Taxes and Bio-diesel...a thought

slowrev · Sep 29, 2005

Politically paid lobbyists (Biodieesel.org) are not always the best source of unbiased infomation regarding the product they have for sale......
//

Oh I fully agree and neither are oil comapany sources /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Ben

sneaky_pete · Sep 29, 2005

( Here's a link to the study that presents the other side of 'making biodiesel uses more energy than it supplies' controversy. Click Here. )

I tried to find the DOE/USDA study at the link provided on the bottom of that page, but failed, even using their search function. The document you posted Mike nitpicks the Pimental paper but does not give any alternative data to substantiate their position. Presumably, this is in the DOE/USDA study, but they didn't cite any hard data. They don't even give the title of the paper so you could search for it somewhere else. Not being critical of your post Mike, just wondering "where's the beef?" on the other side of this story.

sneaky_pete · Sep 29, 2005

( Politically paid lobbyists (Biodieesel.org) are not always the best source of unbiased infomation regarding the product they have for sale......
//

Oh I fully agree and neither are oil comapany sources /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Ben)

The "negative" research was done by Cornell University and University of California-Berkeley (hardly oil companies), and published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal.

However, in the interest of fairness, I found the following study about a new biologically-engineered bacterium that apparently makes Ethanol from waste biomass: University of Florida research

"Ingram's microorganism produces a high yield of ethanol from biomass such as sugar cane residues, rice hulls, forestry and wood wastes and other organic materials. Until we developed this new technology, the chemical makeup of biomass prevented it from being used to make ethanol economically," Ingram said. "Biomass is a much cheaper source of ethanol than traditional feedstocks such as corn and cane syrup.

"The new technology will allow ethanol to become economically competitive with fossil fuels for the first time,"

SkyPup · Sep 29, 2005

Geez, Lonnie and I have actually done some work on the recombinant E.coli he's using for the waste production of ethanol.... /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

http://news.ufl.edu/2005/05/03/ethanol/

The key componet here is waste biomass, not raw row crops!

fishman · Sep 29, 2005

( Unfortunately, turning sugar cane into ethanol uses more energy, and thus causes more greenhouse-gas emission, than making petrol from crude oil. )

While that may be true, it's not the same as the statement that "ethanol takes more energy to produce than it provides".

As for some of the other replies, I still don't see a real answer to the apparant disconnect between the concept that ethanol isn't a viable energy source and the fact that Brazil is almost energy independent due to widespread ethanol use. /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

SkyPup · Sep 29, 2005

It is not a fact that Brazil is energy independent on account of the biofermentation of sugars into ethanol. The fact is that it takes MORE energy to derive the ethanol from the sucrose derived from the sugar cane than what the ethanol itself contains, it is only a governement sponsored subsidy, as are all other crop to transportation fuel schemes.

The only productive use is waste biomass conversion to syn gas and ethanol, that is where energy is actually extracted from wastes.

fishman · Sep 29, 2005

Well, if it takes more energy to produce ethanol than what you obtain from it, then where is that energy coming from? The program stated that Brazil obtains something like 10-20% of it's energy from foreign oil. I understand that there may be subsidies, but again that doesn't explain where the extra energy is coming from to produce the ethanol.

Here are some links I checked out:
Brazilian Ethanol Program
This presentation states that oil prices above $40 U.S. for crude makes ethanol production economically feasible. It also claims that Brazil has saved 1.8 billion U.S.$ per year and about 200,000 barrels of oil per day over the past 22 years.

LA Times article
This article gives a glossy overview of the program but does have some tidbits of fact. The interesting thing to note is that the ethanol factories are actually producing more energy than they use in the manufacture of ethanol. The excess energy is transfered to the power grid in the form of 600 megawatts of electricity, but the article doesn't state whether it's per day or per year. Also, this doesn't take into account the energy to grow and harvest the sugar cane, but it's interesting none the less.

ethanol overview
This is an overview of ethanol, including production. Seems to be a fair and balanced presentation. It indicates that as ethanol production technology has improved, the energy balance has switched to the positive. It also points out some of the environmental consequences of producing so much sugarcane in Brazil.

comprehensive analysis
And last, but definitely not least, is this link. It may be biased, but it does have a lot of information. It does point out that the production of ethanol at the factories does not require any fossil fuels.

dixiedrifter · Oct 2, 2005

Well IMO, biodiesel will never be mainstream.

There is simply too much a demand for the raw unprocessed oil, and not enough acres.

Heck, good clean waste fryer oil is about worth more as animal feed than to make biodiesel out of.

Current prices are around 15 cents a pound for yellow grease... that is about a $1.34 per gallon... add on another $1 per gallon to manufacture and transport it and your up near where normal diesel costs.

Right now there is only one way to make biodiesel viable... and that is algae where a 1 acre pond can kick out 5000 gallons per year.

fastpat · Oct 2, 2005

( Here's a link to the study that presents the other side of 'making biodiesel uses more energy than it supplies' controversy. Click Here. )

What I've been able to glean from about 2 years of study is:

1. Biodiesel from fresh vegetable oil isn't cost effective now because there's only one channel for that oil to be shipped; the food quality channel. This means that all shipping tanks must be certified as clean enough for human consumption. This adds substantially to the cost. A non-food or fuel use only channel is needed.

2. Methyl alcohol is fine for diesel, but has toxic qualities that must be guarded against. Ethyl alcohol is better, but the federal and many state governments like to tax this potential fuel, and it's harder to use because it's hygroscopic at a much higher level than methyl alcohol.

3. Someone mentioned that used vegetable oil has an animal feed value of more than $1.00. If that is true, then the waste oil disposal companies need to be advised since they are throwing away millions of gallons of used oil yearly. The reality is, most people can get this resource for nothing, only having issues in parts of the country requiring "Rendering licenses", such as California. Despite the license issue, there's a very active homebrew biodiesel group in Northern California. The cost is roughly $1.50 per gallon of diesel made from used oil.

4. Straight vegetable oil can be used as well, but the double fuel system required makes this too much trouble for most folks, it would be easy for this type system to be used in boats and large trucks because the weight increase wouldn't be a handicap with those users.

And finally, this fuel source is in it's infancy, still, and if the cost for petroleum continues to climb, vegetable oil based fuel will become attractive. After all, Rudolf Diesel did not design the diesel to run on petroleum.

NOTE: I'm not mentioning global warming or greenhouse gases because there's no genuine science indicating that this should be a concern.

thatguy · Oct 2, 2005

I can only speak about Virginia, but any fuel that is used in a highway vehicle is suppose to have the tax on it.. That includes bio diesel, waste oil or any other product that hasnt had the road tax paid on it.... I dont have the code section right now, but it is in there..

I am pretty sure all other states have about the same language in their on their books about taxing it..