anyway. In the UK we have one of the
>>highest fuel tax rates in the world, and it shows no sign of restricting car
>>use as a result, which is one (minor) stated aim. Of course the major aim
>>is to raise lots of money so we can go and bomb Iraq.
>
>Actually its necessary to pay for the Socialist entity called the
>United Kingdom.

true, but the high taxes predate the current regime.

and they've spent several billion on the war in Iraq so far, buggrem.

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.fsnet.co.uk my opinions are just that
"The breezy call of incense-breathing Morn, The swallow twittering
from the strawbuilt shed, The cock's shrill clarion, or the echoing
horn, No more shall rouse them from their lowly bed."
Thomas Gray, Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard.

On or around Fri, 14 May 2004 13:10:29 -0400, default <[email protected]>
enlightened us thusly:

>> however, we *will* deplete the oil supply if we carry on as we are, so we
>> need some sort of alternative. And the much in-vogue hydrogen is a long way
>> from practical too.
>
>Hydrogen is not an energy source.. It's an energy storage medium.
>The only advantage to hydrogen is that it lets you combine your
>energy generation plants to a few central places where it's easier
>to blow them up... er... easier to control the polution, because it's
>a point-source.

so are all fuels. What really makes sense is a hydrogen fusion-powered
watre-cracker making hydrogen... but that's a way off, too. Most commercial
H at the moment comes from methane.

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.fsnet.co.uk my opinions are just that
"Nessun maggior dolore che ricordarsi del tempo felice nella miseria"
- Dante Alighieri (1265 - 1321) from Divina Commedia 'Inferno'

Austin Shackles wrote:

> see my other post nearby for a link which says you'd need 3000 sq. miles of
> solar collectors to supply current US vehicle fule requirements.

That wouldn't be a big chunk of New Mexico or Arizona - or Saudi Arabia
come to think of it. 55 miles x 55 miles. I have me doubts though.

Steve

Austin Shackles wrote:
>
> <snipped>
>
> However, my point stands - refining crude is probably equally to make diesel
> (and kerosene - all that AVTUR for the jest engines??) rather than all the
> other oils being "byproducts" of the process of refining gasoline.
>
> Commercial vehicles in most countries, buses in most countries, all run on
> diesel.
>
> I grant you that in the early days they may have been, however, I imagine
> that in the very early days, oil refining was presumably about refining lamp
> oil, it was only later that someone deiced to try and run engines on it.
>

John D Rockafeller became on of the wealthiest men in the world with his
Standard Oil Company selling coal oil. Before the big breakup of the
evil monopoly people were buying coal oil for 11-13 cents a gallon. For
the next decade after the break up people were buying coal oil for 17 to
20 cents a gallon.

The break of of Standard Oil Company cost the american consumer billions
of extra dollars

Gasoline did not become widely available until after World War I.
It wasn't until the early 1930's that farm equipment became gasoline
powered. Before the 1930's farm equipment motive force was a verity of
heavy oil engines. The switch to Diesel on the Farm began in the late
60's. It was the switch to Diesel on the farm is what forced the major
automobile manufactures to begin manufacturing light diesel trucks.

The Independent
> --
> Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.fsnet.co.uk my opinions are just that
> "If you cannot mould yourself as you would wish, how can you expect
> other people to be entirely to your liking?"
> Thomas À Kempis (1380 - 1471) Imitation of Christ, I.xvi.

Tim May <[email protected]> wrote:

> As with the earlier poster (maybe it was you, I can't easily check),
> you just don't realize what a "piddling" (to use your own words) amount
> of deep fryer fat and frying pan fat is available.

<yawn> Perhaps you could turn your brain on before typing?

--
Having problems understanding usenet? Or do you simply need help but
are getting unhelpful answers? Subscribe to: uk.net.beginners for
friendly advice in a flame-free environment.

That's it!

We should eat beans and capture it for our countries!

Splendid idea, instead of taking a bubble bath with my reserve of methane
from eating beans tonight. I shall go to the convenience store, get a bottle
of soda, and harness both the anal and upper G.I. methanes and ship it to
whomever it may help.

Refinish King


"Austin Shackles" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On or around Fri, 14 May 2004 13:10:29 -0400, default
<[email protected]>
> enlightened us thusly:
>
> >> however, we *will* deplete the oil supply if we carry on as we are, so
we
> >> need some sort of alternative. And the much in-vogue hydrogen is a
long way
> >> from practical too.
> >
> >Hydrogen is not an energy source.. It's an energy storage medium.
> >The only advantage to hydrogen is that it lets you combine your
> >energy generation plants to a few central places where it's easier
> >to blow them up... er... easier to control the polution, because it's
> >a point-source.
>
> so are all fuels. What really makes sense is a hydrogen fusion-powered
> watre-cracker making hydrogen... but that's a way off, too. Most
commercial
> H at the moment comes from methane.
>
> --
> Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.fsnet.co.uk my opinions are just that
> "Nessun maggior dolore che ricordarsi del tempo felice nella miseria"
> - Dante Alighieri (1265 - 1321) from Divina Commedia 'Inferno'

On or around Sun, 16 May 2004 12:31:59 +0100, Steve
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>Austin Shackles wrote:
>
>> see my other post nearby for a link which says you'd need 3000 sq. miles of
>> solar collectors to supply current US vehicle fule requirements.
>
>That wouldn't be a big chunk of New Mexico or Arizona - or Saudi Arabia
>come to think of it. 55 miles x 55 miles. I have me doubts though.

it's research form a supposedly reputable lot, although they're trying to
sell the unclear option, so the other figures might be augmented

the other point was that the 3000 sq mi of solar collectors was gonna cost
$4.8 trillion (albeit erroneous american trillions)
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.fsnet.co.uk my opinions are just that
"The boys are dreaming wicked or of the bucking ranches of the night and
the jollyrodgered sea." Dylan Thomas (1914 - 1953) Under milk wood

On Sat, 15 May 2004 23:31:18 -0700, The Independent wrote:

>If I remember correctly there were some higher yielding plants, (palm
>oil was the highest if I remember right. Jojoba oil was up there too.
>However that stuff is worth its weight in gold. Jojoba oil has all the
>qualities of sperm whale oil (doesn't spoil or go rancid and doesn't gum
>up under heat and pressure). Almost all of that stuff goes into
>government contracts for the lubrication of precision ball bearings in
>guidance systems. Some of it goes into the cosmetic industry.

interesting...

http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99993464

Austin Shackles <[email protected]> wrote:

> On or around Sat, 15 May 2004 20:22:07 GMT, "L0nD0t.$t0we11"
> <"L0nD0t.$t0we11"@ComcastDot.Net> enlightened us thusly:
>
> >
> > Except of course for that nasty little prerequisite of electricity.
> > Or the water itself...
>
> the water is reusable though, once the hydrogen has been used in the car it
> goes back to being water.

However none of the "we can make huydrogen by electrolysis" nuts ever
addresses the problems. The inefficiency and the potential for pollution
in the form of chlorine and hydroxide. Neither of them trivial
byproducts.

--
Having problems understanding usenet? Or do you simply need help but
are getting unhelpful answers? Subscribe to: uk.net.beginners for
friendly advice in a flame-free environment.

I made a bit mistake when I wrote a post about bio diesel. I said
that we could make 20,000,000 gallons of bio diesel with out a
substantial impact on our agriculture.

What I meant to say was that we could plant an additional 20,000,000
acres of rape seed with out substantial impact on our agriculture.

Now that I have done some additional research 20,000,000 acres would
probably cause some dislocation (higher prices) but the increase in the
price of crude to $41.18 a barrel will also cause even a larger market
dislocation in other agricultural goods.


An additional 20,000,000 dedicated to rape seed production and
an additional million acres of acres would be a much better solution.

If we increase our acreage of things that we go now and can use
the calce (solids left over for cattle feed or other uses), we
could increase the production of the following

Corn @ 18 gal per acre
Oats @ 23 gal per acre
cotton @ 35 gal per acre
hemp @ 39 gal per acre
soybean @ 48 gal per acre
Flax @ 51 gal per acre
Pumpkin Seed @ 57 gal per acre
Mustard Seed @ 61 gal per acre
Safflower @ 83 gal per acre
rice @ 88 gal per acre
sunflower @ 102 gal per acre
Peanuts @ 113 gal per acre
Rape seed @ 127 gal per acre
Olives @ 129 gal per acre
Caster beans @ 151 gal per acre
Jojoba seeds @ 202 gal per acre
Avocado @ 282 gal per acre

We could probably increase our production of vegetable
oils by 20 billion gallons

Also for those inclined to build there own still to make ethanol the
site

http://www.moonshine-still.com

has instructions to build two different type of still that can make
180 proof (95% pure) ethanol in one pass. The still can be build
for less than $100.00 with simple hand tools. It also has a lot of
information about government laws, and safety per cautions.

It also cover a lot about how to make sippin alcohol.

The nicest still is made from stainless steel beer kegs with the
upper reflex part made from copper plumbing tubing. When polished
they look really nice and they get about 2.5 to 3.0 gallons of alcohol
from a bushel of corn.

In any case, for the survivalist I urge you to go to

WWW.journeytoforever.com

for information on alternate fuel, solar power, small farms,
sustainable farming seeds, blacksmithing, water-powered water pumps,
small vermin traps, making hand tools, organic gardening, low-tech
radios, (sophisticated crystal radios that work), a 250 watt pico
turbine from producing electricity, (a mini pico turbine was built by a
bunch of 10 year olds that put out 1/3 watt of power,) and information
on just about anything you might be interested in. It is a site that is
primarily an index to link to other sites.

An very interesting subject topic is City Farms.

The Independent




Chris Phillipo wrote:
>
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] says...
> > On Thu, 13 May 2004 23:02:01 -0300, Chris Phillipo <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > In article <[email protected]>,
> > > [email protected] says...
> > >> Chris Phillipo wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > You are delusional if you think diesel is "made", all diesel besides the
> > >> > stuff a dozen or so people are pilfering from the back of McDonald's
> > >> > comes from the same place as gasoline.
> > >>
> > >> Diesel IS made ! It certainly ain't pulled from the ground and put in
> > >> your tank !
> > >>
> > >> The refining process for Diesel is cheaper than that for gasoline, and
> > >> it uses a rougher grade of crude oil, not a high aromatic stock like
> > >> Arabian Light. Hence its cheaper to make.
> > >>
> > >> Steve
> > >>
> > >
> > > It comes from oil, not flowers and puppy dog farts, it is not made. And
> > > it doens't matter how cheap it is to refine, I have news for you,
> > > gasoline costs about 15 cents a liter to refine including extraction and
> > > transport, does that seem to be helping you at the pump lately?
> >
> > The destructive/fractional distillation of crude oil, plus the usual
> > hydrogenation of the results (to increase the yields) is sufficiently complex
> > to be referred to as "making". You do not pluck the diesel out of the crude
> > oil with a spoon.
> >
>
> I don't consider it "making" simply because you make a cake, you don't
> extract a cake from a big tanker full of cake mix. Making implies you
> are getting something greater than the sum of it's parts. It's the
> opposite with refining. Diesel wouldn't even be a viable product if it
> wasn't for the fact that it's a byproduct of refining oil to get
> gasoline and kerosene. Imagine if oil was refined only to get diesel,
> more than half the energy and 80% of the dollar value would just go down
> the drain.
>
> > Far less complex processes are accurately referred to as "making".
> >
> > But you are certainly right about "bio-diesel" not being a reasonable substitute
> > for petroleum. It's a laughable idea: The fellow here who offered the idea is
> > not real fond of arithmetic or careful research. He just skims a couple of
> > web pages and goes off the deep end...
> >
> > The fact is, that there is NO substitute for petroleum, nor any combination
> > thereof: All will be significantly more expensive for the majority of the
> > people, and that affects the price of everything, of course.
> >
> > Fuel will be more expensive at the same time that more money is needed for
> > other things: And the middle-class shrinks.
> >
> > Our leaders are not idiots (well, not the ones that REALLY make the decisions)
> >
> >
> >
> > If this weren't true there wouldn't be the desperate violence being done to
>
> I think we all know that the only thing that will drive change is the
> dollar and we have a long time to wait before things get that bad. Back
> when we were going to run out of oil by 1989 people were talking just
> like this.
> --
> ____________________
> Remove "X" from email address to reply.