New Years Day, a time to look Forward, Back and at Biofuels

[400lbsonacubseatspring]

400 Cub If you get up their to take pictures could you please take one of the birch on the coal piles I would love to see that.

I am what I call 80% person. I get the first 80% of a project done and can never seem to finish it. I also have a hard time getting started so once I do I don't stop for anything untill I run out of supplies or am too tired to stand up. Its with the knolage of my strenghts and weakness as a person that I decide to go with SVO. I need somthing I can set up once and then do large batchs of fuel at one time. I want to do about 2000 gal at a time. And doing that once at harvest time appeals to me. Bio d on the other hand with the washing, bubling, settling and testing for free fatty acids. The time of the multple prosses and the time involved with starting stoping waiting then repeat. Works aginst the type of person I am.

Billy

Billy,

I know what you're talking about. With me, sometimes I'll work at something until I get it working, and then all the interest goes out of it for me, and I never come back to it again. It was that way with jewelry casting. I made one rather mediocre ring, after investing about $3000 in equipment and books, and having convinced myself that it was something I now understood, and "could" do, I have been buying my settings ever since. My mother wears the ring, and I have a few burn scars to show for it, and that's about it, but at least I understand the process now.

[400lbsonacubseatspring]

Bio diesel is something I would like to try, but the startup is expensive, especially for what I actually use. I reun jet fuel in the 880 and backhoe which is sumped from the planes at work. If biodiesel is available locally, I would purchase that and just run the jet fuel in the heating oil tank. I like the idea of paying our farmaers to produce fuel. ethanol or biodiesel. since the subsidies are going by the wayside as a result of the WTO and other America hating groups (while the other countries still subsidize their businnesses) I would gladly burn all domestically produced fuels (given the option), especially bio-fuels.

Carm,

So far, biodiesel works pretty well in most oil burners with no modifications. There isn't a lot of information on the subject, since we only seem to heat with oil here in the maritime states, and most of the biodiesel work is being done in the midwest.
Here is a link to a good site on making your own biodiesel in small batches, without alot of extra hoopla.

http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_make.html

Now these were the Mother Earth News people, so, you need to take some of what they say with a grain of salt, but it's a good starting point.

[400lbsonacubseatspring]

My information was taken from a book I read.

I find that having a wife or girlfriend prevents me from doing several things, among them chiefly are:

Fishing
Reading Books
Visiting Old Friends
Smoking Cigars
Playing the Piano

I seem to think that you are an admirer of Teddy's, and for good reason. I am too, to a large extent. In the 18th and 19th centuries, we had primarily Intellectuals as presidents. In the 20th century, we had only two, Teddy, and Jimmy Carter, the latter of which was not an entirely successful arrangement, I'm sure most will agree. Following that trend, I doubt we shall have any in the 21st.

[Jack fowler]

Deleted

[Russell F]

I know around work and out and about i've heard bad things about the bio-fuels. Namely bio diesel. Around here bio-diesle sprang up earlier this year when a small farm stated producing it. I have ran 2 tanks so far in my diesel truck and have had no complaints. I didn't loose any power, truck fires up well, and i get similar MPG. And as i have mention in the past the carnival food smell of it gives me the munchies. I could be wrong, but i see bio-diesel gain serious ground around here in the next few years. Alot local trucking companies have gone to it, farmers are getting interested. The truckers that have run it for 6 months or more say there is a definent difference in the oil when they change it, it appears cleaner and the exhaust is alot cleaner. And no complaints about power loss. Around here, winter gelling is rarely a problem but i'm sure as time goes on additives could be added to help or prevent that.

I have looked into making it myself, but after following that link and doing so reading, i'm afraid my neihbors would think i was cooking up something other than diesel.

Good reading, and a good post.

Russell

[jostev]

Thanks for the article Tom, when I get the Brock, I am thinging of running it on bio, but kinda $$ for how much we would want, but a friend over in Maine makes it by the 55 gal drum, so will get it from him.

Thanks for the great reading

Johnny

[400lbsonacubseatspring]

I know around work and out and about i've heard bad things about the bio-fuels. Namely bio diesel. Around here bio-diesle sprang up earlier this year when a small farm stated producing it. I have ran 2 tanks so far in my diesel truck and have had no complaints. I didn't loose any power, truck fires up well, and i get similar MPG.

Russell,

In regards to both the biodiesel and ethanol fuels, there are two problems one chiefly encounters.

The first is fuel filter clogging. This is mainly a problem in older systems (pre-1995) where years and years worth of deposits throughout the fuel system get loosened by the high detergent properties of both fuels. If a relatively new system was used with biofuels from early in its life, it would not accumulate these deposits, and hence, would not have this problem.

Virtually all of the information I've found in regard to older systems mentions the necessity to change fuel filters frequently, in a prophylactic way, to avoid on-road breakdowns. Presumably over time, as the fuel systems clean themselves out, one would have to do this less frequently.
Replacing the components with new ones, rear of the fuel filter, would also be an option.

The second problem one encounters with older systems is fuel system component incompatibility. Natural rubber degrades in the presence of either biodiesel or ethanol blends above the 10% mark. Some other compounds do as well. The obvious solution here would be to replace hoses and gaskets with those made of compatible materials.

It is interesting to note that the oldest non diesel engines, being carbeurated, if fitted with appropriate gaskets, are perfectly able to burn "neat ethanol" or 180 proof (90%) distilled ethanol, without any other additives, with simple carbeurator adjustments, and perhaps some timing advance. While one would probably expect some additional corrosion to occur in the carbeurator, and possibly the fuel lines, all in all it should work pretty well. One needs to bear in mind that the prototype Model T Ford engine was a dual fuel ethanol/gasoline system, that was planned by H. Ford, as ethanol was more plentiful, and less expensive at the time. Even then, though, Motor companies bowed to pressure from the petroleum industries, and I don't believe any of the ethanol systems saw their way to production.

[400lbsonacubseatspring]

Thank you, Jack Fowler for your most well written and insightful report.

There are a host of problems with the economics of ethanol, indeed, but in a recent report from the USDA, they claim to have ethanol production at the level of $.08 / Litre, and express an overall goal of $.05 / Litre. They are offering grants to facilities who can meet this price goal. Now, realizing that ethanol is a poorer fuel, by about 1/3, ethanol at $.08/Litre still amounts to $.40/gal in equivalent gasoline energy.

Now, there are more than one group claiming that the energy input to produce ethanol is higher than the energy contained in ethanol. This is only true if you look at the worst ways to produce ethanol.

Big agribusiness in the US, which is not a friend to any of us would like to continue planting corn and soybeans in massive quantity, of course, because they have invested billions in these crops, by way of new, modified varieties, and better planting and harvesting varieties. They have also been historically the biggest recipients of Federal price protection subsidies for these crops.

Unfortunately, Soy and Corn grain are not the best feedstocks for biofuels, either by yield/acre or efficiency of process.

Starchy feedstocks for ethanol production require heating of the mash for long durations with an enzyme (the beer industry uses sprouted barley), to convert the long starch chains into sugars. This is an extremely energy-intensive method of ethanol production. Starting with sugary feedstocks such as sugar beets, green sweet corn stalks, sorghum, or jerusalem artichoke stalks eliminates this expensive and energy intensive step, yielding a ready-to-ferment product immediately from the milling stage. The only energy then required is heat for distillation, which, if done in an efficient way, could make use of the waste product from milling these feedstocks. There's an awful lot of carbon in a crushed and pressed cornstalk, and historically, cornstalks were burned under the boilers of corn juice to reduce it to syrup, in the corn-syrup mills of old.

Big agribusiness, like Archer Daniels Midland, Con Agra, and Proctor & Gamble are locked into the mindset of using existing technology and readily available (fossil) fuels for everything they produce.

But, in the next few years, they are going to have to learn to become adaptable, or become extinct, as agricultural subsidies will be reduced or eliminated, while biofuel subsidies will become greater. To maximize their profits, they're going to have to "think outside the oil barrel", so to speak.

Biodiesel has issues as well, as soy only contains 20% oil on average, as you say, and our vegetable oil market, nationally, revolves around soy. But there is no logical reason for this either, except that Big Agribusiness likes it that way. Every year, at least 20 new varieties of soy are "patented" -- I don't know how you can be allowed to patent a living thing, but what do I know. There are even "roundup (the herbicide) resistant" varieties now, that allow you to spray the whole field, beans and all with roundup, and the beans will not be stunted in the least, but the weeds will die.

I always think this is a good example of why we should not go down the path of genetic modification of plants, as creating this trait in one species means that the trait will evolve naturally in others, making our safest herbicide, roundup, generally ineffective, eventually. What I think is amusing however, is that the saving of seed from these varieties is a criminal offense.

There are again, however, better crops to make biodiesel from. The top of the list in the US is canola seed oil, but it's not as easy to harvest, and hence, Big Agribusiness is not fond of it. Oil Sunflower (the little black ones) are another great choice for many areas, and finally, the lowly peanut. Black walnuts in the northeast would be a good option as well, providing both valuable hardwood products, firewood, and nut oils.

since we have learned that feeding animals to animals is not a good thing to do, slaughterhouse and butchering waste fats can be turned to biodiesel as well.

The animal people will be horrified to think of this, but up until the 1960's Lard production was a major industry in the US, and the current varieties of pink pigs were not as common as their "fattier" cousins. When the demand for lard dropped, the fattier varieties of pigs were not as widely raised, as they weren't quite as efficient as the pink pigs in converting feed to non-fatty weight. I'm not suggesting we raise pigs just for bio-fuel production, but I see nothing wrong with creating a market for lard again.

The bio-diesel industry so far is stuck on the idea of using caustic soda and methanol (which is produced from methane). It can be made more cheaply by using ethanol and Potash (burned lye of wood ash), but there are some more difficulties involved.

One thing from the ethanol critic, Jack, that I find curious, is that if it truly takes $340 in gasoline to plant, grow, and harvest an acre of corn, these people should be using antique farmalls, as I venture to guess that you could plow, disc, plant, cultivate, fertilize twice, and pull a PTO driven corn-picker over an acre with say, a Super A, in under 3 tankfulls, and still have enough left over to bush-hog the stubble.

Which brings me to my last observation on the biofuel industry as it stands today. If the little guys with less than 100 acres got involved in production of biofuels, you can be sure they would be made at a profit, which would ensure that putting more into their production that you get out will never, ever occur. These guys can go to the hardware store and buy what they need to make the equipment, and aren't afraid to stand there and shovel corn cobs or dried stillage onto a fire. They don't measure their labour in terms of cost per hour, but by how much return they get on a given project. They don't need to invest $1000 in a motor and controls, when turning a crank for 10 minutes will do the same job. It is America's little farmers who can make this work for us.

It's all about "appropriate technology".

[Carm]

Wow, what a bunch of great posts..probably the most informative biodiesel discussion I've seen in awhile. Thanks for the link Tom. Anyhow, I burn the jet fuel for 2 reasons 1: Its freeeee 2: We'd have to pay to have it hauld away by a recycler.

[400lbsonacubseatspring]

Wow, what a bunch of great posts..probably the most informative biodiesel discussion I've seen in awhile. Thanks for the link Tom. Anyhow, I burn the jet fuel for 2 reasons 1: Its freeeee 2: We'd have to pay to have it hauld away by a recycler.

Carm,
Free is always best, and since you're utilizing a waste product, you're doing way more than your share. Giving it to a recycler to make something else out of it would be just throwing good carbon after bad.

[400lbsonacubseatspring]

In regards to the small processing of biofuels, particularly ethanol, Here is an excerpt from an article delivered to:

RIO 3 - World Climate & Energy Event, 1-5 December 2003, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil 205


Entitled:
ENERGY REVOLUTION: POLICIES FOR A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE

By:
Howard Geller
Southwest Energy Efficiency Project (SWEEP)
Boulder, CO, U.S.A.
e-mail: hgeller@swenergy.org


Brazil – Ethanol Fuel

Brazil initiated a national program to produce ethanol fuel from sugarcane in 1975. The
initial goals were to reduce oil imports and also to provide an additional market for Brazil’s
sugar producers. Ethanol is produced in about 350 privately owned distilleries. Ethanol fuel
production was stimulated through:

1) low interest loans for the construction of distilleries,
2) guaranteed purchase of ethanol by the state-owned oil company;
3) sales tax incentives to stimulate the purchase of neat ethanol vehicles, and
4) favorable pricing of neat ethanol relative to the alternative gasoline-ethanol blend.

These policies were very successful. The goal of achieving 20% ethanol in the gasoline
blend was reached in the early 1980s. During 1983-89, the large majority of cars sold in
Brazil consumed neat ethanol.17 Ethanol production grew rapidly reaching the level of 13-16
billion liters per year by the late 1990s. At the same time, the cost of producing ethanol
steadily declined due to improvements in sugarcane productivity, better ethanol yields, and
lower production costs. The government ended subsidies and ethanol price regulation by the
late 1990s. Ethanol now provides about one-third of the fuel consumed by cars and light
trucks in Brazil on an energy basis.
Brazil’s ethanol fuel program provides wide-ranging economic, social, and environmental
benefits.18 Production of ethanol saved Brazil about $33 billion in oil imports during 1976-96.
The sugarcane and ethanol industries employ around 700,000 workers in rural areas, and the
total investment cost per worker is much less than for other industries in Brazil. In addition,
the introduction of ethanol fuel has improved urban air quality and reduced CO2 emissions.
The Brazilian ethanol fuel program was successful because it featured both financial
incentives and market reserves, along with mechanisms to promote technological
improvements. Also, it began with a strong industry base (namely the existing sugar industry)
and it worked through the private sector. Finally, the federal government maintained its
support for the program over the past 28 years, perhaps linked to the large number of jobs that
were created.