Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

permaculture - Re: [permaculture] Re: Bio diesel (Not Bio gas)

permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: permaculture

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Mark <mpludwig@facstaff.wisc.edu>
  • To: permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [permaculture] Re: Bio diesel (Not Bio gas)
  • Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002 10:15:15 -0600

At 04:02 PM 3/6/02 -0800, you wrote:
I don't consider myself an expert on this by any means, but I have a few
questions about plant based substitutes for petroluem based fuels. I call
them questions, rather than criticisms, because I am open to information
that helps me see through what otherwise seems problematic to me now. I'd
love to find out that there are good alternatives, so please feel free to
fill me in if I'm missing something.

Shooting from the hip here....

I see the advantage of a fuel that can be grown annually rather than pumped
from the ground and created on the scale of millions of years. But this is
not the only goal of a sustainable fuel source.

Is there a qualitative difference in the exhaust between diesel and
biodiesel? Will this still cause polution and global climate change? I
would guess both burn hydrocarbons and therefore are much the same. Any
chemists out there?

Yes, much lower on sulphur and particulates. Also destroys most types of rubber hoses, check your fuel system before trying the stuff. Has CO2 but it's not liberating CO2 stored in oil reserves, it's cycling rather than adding more.

By the time you subtract the fuel it takes to grow the plant matter and to
produce the fuel, is there any left over for other uses?

Not entirely sure, but keep a few things in mind; You are left with 45% protein soy meal after extracting the oil, a common feed for animals. Most soy in the US is roundup ready GMO that has an awfully low number of trips for planting and harvest. Though there are clearly downside to GMOs this particular crop is a net fuel saver over older methods.

It seems most
suppliers of any quantity may use petroleum based fuels to grow/produce the
fuel, and therefore this could be a very inefficient way to feel good about
one's own vehicle when in fact there is no real gain. It's kind of like
running an electric car on electricity made from inefficiently burning
coal; you may think you car is running clean, but you may in fact be
causing more problems than you are solving.

Needs to be kept in mind. Ethanol has similar issues, but the byproduct there is also a good feed and I understand it's a net + in energy production.

If we find an easy, cheap and clean substitute to oil/gasoline, what
incentive will there be to move away from an auto based society? There are
many other problems with auto lifestyles than just the polution, climate
change, and military infrastructure to protect oil interests and profits.
Do we really want to make it easy for people to each have their own car?
And what about the other 5 billion people that will want their cars?

People like cars, they are really handy machines. Realistically we need to look at lowering the impact of auto ownership while pursuing rebuilding rail and other mass transit systems.

While biodiesel may be an interesting transitional phase, I don't see it as
a long term solution to most of the problems we have now with cars and oil.
The only advantage I can see is that it can be produced locally and on a
dramatically shorter time frame. I come from a sustainability framework
and want to avoid solutions that cause a half a dozen other problems. It
seems that we need solutions that solve several problems at once, stacking
functions.

Eric Storm

Ideally that's true, but we need to take the incremental improvents too; these are not mutually exclusive.


Mark P. Ludwig
Poultry Research Lab
University of Wisconsin -Madison
608-262-1730 WK
608-846-7125 HM





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page