Showing posts with label Flex-Fuel Vehicles. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Flex-Fuel Vehicles. Show all posts

Thursday, March 11, 2010

The Silver Bullet to our Petroleum Crisis

I was reading a column by David Harris of the AJC the other day.  While I praise the AJC for making energy a high priority, I find them too embracing of liberal orthodoxy.  Like so many people, they've been distracted by all the talk of "greenhouse gases".  So when David Harris made the comment: "There is no silver bullet", I had to disagree.  There IS a "silver bullet".  It is the Open Fuels Standard Act of 2009.

Dr. Robert Zubrin has laid this policy out in a book called "Energy Victory".  I highly recommend you read it.  However, if you can't read it, please take the time to watch these 4 videos of his Energy Victory presentation. 

These videos can be found at the following address:

http://vimeo.com/tag:zubrin

Here's part 1 of 4


Dr. Robert Zubrin Energy Victory 1 of 4 from EcoBabble on Vimeo.

Friday, December 19, 2008

Grain isn't a limited resource

Grain isn't a limited resource. We can grow tons more. Right now, the government pays farmers NOT to plant crops. But wait! There's more!
Most corn grown in America is feed grain for cattle. In the ethanol distilling process, only the starch is used. All the protein fiber and oil is left over for use as cattle feed.
But wait! There's more! There's no need to limit ethanol production to corn. There are other sources of ethanol including sugar cane (Brazil is running their cars on sugar-cane based ethanol) and other sugar-bearing crops. Plus, there's cellulosic ethanol, the next coming technology.
But wait! There's more! There's no need to limit our automotive fuels to ethanol. We can run our cars on METHANOL which can be made from darn near anything including coal, waste wood, waste paper, and even garbage.
Diesel powered vehicles can be run from dimethyl ether, another alcohol derivative.
In the third world where economies are agrarian in nature, growing plants for automotive fuel holds the potential for economic growth that these countries so desperately need. Why let the poor countries get raped by OPEC when we can have THEM make our automotive fuels.
Yet if you read my post, you'll note that we don't have to do anything to MAKE ethanol. We merely have to make our vehicles CAPABLE of running on alcohol fuels. By doing that, we can place a cap on the price of petroleum that will limit OPEC's ability to control prices.
We can't lose if we have motor vehicles capable of running on biofuels. The possibilities are endless. We can even derive bio-fuels from algae fed from CO2 emissions from power plants that we are currently throwing away. Even the tree-huggers will like that one!

Flex Fuel Vehicle Mandate is a MUST

With petroleum and gasoline prices falling, there is still plenty of room for ethanol in America's future for transportation fuels. Naturally, ethanol is losing its competitive edge as the price of petroleum falls with the world economy slipping into a major recession.

But all is not lost. You see, NOW is the time to bring about a federal mandate for flex fuel vehicles.

We don't need to make any more ethanol (especially corn-based ethanol) than we are not to finally put a cap on the price of petroleum. A mandate that all cars sold in America be flex fueled (Any mix of gasoline, ethanol and/or methanol) would forever place a ceiling on how much OPEC can charge for petroleum.

Right now, the equivalent price of a gallon of gasoline in the form of ethanol is about $2.25/gallon. That was VERY competitive with last Summer's gasoline prices that exceeded $4.00/gallon. However today, this is not competitive with gasoline selling for well under $2.00/gallon.

However, if every car sold in America could run on any combination of gasoline, ethanol and/or methanol, the prices of these alternative fuels made-in-America will forever be a cap on the price of gasoline and petroleum.

That is why it is imperative that the United States pass a flex fuel vehicle mandate as soon as possible.

Saturday, August 16, 2008

Another busy week for America and Ethanol

For starters, it was really nice to see Texas Gov. Rick Perry suffer defeat by the EPA recently. Gov. Perry, claiming to represent poultry farmers in Texas (as if the as if petroleum companies aren't encouraging him) led a charge to roll back ethanol production mandates. I have written before about the myth that ethanol is blamed for tight food supplies.

Now, FAITH BREMNER of http://www.tennessean.com/ writes a fine article in the link below:

http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080816/NEWS08/808160338/1025/NEWS01


WASHINGTON — Ethanol producers will use about a quarter of the U.S. corn crop this year, an amount that alarms ranchers and poultry producers who depend on corn to feed their animals. As the demand for corn and energy costs climb, so do prices at the grocery store.

But the ethanol industry's impact on the nation's supply of corn for feed isn't as dramatic as it may seem.

One-third of all the corn used to make ethanol ends up as an ingredient in feed that farmers in the upper Midwest — where most of the ethanol plants are located — give their cattle, poultry and pigs.

This year, farmers will feed 18 million metric tons of this ethanol byproduct, called distillers grains, to their animals, up from 2.3 million tons nine years ago. Last year they used 14.6 million tons. About 1 million tons will be exported to places such as Canada, Mexico, Taiwan and Japan.

The article goes on to say that distillers grains aren't easy to come by where there are no distilleries, so Texas chicken farmers are probably experiencing difficulty. Given that Texas is enjoying the fruits of soaring petroleum prices, I think the state can manage for a while. Funny how Gov. Rich Perry doesn't complain to the EPA about soaring petroleum prices. And let's face it! The EPA's mission on earth is not to regulate the price of chicken feed (or the price of tea in China for that matter).

Maybe Texas needs some distilleries producing distillers grain. Maybe Texas petroleum companies need to share some of their record profits subsidizing the state's embattled poultry farmers. I think Texas can solve this problem quite handily without any help from the EPA, the Federal Government, and the rest of the country. All they have to do is get with the program.

In other wonderful news...

Going to Google News and entering "Ethanol" for a search yields fresh news every day about new plants coming on line. Ethanol plants go up FAST. It takes 2 years from start to finish to put an ethanol plant on line.

There are a lot of new cellulosic ethanol plants coming on line too. Each one has rather unique technology; some which may turn out to be more efficient than others. The soaring price of petroleum is fueling a surging technological race to replace it with alcohol fuels.

FYI, the EPA mandate for corn ethanol has already been met (or will be so by the time you read this). The race is on for more cellulosic ethanol production which is the other half of the EPA ethanol mandate. Ooops! Gov. Perry didn't mention that when he whined about the price of chicken feed.

I'll tell you a little secret: Texas has some of the best darn energy engineers found on the planet. They can probably put up distilleries faster than the rest of us. All Texas has to do to fix their little chicken farmers' problem is get with the program.

In yet additional good news...

Yahoo AP reports:

Oil touches 3-month low on stronger US dollar

NEW YORK (AP) -- Oil fell to its lowest price in three months Friday, briefly touching the $111 level after the dollar muscled higher and OPEC predicted the world's thirst for fuel next year will fall to its lowest point since 2002.

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080815/oil_prices.html?.v=21

Gee! Maybe some of these spot market speculators are figuring out that we have a very nice future with automotive fuels that will compete quite nicely with petroleum sold at ridiculous speculative prices. Maybe OPEC is starting to realize that the party is over. I wouldn't go dancing in the streets just yet. Alcohol fuels start losing their competitive edge at around $50/barrel; still a VERY healthy price for petroleum.

Nobody is going to starve because we put alcohol fuels in our cars. In fact, we'll all have more jobs making fuels here in the United States that bring a good buck to American workers.

Eventually, our idiot politicians are going to get bowled over by economics performing a work of nature that cannot be stopped. It would be nice if they act smart and pass the Open Fuels Standard Act of 2008 and make every car sold in America capable of running on any blend of gasoline or alcohol. Then we'll have even more domestic alcohol plants, more jobs, the price of petroleum will be forced down, the dollar will regain its glory and we'll all live happily ever after.

Have a nice day,

There is NO Santa Claus

Saturday, July 12, 2008

The Strategic Path To Victory In The War On Terror

Remember folks! You heard it here first.

THE STRATEGIC PATH TO VICTORY IN THE WAR ON TERROR IS THE ELIMINATION OF PETROLEUM AS THE PRIME MOVER OF OUR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM.

There! Read that. Remember where you read it and quote your source often.

I had the opportunity to meet Dr. Robert Zubrin recently at the 2008 AIPAC policy conference. We hit it off right on the spot. I merely told him what I wrote above in bold letters. Dr. Zubrin commented that he ALMOST agreed. He repeated what I said and added one word. In Dr. Zubrin's opinion: "The strategic path to victory in the war on terror is the elimination of petroleum as the ONLY prime mover of our transportation system."

I'll let you decide whether that's "splitting hairs". I like his attitude. Besides! He's done a TON more research into this than I have. I've been merely following ethanol vehicle fuels because I grew up in Illinois farm country. I've long been convinced that America could produce enough ethanol to power our motor vehicle fleet; the largest in the world. Dr. Zubrin has written a book that all but proves it out.

The book is ENERGY VICTORY and it is presented at:

http://www.energyvictory.net/

Of particular importance, PLEASE review the on-line slide show highlighting his thesis.

http://www.energyvictory.net/energy_victory_Presentation.htm

In short, Dr. Zubrin's thesis is that we could create competition in the motor vehicle fuel business by mandating that all cars sold in the US be flex fuel.

I concur with Dr. Zubrin. Giving American automobile fuel consumers CHOICE will cause competition that will break OPEC's absolute control over motor vehicle fuel supply. Make OPEC nations work for a living, competing against the rest of the world which can grow something that can be made into ethanol. This competition will cause a significant shrinkage in the capacity of the money pipeline to international terrorism.

We're not limited to corn. We're not even limited to ethanol as methanol is even cheaper to make. Methanol is still used in American open wheel auto racing.

I don't care how you add it up! Petroleum selling over $100/barrel makes ethanol competitive. Whether you use corn, sugar cane, coal, wood, or something we're currently throwing away, you can make alcahol fuels out of it.

There is even great potential for biodiesel. CO2 from power plants can be pumped into ponds growing oil-rich species of algea. The oil can be extracted and used for diesel fuel. There is a paper from the University of New Hampshire on the web that is somewhat dated, but interesting reading.

http://www.unh.edu/p2/biodiesel/article_alge.html

Now I know a lot of you are hearing all this talk about how ethanol is robbing the food supply. This is ridiculous, but apparently not obvious to all.

Let me assure you, there is compelling evidence to lead any rational person to know that ethanol is not robbing the food supply. Rather, it is increasing the food supply. Grocery prices have risen because trucking prices have risen due to high petroleum prices and more specifically, diesel fuel prices.

Nonetheless, this is explained by Dr. Zubrin and any number of other people as well as the USDA.

Dr. Zubrin writes:

Here are the facts. In the last five years, despite the nearly threefold growth of the corn ethanol industry—actually, because of it—the amount of corn grown in the United States has vastly increased. The U.S. corn crop grew by 45 percent, the production of distillers grain (a high-value animal feed made from the protein saved from the corn used for ethanol) quadrupled, and the net U.S. corn production of food for humans and feed for animals increased 34 percent.

Contrary to claims that farmers have cut other crops to grow more corn, U.S. soybean plantings this year are expected to be up 18 percent and wheat plantings up 6 percent. U.S. farm exports are up 23 percent over last year. America is clearly doing its share in feeding the world.

http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/in-defense-of-biofuels

So much for the food dis-information campaign. There is also another insidious myth floating around about ethanol. This myth says that it takes more energy to produce ethanol than the energy contained in the fuel. Even if this were the case, ethanol would still be a viable motor vehicle fuel for several reasons. It's not just a matter of whether we gain or lose energy. It's a matter of whether we can put it in our gas tanks and run our cars. The real fact is that modern farming and distilling methods have clearly made ethanol a net energy gain

This is best articulated by the American Coalition for Ethanol:

What does "net energy balance" mean?

What is ethanol's energy balance? Net energy balance is a term used to describe how much energy is needed to produce a product versus how much energy that product provides. Two professors that are long-time critics of ethanol claim that ethanol has a negative energy balance, but this is simply not true and has been debunked again and again by science. Scientific study after study has proven ethanol's energy balance to be positive. The latest USDA figures show that ethanol made from the drymill process provides at least 77% more energy as a fuel than the process it takes to make it. The bottom line is that it takes about 35,000 BTUs (British Thermal Units) of energy to create a gallon of ethanol, and that gallon of ethanol contains at least 77,000 BTUs of energy. The net energy balance of ethanol is simply a non-issue.

http://ethanol.org/index.php?id=81&parentid=25#MISCONCEPTIONS

The raw price of ethanol is currently less than petroleum. It's just a matter of automakers adding an average of $100 to the cost of a vehicle to make it flex fuel. The economics will take care of themselves. In a few years, we would have millions of flex fuel vehicles on the road and fueling stations would have to carry ethanol/methanol/E85 because their raw cost is way lower than the present market price for petroleum products.

This is such a no-brainer! Brazil has already done it! We need not feel like we're driving in the dark without our lights on. Besides, if Brazil can do it, certainly the United States of America, land of the free - home of the brave, can do it.

The American motor vehicle consumer deserves CHOICE in motor vehicle fuels. The small scale of ethanol production in the U.S. over the past 3 years has proven itself. Depending on market conditions, ethanol may or may not be competitive. With flex-fuel vehicles that will not be a problem. We will always be able to choose the cheapest fuel.

Thus, whether or not ethanol completely replaces gasoline or not, the fuel supply for America's motor vehicle fleet can be secured with ethanol and other alcahol fuels. Once OPEC no longer controls the cost of our transportation, the money pipeline to terrorism shrinks significantly.

*UPDATE*  (10/28/12)

I have added the web site Open Fuel Standard to the "My Blog List".  The blog is "... the central action hub for all things concerning the vitally important legislation, The Open Fuel Standard Act.
 I encourage my readers to follow this blog. - TINSC

 
 

Thursday, February 22, 2007

Welcome

Thursday, November 02, 2006

Welcome

Welcome to There is NO Santa Claus' blog. You can call me TINSC for short. There are several reasons I have adopted this nickname, but I'm just getting the blog started. There will be plenty of time to fill you in on the details.

posted by There is NO Santa Claus at 7:52 PM 0 comments