Skip to comments.
Pasadena-based KiOR plans to have renewable crude oil at the pumps next year (Condi Rice on board)
Your BayArea News ^
| August 2, 2011
| JIM MOLONY
Posted on 08/25/2011 8:53:23 AM PDT by StolarStorm
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40 next last
Interesting alternate energy news, especially with Condoleezza Rice joining their board.
This is a local company down the road from me (no I don't work there). They claim that their biofuel will be cost effective WITHOUT federal subsidies. And they don't use biomass from food sources. Sounds like it beats most of the pie in the sky alternate energy methods out there.
The company was founded by the guy that started SUN Microsystems, so it's not some fly by night operation. I drove by and took a look at their facilities and they are active as all heck.
To: StolarStorm
They claim that their biofuel will be cost effective WITHOUT federal subsidies Good for them. I hope it works.
2
posted on
08/25/2011 8:55:40 AM PDT
by
MNJohnnie
(Giving more money to DC to fix the Debt is like giving free drugs to addicts think it will cure them)
To: StolarStorm
interesting.
hope it gets to market.
3
posted on
08/25/2011 8:56:53 AM PDT
by
ken21
(ruling class dem + rino progressives -- destroying america for 150 years.)
To: StolarStorm
Very encouraging post. I hope they make a fortune.
4
posted on
08/25/2011 8:58:23 AM PDT
by
Persevero
(Homeschooling for Excellence since 1992)
To: StolarStorm
“And they don’t use biomass from food sources.”
Wood chips? From TREES?
No, no one should object to that.
5
posted on
08/25/2011 9:02:01 AM PDT
by
jessduntno
(Obama shanks. America tanks.)
To: StolarStorm
I was pretty surprised that Condi joined the board. I think that speaks volumes about the real possibility that their process can work, without sucking up annual subsidies.
To: StolarStorm
The big questionis the energy cost of production.
For example, if it takes more BTU/watts. joules or whatever measure you wish to produce the consumer product, then it is a farce.
For example, it costs about 10% of a barrel of oil to produce consumer products-the 10% goes to electricity, heat, etc used from well to point of sale and the output is approx 90% useful products ranging from asphalt to gasoline and oils etc.
These “green” ideas are usually (if not always) more costly to produce than the energy they provide....
One of our algae researchers has made diesel fuel from fatty acid bearing algae-only problem is it costs about $1000 per gallon to produce, and to just manufacture enough bio-diesel to run the MODOT truck fleet, it would take every acre-foot of impounded water in the state of MO converted into algae ponds..... Realistic? NOT.
7
posted on
08/25/2011 9:04:40 AM PDT
by
Manly Warrior
(US ARMY (Ret), "No Free Lunches for the Dogs of War" (my spelling is generally korrect!))
To: jessduntno
I don’t think they are cutting down trees for fuel... that wouldn’t be cost effective anyway. They are using waste materials left over from the lumber and paper industries.
To: StolarStorm
The Department of Energys Loan Guarantee Program provided over $1 billion in loan support for the biofuels project. Why do I feel like this is the only reason they are into this?
9
posted on
08/25/2011 9:06:14 AM PDT
by
Red_Devil 232
(VietVet - USMC All Ready On The Right? All Ready On The Left? All Ready On The Firing Line!)
To: StolarStorm
“I was pretty surprised that Condi joined the board. I think that speaks volumes about the real possibility that their process can work, without sucking up annual subsidies.”
I wanted to see her become Commissioner of the NFL...
10
posted on
08/25/2011 9:07:00 AM PDT
by
jessduntno
(Obama shanks. America tanks.)
To: jessduntno
yes...good point.
this stuff would have to be burned to be useful. won’t the left still be against it because of that?
11
posted on
08/25/2011 9:07:11 AM PDT
by
mreerm
To: Red_Devil 232
A loan guarantee isn't exactly free money. As of now, they aren't using it and may not. But regardless, if loan guarantees are available ... and they have a good process that wouldn't require future federal dollar inputs ... I don't see a negative to that.
Unlike welfare, it really would be an investment.
All I know is that we need to be energy independent; drill more, build nuclear plants and get viable biofuel plants going. I hate that my money finds its way into the pockets of our enemies.
To: StolarStorm
As long as they don't need taxpayer dollars...Go For It!
I am skeptical though, I think at some point they will begin to whine and lobby for Federal Funding. We have been scammed to many times.
13
posted on
08/25/2011 9:15:56 AM PDT
by
PoloSec
( Believe how that Christ died for our sins, was buried and rose again for our justification)
To: StolarStorm
And where has that "waste material" been going up until now? Paper? Particle board? Outer skins for drywall? That is, what industry just had its feedstock prices increase? We were running a stable closed system before this process came to town. I'm willing to bet that the people making money from this plant didn't bother determining who they were going to ace out.
14
posted on
08/25/2011 9:17:28 AM PDT
by
Pecos
(Constitutionalist. Liberty and Honor will not die on my watch.)
To: StolarStorm
The only drawback I can see is whether or not the “biomass” crude can be co-mingled in the current delivery system of natural crude (pipelines, etc.)
If it needs a stand alone delivery system from crude production to refining, their costs will be much to high to make a real difference.
I’m guessing KiOR is developing this process to challenge Ethanol as a combustion fuel additive.
(I wish I had the money to convert my 1994 Tracker to NatGas!)
15
posted on
08/25/2011 9:20:49 AM PDT
by
Cletus.D.Yokel
(Islam is a violent and tyrannical political ideology and has nothing to do with "religion".)
To: Pecos
"I'm willing to bet that the people making money from this plant didn't bother determining who they were going to ace out. "
I guess we should still be riding in buggies instead of cars.
To: StolarStorm
Imagine a cheaper gasoline that can be produced domestically and is environmentally friendly.Environmentalists would do whatever it took to kill anything of the sort ASAP.
17
posted on
08/25/2011 9:28:51 AM PDT
by
eclecticEel
(Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness: 7/4/1776 - 3/21/2010)
To: eclecticEel
Luckily the GOP will be doing a total takeover in this next election cycle. That’s another reason I find Condi being on the board of directors to be positive. She may not be a die hard conservative, but she’s no dummy either.
To: StolarStorm
Well, there would be fewer high speed accidents.... ;-)
19
posted on
08/25/2011 9:36:39 AM PDT
by
Pecos
(Constitutionalist. Liberty and Honor will not die on my watch.)
To: StolarStorm
There are extremely fast growing varieties of trees, particularuy a couple cultivates of willow.
If there were a cost effective way to convert it to fuel, I can see entire crops of trees being planted and cut for fuel assuming there is a profit to be had.
Assuming a good conversion process, there are options other than trees. We bury hundreds of millions of tons of trash every year. The energy to dry and process it my be overwhelming though.
20
posted on
08/25/2011 10:29:11 AM PDT
by
dangerdoc
(see post #6)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson