Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Biofuels bonanza facing 'crash'

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Biofuels bonanza facing 'crash'

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7096819.stm

    Comments?

  • #2
    Well...quite a lot of information, some probably ture, some may have input from outside forces. I agree with the notion that we shouldn't (read: can't) be taking rainforest for either the production of crops for food or crops for energy. I also see the argument for the peat swamps. However, I do disagree with the notion that we have to scrap bio-energy because it will result in world hunger. I strongly believe that we (the world) can produce enough food for everybody plus produce renewable energy. It's just a problem of getting food to the people who need it who are governed by money hungy & indecent people that seems to be the bigger problem to me.

    Comment


    • #3
      It is as Outback says "where are we going to get energy to produce food". These people talk about starving because we are going to produce energy with food. They never mention the fact that without energy we are going to starve anyway, plus we will be freezing while we do so.

      Comment


      • #4
        r3020: OBG is a friend of mine, but I have answered his question many times: "Where are we going to get the energy to produce the food." OBG correctly raises thought provoking questions. First, we need to drill ANWR and the OCS. Next, we need to URGENTLY expand nuclear power. It is a crime to burn natural gas to generate electricity. Natural gas is the most convenient feedstock to make NH3=anhydrous ammonia. Our coal reserves dwarf the Mideast crude oil reserves. Clean coal to gasoline and diesel solves a good chunk of our problems when combined with our own domestic crude oil production. Finally, in addition to the aforementioned, soydiesel can easily supply at least half of our ag diesel requirements. The big obstacle to all of this is CO2 and global warming and the radical environmentalists. Are we going to let this country recede into the dust bin of history while the Sierra Clubbers sip latte and view the Pacific Ocean to the EXCLUSION of common Americans??? Or, are we going to wake up and tell them to go play on the freeway??? Best.

        Comment


        • #5
          Excellent points 48. We are going to have to explore all types of alternatives. If we face a SEVERE energy shortage, the greens are going to lose a lot of steam.

          Comment


          • #6
            please excuse me for pasting--but it is information NOT being presented by anti "groups"--and individuals.

            The National Corn Growers Association is encouraged by last week's USDA crop production report illustrating that the United States will have enough corn to support the country's food supply, ethanol, and export uses.

            For the marketing year ending in August 2008, the corn supply is projected to reach nearly 14.5 billion bushels, while demand is expected to hit 12.6 billion bushels. USDA estimates the 2007 corn crop will reach 13.2 billion bushels, the largest crop in U.S. history and 25 percent larger than the 2006 crop.

            "The USDA World Supply and Demand (WASDE) figures unmistakably dispel the food versus fuel debate," said NCGA President Ron Litterer. "Clearly, the corn industry is poised to meet the demands for biofuels and will finish the marketing year with one of the highest levels of surplus in the last 20 years."

            "U.S. corn growers will continue to be reliable suppliers of both food and fuel," he added. "Farmers respond to signals from the marketplace. If the market calls for more corn, that's what farmers will grow."

            Litterer points out some common misperceptions about ethanol.

            "Ethanol production uses field corn, not sweet corn," he said. "I continue to be amazed by media reports that suggest ethanol is driving up the cost of sweet corn in grocery stores. The majority of feed corn is fed to livestock, not humans. Roughly 10 percent of field corn is processed directly into human food, like corn flakes."

            Data from the Economic Research Service -- part of USDA -- found that the Consumer Price Index for all food is forecast to increase 3.5 to 4.5 percent in 2007. ERS attributed this increase to retailers who pass on higher commodity and energy costs to consumers in the form of moderately higher retail prices. Moreover, the CPI for food increased 2.4 percent in 2006 and, over the past 10 years, has increased at an average annual rate of 2.5 percent (1997-2006).

            USDA Chief Economist Keith Collins issued a statement Oct. 18 before the House Agriculture Committee, highlighting this year's successes:

            "As we conclude 2007, the U.S. farm economy is coming off unprecedented increases in income and asset values the past few years. Prospects for expanding global food and fuel demand look bright. More-normal weather and farm production increases worldwide should lead to improved supply-demand balance."

            Comment


            • #7
              Excellent post dennis. 93 crude and higher transportation costs to get the food to the grocery store have a far higher impact on higher food prices than corn for ethanol. Keep up the good work.

              Comment


              • #8
                Yes- Just as all other sources of energy produce environmental/health risks or hazards at some locations at some times- so too does making bio fuels. Nothing new there. The world will have to deal with this through law(public protection of fragile resources), private investment (anybody want a peat bog swamp? so it can be protected?), etc.

                Every man I meet is my superior in some way, in that, I learn of him. F W Emerson
                “Democracy is the worst form of government, -------------------------------except for all the others.”

                ― Winston S. Churchill

                Comment


                • #9
                  <blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by 48</i>
                  <br />r3020: OBG is a friend of mine, but I have answered his question many times: "Where are we going to get the energy to produce the food." OBG correctly raises thought provoking questions. First, we need to drill ANWR and the OCS. Next, we need to URGENTLY expand nuclear power. It is a crime to burn natural gas to generate electricity. Natural gas is the most convenient feedstock to make NH3=anhydrous ammonia. Our coal reserves dwarf the Mideast crude oil reserves. Clean coal to gasoline and diesel solves a good chunk of our problems when combined with our own domestic crude oil production. Finally, in addition to the aforementioned, soydiesel can easily supply at least half of our ag diesel requirements. The big obstacle to all of this is CO2 and global warming and the radical environmentalists. Are we going to let this country recede into the dust bin of history while the Sierra Clubbers sip latte and view the Pacific Ocean to the EXCLUSION of common Americans??? Or, are we going to wake up and tell them to go play on the freeway??? Best.
                  <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

                  <font color="blue">48, it would be a huge stretch to use soyoil-based biodiesel to make half of US agricultural diesel usage. US diesel usage by agriculture is about 3,2 billion gallons. Half of that (1.6 bil. gallons) would require 12 billion pounds of soyoil. That is equal to 58.6% of total US soyoil production in 2006/07. That's 595% of expected U.S. soyoil ending stocks at the end of 2007/08. I am not saying it cannot be done, but it cannot be done without building a lot more soybean crushing capacity and exporting one hell of a lot of soymeal. And that will only occur if U.S. crushers are willing to outbid foreign buyers in China and elsewhere. There is a lot of enthusiasm in biofuels, but when reality becomes apparent most of the enthusiasm turns into baseless hype. </font id="blue">

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I'm not saying that 48's numbers are correct, but, IF our energy corporations were more PRO America and not as PRO PRICE then our whole situation would be much better..and Beaner I do respect your opinion..JMHO

                    In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock. Thomas Jefferson

                    Worry does not empty tomorrow of its sorrow. It empties today of its strength. Corrie Ten Boom

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I saw where PBS is going to run a story on Brazil ethanol, Not sure what day, I think Sunday or Monday. The tease makes it look like Brazil is totally energy independent. There ethanol is made from sugar cane and this stuff was not being hand picked, what I thought you had to do to make cane profitable for ethanol. Should be a interesting program.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Beaner: I agree with everything you said. OBG is a VERY good friend of mine, and I appreciate his thought provoking questions. I am just pointing out that in the event of a total OPEC embargo against the US as happened in 1973-74, we can easily source the fuel to grow our food. Also, with the $1.00 blending tax credit on soy diesel, even Big Oil is pursuing bio-diesel projects. Also, please read my comments to r3020. Best.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          r3020: Brazil IS energy independent and becoming more so everyday. Petrobras just discovered: "The Second-Largest Oil Field Discovered In The Past 20 Years" (S&A Oil Report). The name of the field is TUPI and is off shore. "A thick salt layer hid TUPI from previous exploration...One new technique is wide azimuth (WAZ) seismic. It involves multiple ships spread over large areas moving together in a carefully choreographed dance." This holds out immense promise for the OCS of the US, if we can get past the tree huggers and, indeed, the State of California itself!!! Best.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            r3020: Your comment about the green movement running out of steam prompts me to mention geothermal. In my past commentaries about making the US energy independent, I use to include it along with ALL ways to make us energy independent. The following is from Agora Press. I used to live in the Mojave Desert in California and am familiar with the location. The US Navy has a facility near Ridgecrest, CA called China Lake where they test aircraft as the Air Force does at Edwards Air Force Base. China Lake is a huge dry lake bed (just like Edwards). ALL of the electrical power there is generated by geothermal steam spinning turbines to generate electricity. No CO2. No nuke waste. And, it will last forever. The earth's core is molten iron. At $10 oil, it was not economically feasible. At $100 oil it is. High prices cure high prices. The US Navy has made $194 mil selling excess electricity back into the grid. Now private companies are going to bring this public. And, geothermal is scattered all over the West. Many Peak Oil people are pessimistic and see the end of the world coming. I'm a little more optimistic. Best.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              <blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by 48</i>
                              <br />r3020: Your comment about the green movement running out of steam prompts me to mention geothermal. In my past commentaries about making the US energy independent, I use to include it along with ALL ways to make us energy independent. The following is from Agora Press. I used to live in the Mojave Desert in California and am familiar with the location. The US Navy has a facility near Ridgecrest, CA called China Lake where they test aircraft as the Air Force does at Edwards Air Force Base. China Lake is a huge dry lake bed (just like Edwards). ALL of the electrical power there is generated by geothermal steam spinning turbines to generate electricity. No CO2. No nuke waste. And, it will last forever. The earth's core is molten iron. At $10 oil, it was not economically feasible. At $100 oil it is. High prices cure high prices. The US Navy has made $194 mil selling excess electricity back into the grid. Now private companies are going to bring this public. And, geothermal is scattered all over the West. Many Peak Oil people are pessimistic and see the end of the world coming. I'm a little more optimistic. Best.
                              <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
                              Good post 48. geothermal will make much more sense as energy price spiral up. How deep do you suppose they drilled to heat water for turbines? --- Oh by the way, you could have skipped the part about the DRY lake beds. That must mean climate shift cause by man combined with over consumption of water. He he.

                              Every man I meet is my superior in some way, in that, I learn of him. F W Emerson
                              “Democracy is the worst form of government, -------------------------------except for all the others.”

                              ― Winston S. Churchill

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X