Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

World must wake up to the dangers of biofuels, head of Kew Gardens warns (Solution is a problem)
The Independent (UK) | September 9, 2006 | Michael McCarthy

Posted on 09/09/2006 2:53:33 PM PDT by DaveLoneRanger

Link Only: World must wake up to the dangers of biofuels, head of Kew Gardens warns


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Extended News
KEYWORDS: biofuel; energy; ethanol; globalwarming
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-82 next last
For all the environmentalists crying of the need for more earth-friendly resources, they'd better be careful what they support in terms of alternative fuels.
1 posted on 09/09/2006 2:53:35 PM PDT by DaveLoneRanger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger
For all the environmentalists crying

The environmentalists certainly do not want biofuels and are doing all they can to prevent their rapid adoption. What could be a worse nightmare for an environmentalist that a fuel made from plants?
2 posted on 09/09/2006 2:56:30 PM PDT by P-40 (Al Qaeda was working in Iraq. They were just undocumented.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger

So, now we're back to "Destroying the Rainforest" again, huh?


3 posted on 09/09/2006 2:56:41 PM PDT by digger48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: texianyankee; JayB; ElkGroveDan; markman46; palmer; Bahbah; Paradox; FOG724; Mike Darancette; ...
(((GLOBAL WARMING PING)))



You have been pinged because of your interest in environmentalism, alarmist wackos, mainstream media doomsday hype, and other issues pertaining to global warming. Freep-mail me to get on or off.
Add me! / Remove me
Please ping me to all note-worthy threads on global warming.

4 posted on 09/09/2006 2:56:53 PM PDT by DaveLoneRanger (Lord, help me to be the Christian conservative that liberals fear I am.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: digger48

What's Willie Nelson going to do then? This is his baby.


5 posted on 09/09/2006 2:58:17 PM PDT by boop (Now Greg, you know I don't like that WORD!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: boop
Willie's "Rainforest"

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

6 posted on 09/09/2006 3:07:03 PM PDT by digger48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger

Radical environmentalists do not care about the environment. They care about reducing capitalism and the human population by any means necessary. One step at a time, and that means hamstringing development.


7 posted on 09/09/2006 3:07:32 PM PDT by Crazieman (The Democratic Party: Culture of Treason)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger
He's right on one point only. Bio-fuels will not be the answer to the fuel problem.

The "chicken-little" gloom & doom loss of Rain Forest and other nonsense is to generate buzz for his arrival at a new gig. In uber-liberal Chicago, none the less.

If I'm proved wrong and it becomes a commodity of choice, then there's enough American farmers and idle farmland in America to handle the world market. Still no environmental degradation.

We heard the same song & dance during the development of GM agricultural products. Yet, the "Frankenfood's" & destruction of native crops by escape hasn't, nor will it, manifest.

The Royal Botanical Gardens at Kew, are awesome, however.

8 posted on 09/09/2006 3:10:04 PM PDT by bigfootbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger

Bio-fuels are political hype enbraced by both parties. One gallon of ethanol requires three gallons of gasoline or diesel to produce.


9 posted on 09/09/2006 3:25:31 PM PDT by em2vn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: em2vn
One gallon of ethanol requires three gallons of gasoline or diesel to produce.

If you research that statement you will find it is one put out by radical environmentalists.
10 posted on 09/09/2006 3:28:24 PM PDT by P-40 (Al Qaeda was working in Iraq. They were just undocumented.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger

However, that article didn't point out the fact that certain plants such as sugar cane, sugar beets and switchgrass can produce huge amounts of ethanol on a per-acre basis with minimal land impact, and the development of growing oil-laden algae in vertical tanks fed by the exhaust of coal-fired and natural gas-fired powerplants could mean a massive source of ethanol, too.


11 posted on 09/09/2006 3:40:43 PM PDT by RayChuang88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RayChuang88


Liquefied Coal Cuts Oil Need
China plans to launch a coal liquefaction programme in the next five years to ease the nation's oil shortage.

The State Development Planning Commission is carrying out a feasibility study on setting up coal liquefaction projects in Yunnan, Shaanxi and Heilongjiang provinces, according to a senior official with the commission.

"Experiments have been finished in these three places. The results were desirable, but we have not located the specific site to launch the project," said the official.

Analysts predict that total investment for the project will amount to billions of US dollars with the annual output of 2 or 3 million tons of oil.

Coal liquefaction is the chemical process of adding hydrogen to coal under high temperature and pressure to liquefy coal into crude oil.

"Generally speaking, 2 tons of coal can turn out 1 ton of oil," explained Shu Geping, a senior engineer of the China Coal Research Institute.

Given the fact that the total reserves of coal in China far exceed those of oil, it is desirable to implement the technology to stretch the oil supply, Shu said.

According to Shu, 20 billion tons of the total proven coal reserves can be liquefied into 10 billion tons of oil, sufficient for China's consumption for 50 years.

Thanks to 20 years of hard work and co-operation with developed countries, China has mastered the technology and can perform the commercial operation at a desirable cost, said Shu.

With the coal liquefaction technology, producing 1 ton of oil is 30 per cent cheaper than purchasing oil from the overseas market, Shu added.

"A coal liquefaction manufacturer can recoup their total investment within 13 years," Shu noted.

The systematic research of the coal liquefaction technology dates back to 1910. Since then many countries such as Germany, the United States and Japan have been making great efforts to develop the technology. However, due to the high cost of coal and labour in developed countries, this technology has not been commercialized on a large scale.

But South Africa, whose structure of energy reserves is similar to China's, has established three coal liquefaction manufacturers with total investment of US$7 billion in 1950. In 1999, these manufacturers registered a profit before tax of US$610 million.

"If the government can make some preferential policies, such as cutting down the oil consumption tax and value added tax, coal liquefaction manufacturers can attain more profits than factories in South Africa," Shu said.

China has been a net importer of oil since 1993. It is expected to import 70 million tons of oil this year. (Source: chinadaily.com.cn)


12 posted on 09/09/2006 3:43:12 PM PDT by digger48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: RayChuang88

Especially switchgrass, which is native to North America.

Forget the environment; the main thing is cutting off the money supply to the Arabs.


13 posted on 09/09/2006 3:48:51 PM PDT by A.J.Armitage (http://calvinist-libertarians.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: digger48

Usually there are complaints about ethanol subsidies. Be aware that the Liquefied Coal folks are lobbying for a $5b sssubsidy to get going and a government price support at $35/bb.


14 posted on 09/09/2006 4:00:00 PM PDT by ClaireSolt (Have you have gotten mixed up in a mish-masher?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: em2vn
that's old information. Processes have been improved and will be improved even more.

Eventually, we'll have biofuel vehicles that produce even more fuel than they burn and the big problem will be sopping up the alcohol spiled all over the highways.

15 posted on 09/09/2006 4:24:21 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ClaireSolt
Notice, contrarily, that Shell hasn't asked (and won't, btw) for any subsidy or price floors for its in situ shale oil development in CO, nor has any company participating in Canadian tar sands development asked for either of these.

Well, except Imperial Oil (CAN) -- but that's a whole 'nother story. No American, British, or Dutch company has asked, let me rephrase that.

Coal liquefaction shouldn't NEED a subsidy in the first place. It's fully competitive as long as crude stays above $35/bbl or so. But then again, who says crude will stay that high when alternative production methods come online, eh?

16 posted on 09/09/2006 4:29:53 PM PDT by SAJ ("Who doesn't jump is a French!!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger
The enviros do not wantany fuels except what is enough to power the limousines of the ruling elite which will be them. Environmental protection is to them only a means to power. They are the Communists of old in a more acceptable garb for the post USSR world.
17 posted on 09/09/2006 4:37:12 PM PDT by arthurus (Better to fight them over THERE than over HERE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: digger48
"A coal liquefaction manufacturer can recoup their total investment within 13 years," Shu noted.

Probably a bit overoptimistic because as it comes on line, if it is large scale it will reduce the price of oil, probably to below the cost of coal liquifaction. More power to them.

18 posted on 09/09/2006 4:41:21 PM PDT by arthurus (Better to fight them over THERE than over HERE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: em2vn

Tell that to the Good Ol Boys down in Kentucky who switched their stills over to making ethanol for cars. Fired by waste wood and they turn out many gallons a day.


19 posted on 09/09/2006 4:48:45 PM PDT by crz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: P-40

>>>>One gallon of ethanol requires three gallons of gasoline or diesel to produce.

>>If you research that statement you will find it is one put out by radical environmentalists.

1:3 is pretty absurd. But more sober analyses have shown that it takes more energy from petroleum to make a gallon of ethanol, than you get from the ethanol.

Do not underestimate the power of the ADM/farm lobby, for subsidies.


20 posted on 09/09/2006 4:51:44 PM PDT by FreedomPoster (Guns themselves are fairly robust; their chief enemies are rust and politicians) (NRA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-82 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson