JulesMaximus
No Lifer
- Jul 3, 2003
- 74,599
- 1,001
- 126
I wonder how long before we destroy what is really fucking up this country. Lobbyists.
GOVERNMENT FOR SALE!!! GET YOUR CHEAP WHORISH GOVERNMENT OVER HERE!!!
Sometimes I really hate the politics in this country...most of the time really. :|
Seriously, is this like the 100th of it's kind??? Seems like they all just fade away like a fart in the wind (either paid off or 'silenced'.
Ummmm.....I was reading in Discover probably 5 years ago about gassification was the next great thing and we wouldn't have to worry about energy for the future. Strangely enough, it is only used in limited situations (ie outside chicken rendering plants).
What most people don't realize is Henry Ford first thought to use Hydrogen in his early cars...
What most people don't realize is Henry Ford first thought to use Hydrogen in his early cars...
TankGuys
Golden Member
- Jun 3, 2005
- 1,080
- 0
- 0
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Still doesn't solve the co2 problem
It would, actually. A system like that would be nearly carbon neutral. So long as you're burning currently growing crops (that subsequently get replanted to continue the cycle) the CO2 balance remains the same, since the next round of plant growth essentially reabsorbs the CO2 released from the last round.
Burning fossil fuels only increases CO2 levels because you're releasing the carbon that was otherwise locked in those fuels, that doesn't get "recycled" through new fuel source creation.
- Aug 23, 2003
- 25,375
- 142
- 116
When will you guys learn. Lower production costs don't necessarily translate into lower retail prices.
Exxon will announce earnings of almost $40 billion for their last fiscal year, the most ever by a US company.
Since the 1990s, when gas was $1/gallon retail or less, the production costs of gasoline have only incrementally increased, but the retail cost of gas and profits of oil companies have increased at a record setting pace.
The bottom line is that companies providing gasoline and ethanol know what prices the market will bear; technological advances that reduce production costs will only pad their pockets.
Exxon will announce earnings of almost $40 billion for their last fiscal year, the most ever by a US company.
Since the 1990s, when gas was $1/gallon retail or less, the production costs of gasoline have only incrementally increased, but the retail cost of gas and profits of oil companies have increased at a record setting pace.
The bottom line is that companies providing gasoline and ethanol know what prices the market will bear; technological advances that reduce production costs will only pad their pockets.
SagaLore
Elite Member
- Dec 18, 2001
- 24,036
- 21
- 81
Its about time this is showing up in the news. This technique has been around for awhile, but everyone keeps quoting outdated corn based production to bash ethanol production.
Awesome. And you don't even need to use hay, it can be any organic trash.
Awesome. And you don't even need to use hay, it can be any organic trash.
destrekor
Lifer
- Nov 18, 2005
- 28,799
- 359
- 126
Originally posted by: TankGuys
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Still doesn't solve the co2 problem
It would, actually. A system like that would be nearly carbon neutral. So long as you're burning currently growing crops (that subsequently get replanted to continue the cycle) the CO2 balance remains the same, since the next round of plant growth essentially reabsorbs the CO2 released from the last round.
Burning fossil fuels only increases CO2 levels because you're releasing the carbon that was otherwise locked in those fuels, that doesn't get "recycled" through new fuel source creation.
Interestingly enough, that sounds exactly right and I never thought of that for some unknown reason.
It would be nice to see this happen but it might be even better if it works with butanol. Check out this site! Butulfuel LLC
IHateMyJob2004
Lifer
- Sep 29, 2004
- 18,656
- 68
- 91
Yayyyyy!!! Global warming!
I learned something today. There is enough oil that if global warming is real, we will be able to swim in the antartic before it runs out. Go humans!
I learned something today. There is enough oil that if global warming is real, we will be able to swim in the antartic before it runs out. Go humans!
Modelworks
Lifer
- Feb 22, 2007
- 16,240
- 7
- 76
Originally posted by: TankGuys
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Still doesn't solve the co2 problem
It would, actually. A system like that would be nearly carbon neutral. So long as you're burning currently growing crops (that subsequently get replanted to continue the cycle) the CO2 balance remains the same, since the next round of plant growth essentially reabsorbs the CO2 released from the last round.
Burning fossil fuels only increases CO2 levels because you're releasing the carbon that was otherwise locked in those fuels, that doesn't get "recycled" through new fuel source creation.
The problem is that its not that simple.
Its certainly less co2 than gasoline burning, but producing ethanol and burning it are not on an equal ratio.
The chemistry of it:
The other concern is that unless your capturing the co2 directly off the car how are you going to insure that the co2 the car produces goes back to the plant that produces it ?
If you have dense populations those areas will have high co2 emissions which will take time to cycle through the air to the areas where the ethanol is being produced .
How long does it take co2 to travel through the atmosphere to where the plants would be consuming it ?
SunnyD
Belgian Waffler
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter