Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-05-2008, 12:36 AM
 
159 posts, read 634,505 times
Reputation: 82

Advertisements

I like the idea of bio-diesels and green living, but in my heart I believe that Madison Avenue and Wall Street have final say on whether we become a green nation. Would costs of things actually adjust for the better if we went green? It makes no difference to me to drive a bio-diesel or electric vehicle or get my electricity from solar cell or wind farms. I have no problem with cutting back or substituting on my consumption choices if costs become a concern. I believe that things get allocated better because of prices. If everyone wanted to go green in America, would it be feasible and affordable? I think these bio-diesel fueled cars and trucks are a hoot, but is there really enough waste cooking oil to go around?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-08-2008, 03:47 PM
 
12,669 posts, read 20,494,025 times
Reputation: 3050
Another Black Eye for Biofuels--Pollution
It was a mixture of oil and glycerin, byproducts of biodiesel production. They deplete oxygen in waters very quickly, killing fish. And they're just as lethal to birds as the Valdez spill. Alabama isn't alone in this problem.
In January a Missouri businessman was indicted by a grand jury for a discharge that killed 25,000 fish and wiped out the population of fat pocketbook mussels, an endangered species.

Another Black Eye for Biofuels--Pollution | Autopia from Wired.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2008, 03:56 PM
 
12,669 posts, read 20,494,025 times
Reputation: 3050
Cornell ecologist's study finds that producing ethanol and biodiesel from corn and other crops is not worth the energy
By Susan S. Lang


In terms of energy output compared with energy input for ethanol production, the study found that:

* corn requires 29 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced;
* switch grass requires 45 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced; and
* wood biomass requires 57 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced.

In terms of energy output compared with the energy input for biodiesel production, the study found that:

* soybean plants requires 27 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced, and
* sunflower plants requires 118 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced.

Biomass for biofuel isn't worth it



Biofuel crops may worsen global warming: study

Then there is a mechanical aspect using biofuels in automobiles, though engines may like biofuel, the starches and sugars they create as a byproduct are not handled very well by a vehicles fuel injectors and or carburateurs, so at $2,000.00 a pop to take em (fuel injectors) ($1,000.00 for Carburateurs) apart, clean them or replace every 6 months or a year, certainly makes biofuels unattractive, not to mention trying to run Biofuel in Wintery Northern climates where winter temperatures will leave you stranded on the side of the snowbanked road.

But then, people feel Common Sense "Free Advice" isn't worth the Story it is typed on, when others like Al Gore who charge millions for Junk Science advice is taken at face value worldwide by a gullible public.

Biofuel crops may worsen global warming: study | The News is NowPublic.com



Rapeseed biofuel ‘produces more greenhouse gas than oil or petrol’

Measurements of emissions from the burning of biofuels derived from rapeseed and maize have been found to produce more greenhouse gas emissions than they save.

Rapeseed and maize biodiesels were calculated to produce up to 70 per cent and 50 per cent more greenhouse gases respectively than fossil fuels.
The concerns were raised over the levels of emissions of nitrous oxide, which is 296 times more powerful as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.

Scientists found that the use of biofuels released twice as much as nitrous oxide as previously realised. The research team found that 3 to 5 per cent of the nitrogen in fertiliser was converted and emitted.
In contrast, the figure used by the International Panel on Climate Change, which assesses the extent and impact of man-made global warming, was 2 per cent.

The findings illustrated the importance, the researchers said, of ensuring that measures designed to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions are assessed thoroughly before being hailed as a solution.

Rapeseed biofuel ‘produces more greenhouse gas than oil or petrol’ - Times Online
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2008, 12:36 PM
 
Location: Arvada, CO
719 posts, read 2,623,921 times
Reputation: 495
The current conventional wisdom on biofuels is a joke. Its a matter of how much arable land-food-you'd be willing to exchange for fuel. Folks wax and fawn over Brazil's energy independence with their sugar cane ethanol. What they forget is that Brazil had to destroy a helluva lot of rainforest to ramp up cane production.
So, if everyone drove a bio-diesel, there a: wouldn't be enough to go around. and b:lots of worldwide food shortages and starvation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2008, 02:09 PM
 
3,459 posts, read 5,814,391 times
Reputation: 6677
I'd be happy if people would just quit burning diesel to heat their homes....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2008, 05:09 PM
 
Location: Lynbrook
515 posts, read 2,490,293 times
Reputation: 330
What about plug-in hybrid cars? Ideally with the plug-in electricity coming from solar or wind energy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-14-2008, 11:38 AM
 
Location: Northglenn, Colorado
3,576 posts, read 10,438,881 times
Reputation: 974
Quote:
Originally Posted by KarenBo View Post
What about plug-in hybrid cars? Ideally with the plug-in electricity coming from solar or wind energy.
the battery life is a HUGE problem in the west where it is not that uncommon to have to drive 50-100 miles to reach the nearest town to work in.

A combination of electric and flex fuel internal combustion might work good. And Flex fuel does not have to just mean ethanol. There are many different types of gas that can be burned in these.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-14-2008, 11:50 AM
 
Location: Heartland Florida
9,324 posts, read 26,819,500 times
Reputation: 5040
Home based algaculture is a much better way to get biofuels. It's even possible to use waste heat from engines to refine waste material into gas or liquid fuels.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-15-2008, 03:33 AM
 
Location: Chicago
38,707 posts, read 103,490,929 times
Reputation: 29991
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noahma View Post
the battery life is a HUGE problem in the west where it is not that uncommon to have to drive 50-100 miles to reach the nearest town to work in.

A combination of electric and flex fuel internal combustion might work good. And Flex fuel does not have to just mean ethanol. There are many different types of gas that can be burned in these.
Uh, a plug-in hybrid IS a combination of electric and, at a minimum, internal cumbustion (though not necessarily "flex-fuel"). That's why they're called plug-in hybrids and not just "electric cars." There's an ICE on board to pick up where the battery leaves off when it's drained, so driving 50-100 miles is only an issue to the extent that the further the commute the lesser the benefits of driving the first 30-50 miles on electricity alone. But if you can do 30 to 80% of your commute with a considerably cheaper energy source than petrol, it still makes sense, especially if the gap between electric and petrol BTU-per-dollar continues to rise.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-15-2008, 11:07 AM
 
Location: Lynbrook
515 posts, read 2,490,293 times
Reputation: 330
Yes, I'm really hoping that the plug-in hybrids take off, because they seem to be the most promising. Of course, price will be a big factor in whether they are adopted by the general public. I had wanted to buy a hybrid when I bought my current car but I just couldn't afford it at the time so I bought the most efficient car I could afford.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:54 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top