You had to know this was coming, right:

http://www.alertnet.org/db/an_art/20316/2008/01/18-170525-1.htm

This horse is pretty much dead. No need to beat it (or eat it) anymore. Cellulosic ethanol from material ready for the Land Fill is all that's necessary and Costka has that covered. Although Exxon's profits are obscene, confiscating them would be moreso.
It'll be even less an issue when E-REV's appear in 2010.

This horse is pretty much dead. No need to beat it (or eat it) anymore. Cellulosic ethanol from material ready for the Land Fill is all that's necessary and Costka has that covered. Although Exxon's profits are obscene, confiscating them would be moreso.
It'll be even less an issue when E-REV's appear in 2010.

No, our current legislation encourages food production to be diverted towards fuel production. While "2nd Gen" ethanol sources have been identified, they are not the dominant source of ethanol.

Or we could just set and age limt of say 65. You get a new "Soylent" source of food, less demand for food, and social security is solvent again with surplus in the budget. All problems solved.

Or we could just set and age limt of say 65. You get a new "Soylent" source of food, less demand for food, and social security is solvent again with surplus in the budget. All problems solved.

I prefer the Logan's Run approach - if you are 25, you are past your prime, and can no longer be counted on to swallow indoctrination.

Hopefully peak food will result in peak obesity.

Biofuels seems like a repeat of the mistakes made by the world bank when it encouraged 3rd world nations to transform themselves from food crop producers to cash crop producers. Fuel this time instead of cotten.

With Monsanto and other agro science shops more focused on increasing their dollars per seed instead of food yeild per seed, we can't really afford to turn large sections of our food crops into fuel crops.

The only ways this will work is if we can turn a crop and a fuel from each field (IE the stocks get used to make fueld while the fruit ends up on the table) or we find fuel crops that can be grown in places that traditional food crops can't be grown. Of those two I think the first is a better option.

Ethanol is a joke and complete waste of resources. I read recently that if the USA converted all of it's crop land to growing corn for biofuel it would only meet 12% of our national fuel needs. I also read the sickening fact that the corn needed to produce enough ethanol to fill up one SUV gas tank would be enough calories to feed one person for almost an entire year.

All of this push towards biofuels etc is causing our food prices to rise and will contribute to world hunger. The only way I see biofuels being a legit source of engery is if they can get the biofuels from waste plant products that humans would have never consumed. If that can be done that would be great but I don't see that happening.

The future is electric and solar power. As solar cells become more efficient and cheaper to produce they should be required in every state that gets a lot of sun during the year. There are tons of land area in the USA that will never be inhabited and those areas should be blanketed with solar arrays and power plants. The other area of promise is battery technology. If our government would pour the billions of dollars it spends on worthless projects into battery technology we could be driving all electric cars with 300-500 mile range in the next 15 years. I am also a proponent of building some new nuclear power plants. We haven't built a new nuclear plant in over 20 years and the ones we do have work great and have been accident free.

I hope the Volt is a major success. I see it as the starting point on the road to ensuring our countries survival, both economically and strategically in the world. I'm tired of being forced to buy oil from countries who would nuke us if they had the technology. I'm also tired of our government's stupid decisions and slowness to act in ways that would immediately benefit all Americans. Increased battery and solar technology will force our government to make wise decisions that benefit our country and not just the few. No longer will other countries or even our own government be able to hold citizens hostage by controlling energy resources. Unless of course they find a way to charge us for sunshine:)


Biofuels seems like a repeat of the mistakes made by the world bank when it encouraged 3rd world nations to transform themselves from food crop producers to cash crop producers. Fuel this time instead of cotten.

With Monsanto and other agro science shops more focused on increasing their dollars per seed instead of food yeild per seed, we can't really afford to turn large sections of our food crops into fuel crops.

The only ways this will work is if we can turn a crop and a fuel from each field (IE the stocks get used to make fueld while the fruit ends up on the table) or we find fuel crops that can be grown in places that traditional food crops can't be grown. Of those two I think the first is a better option.

I'm with you on the EV and solar but not with the nuclear and your comment that ethanol is trash. For the best argument against nuclear I have ever heard please check out:

http://www.rmi.org/

It talks about how nuclear can never and will never be done by private companies and that the entire cost of the plant has to be subsidized. Not to mention the problems with the nuclear waste getting into the wrong hands. They talk about how alternative energy sources are not only cheaper, faster to set up, and are being funded by private sources but that they are growing at a much greater rate all over the world. Nuclear is basically dead in the US. Rest in peace. We have abundance of solar and wind, no need for nuclear. Base loading is not a problem as RMI will explain.

Please take another look at second generation biofuels. These are based based on algae or cellulose. There are several large projects on-going and we should know the results by next year. Algae still has great potential to be used in old vehicles, trains, ships, planes, etc. You can make diesel and even ethanol from it. Let's keep up the R&D. It is too soon to pull the plug on this. Agreed?

That algae was exactly what I had in mind when I mentioned growing fuel crops where we don't grow food crops now. I'll be interested to see if they can get that growing on scale where it can be effective.

The one place I see biofuels being a big hit might be airline fuel. I just don't see any sort of all electric plane coming down the pipeline anytime soon. Renewable fuels could be a good option for a limited in size market. (Yes I know a ton of fuel gets burned up in planes every year, but it's much less then in cars)

Corn is a food and fuel crop. They feed the dried distillers grain to the cows. They just had a pretty good show about corn on the History Channel; it's pretty amazing what they can make out of corn and how far its advanced. I don't think we should have a massive expansion of corn ethanol, but hopefully, with cars like the Volt, we wont need nearly as much fuel anyway.

As far as nuclear goes, I doubt its demise is imminent:

http://www.ne.doe.gov/publicInformation/nePIProgramFactSheets2.html

The one place I see biofuels being a big hit might be airline fuel. I just don't see any sort of all electric plane coming down the pipeline anytime soon. Renewable fuels could be a good option for a limited in size market. (Yes I know a ton of fuel gets burned up in planes every year, but it's much less then in cars)

Airplanes will use fuel cells for propellor driven craft (one prototype has already been flown around) and hydrogen jets for jet planes. I suppose bio jet fuel might have a run for awhile, but it still requires land use, pesticides, fertilizers, etc.

Airplanes will use fuel cells for propellor driven craft (one prototype has already been flown around) and hydrogen jets for jet planes. I suppose bio jet fuel might have a run for awhile, but it still requires land use, pesticides, fertilizers, etc.

I can't really see the airline industry going back to a propellor driven model. And I really can't see the millitary doing that. Some of the numbers on algae are really quite good and it can be grown in deserts and in saltwater. And, it has a much higher oil content then corn based crops.


Gallons of Oil per Acre per Year

Corn . . . . . . . 15

Soybeans . . . .48

Safflower. . . . . 83

Sunflower . . . 102

Rapeseed. . . 127

Oil Palm . . . . 635

Micro Algae . .1850 [based on actual biomass yields]

Micro Algae . .5000-15000 [theoretical laboratory yield]

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Biodiesel_from_Algae_Oil

I can't really see the airline industry going back to a propellor driven model. And I really can't see the millitary doing that. Some of the numbers on algae are really quite good and it can be grown in deserts and in saltwater. And, it has a much higher oil content then corn based crops.

Oh, the people flying Cessna's today will eventually be flying fuel cell props. Airlines will use hydrogen jets.

I do believe there will be a window of opportunity for high-speed mag-lev trains, especially if enclosed in air tight tubes that are partially or completely evacuated of air. It would take much less power to fire pods or trains of pods down that type of track at airplane speeds.

Oh, the people flying Cessna's today will eventually be flying fuel cell props. Airlines will use hydrogen jets.

I do believe there will be a window of opportunity for high-speed mag-lev trains, especially if enclosed in air tight tubes that are partially or completely evacuated of air. It would take much less power to fire pods or trains of pods down that type of track at airplane speeds.

Well, sure, but we can barely get new bridge contruction approved in the United States anymore. I just can't see anyone putting out the construction costs of a trans atlantic or trans continental airless tubes.

Well, sure, but we can barely get new bridge contruction approved in the United States anymore. I just can't see anyone putting out the construction costs of a trans atlantic or trans continental airless tubes.

LOL - I was thinking mag lev in tubes for domestic city to city travel - LA to San Fran, New York to Boston and DC, Miami to Orlando, Atlanta to Orlando, etc.