cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
sdholloway56
Senior Advisor

Re: Ethanol plants recovering CO2

That was the fourth shoe that dropped this week- the IEA report that concluded that the world does not need any further major fossil fuel investments.

Time to move along.

0 Kudos
sdholloway56
Senior Advisor

Re: Ethanol plants recovering CO2

As far as any major increase in grain ethanol from here, I don't think so.

Probably hold on to the 15 b/g/y but the world did not really like what they saw happen with the last big ramp up.

0 Kudos
sdholloway56
Senior Advisor

Re: Ethanol plants recovering CO2

BTW, there are other important uses for natural gas and other fossil fuels. There will probably be need in some traditional sectors for a long time and then there's stuff like petrochemicals, fertilizer.

There's nothing conservative about wanting to burn through a finite resource as fast as you can.

We'll have probably burned through the cash that the last big oil spike drew into the sector by 2050. Good riddance, we don't need another.

0 Kudos
sdholloway56
Senior Advisor

Re: Ethanol plants recovering CO2

.3%/yr increase in blend rate would be virtually invisible.

0 Kudos
rickgthf
Senior Advisor

Re: A game changer for fossil fuels would be .....

...wholesale carbon sequestration at all stationary power plants.  Outside the environmental effects of mining, drilling, spilling (which are considerable), the only real problem is carbon dioxide.  Capture & sequester the carbon dioxide and the only real objections to fossil fuels go away.  The technology isn't really that hard, you grind certain readily available, naturally alkaline siliceous rock, filter the flu gases through it, and bury the product. If somebody finally really put the screws to the fossil fuel companies they could do it. They already did it for sulfur on a smaller scale.

  Carbon sequestration would be more difficult for transportation fuels.  That's why electric vehicles is the better choice.

  By the way, using natural gas to generate electricity for electric vehicles is already more efficient than the best internal combustion engine by far.  The modern combined-cycle natural gas turbines easily achieve 60-70% thermodynamic efficiency, electric vehicle charging/use cycles are 85-90% efficient.   The combination, 90% of 70% is 63% overall efficient already far better than the 40% efficiency of a good diesel engine and miles ahead of gasoline's 25%.

0 Kudos
sw363535
Honored Advisor

Re: A game changer for fossil fuels would be .....

Then there will eventually be the questions of what happens in a collision.... I personally don't want to die in an electric car crash.  What will be the result of hitting a tree or a truck..... ?  

A serious question that the proponents have not addressed.   

Nuclear --- the only answer that will creat generating capacity to replace fossil fuels.  And why replace them with something that has a far greater carbon footprint.... like wind.........   It is really all down to how we load the data, like everything else in the computer age.  Select your input to generate the outcome desired.  Carbon footprints come in all sizes depending on what gets left out of the formula.

The question of which footprint do we want to assign comes down to which method of energy delivery we want to support.  Electricity seems to get figured without distribution costs and storage costs or danger of use costs.  Convincing the public that it is safe to ride on massive battery storage we haven't even begun that campaign and will take more trillions.

Using what is readily available and what we already have relatively clean handling in place is as always, the most efficient.  Using it more wisely certainly seems important.  There is no cheap or clean answer to electrical generation.  Electricity couldn't stand up to fossil fuel use in the early 1900's when it was most popular in history, and still doesn't.  We haven't solved those big issues yet.  We still have to have diesel to transport freight ,,,,, even on rail.

Ask yourselves, it is the sd way(go ____ yourself... on marketing means go talk to yourself sd)..  If Elec cars are the future.... why hasn't Korea or Japan been there long ago?  Instead of buying fossil fuels they don't have.  It all boils down to economics.  They can't make electric transportation work on an individual automobile format "economically". And they don't have far to go.

We live in delusion that is created by massive debt ease.  Maybe Iowa will be smarter when every field has wind turbine and the cost of maintaining that massive process is not subsidized by political cash up the nose.  At some point we will be able to see and think more clearly, when the politically correct drugs wear off.  The delusion of the super rich and irrational. Every day I see wind turbines transported into position by diesel and gasoline.  Lifted into position by diesel and gasoline.  Components built by traditional fuels.  Imported in from countries using diesel and gasoline.  Still haven't seen a pacific shipping transport run by solar power.

Would make far more sense if we just used the natural gas we waste every day world wide....

electric cars are still a vision for Florida Amusement parks.

rickgthf
Senior Advisor

Re: Unsafe, wasn't it Ford truck that were .....

Electric cars unsafe?  Wasn't it Ford trucks that were blowing up every they got T-boned?  And remember the Pintos, Corvairs?

  By any measure, a tank full of gasoline is far more dangerous than any battery in any current electric vehicle.  The simple fact that the battery pack consists of smaller cells packed into modules makes them inherently far less vulnerable to catastrophic meltdown.  Not only that but you can easily install fusible links between modules to prevent short circuits.

0 Kudos
sdholloway56
Senior Advisor

Re: Unsafe, wasn't it Ford truck that were .....

Gasoline is rather volatile.

The internal combustion engine is fundamentally a crap machine despite a century and a half of exquisite tinkering. No matter what you do most of the energy goes out the radiator as waste heat. But they will remain the standard for certain applications like heavy construction and agriculture for a long time.

When scaled, electric cars will be cheaper, more reliable and last longer. I expect it will be at least 2040 before they’re half the fleet. So if you’re waiting around for the sky to fall, pack a lunch.

0 Kudos
sdholloway56
Senior Advisor

Re: Unsafe, wasn't it Ford truck that were .....

.......and them dang newfangled toilets, dishwashers, low phosphorous detergents.

And don’t even get me started on the windmills and hippie panels.....

BTW, as I said, nobody is ruling out nukes but that is a different matter than mostly private utilities pumping propaganda and bribes to keep milking out old, high cost plants that are 20 years or more past their planned life expectancy.

Oh have I mentioned that the Koch Bros suck donkey *****? Even the dead one.

0 Kudos
Hobbyfarmer
Honored Advisor

Re: Unsafe, wasn't it Ford truck that were .....

Ricky, get it straight, it was all General motors pickups with the gas tanks out side of the frame.

SD, if you'd had a Flint Hills e plant to deliver to you would not be quite so negative.

I'm just disappointed they just sold them to Poet.

Also very easy to tell when you are off your meds. 

You talk to yourself and even answer yourself.

0 Kudos