Biodiesel won't drive down global warming

F8L · May 14, 2007

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(vdubstress @ May 13 2007, 10:15 PM) [snapback]441468[/snapback]</div>

With regard to alternative fuels, the main importance of the carbon cycle is whether it is a closed or open cycle. Any fuel produced entirely from biomass would have a closed carbon cycle â€“ since all of the carbon within the fuel came from the plants from which it was produced, and the carbon in the plants came from the atmosphere. If the plant decays, much of that carbon finds its way back into the atmosphere as CO2 or methane (CH4). If the oil is extracted from the plant, and turned into biodiesel (the alcohol used to make the biodiesel could come from alcohol also made from the plant), all of the carbon in the biodiesel had to come from CO2 in the air. So, when we burn biodiesel, even though it gives off CO2, there is no net addition to atmospheric carbon (CO2) levels, since that same carbon (and nitrogen) we are releasing was taken from the atmosphere by the plants when they were growing.
Contrast this to the carbon released when we burn any fossil fuels. The carbon in gasoline, for example, is from the petroleum we extract out of the ground. That carbon itself was likely in the atmosphere at one point â€“ but billions of years ago, when the earth was much younger, and had much higher levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide. The bacteria that grew on the young earth took carbon out of the atmosphere, and over billions of years of dying, not fully decaying, â€œsequesteredâ€ that carbon within the earth.

It seems to me as though the folks doing this study are focused purely on atmospheric greenhouse gases and not anthropogenic carbon.

Transesterification RULES!

Patiently waiting for the BLUE tec jetta diesel - suffering in a Prius in the interim. :blink:
[/b]
Click to expand...

You describe the main points of ecological design. Create a fuel source that takes a naturally cycling resource, convert it for our use with no waste product (even sludge can be bioremediated), then we burn the fuel and return the basic components back to the earth for reuse by other organisms or systems. This will still have to scaled appropriately and because of the sheer amount of fuel required a more diverse choice of fuels and methods will be required to not overload a system and possibly reach a bifurcation point.

Bob Allen · May 14, 2007

Biofuels can be produced "locally" while petroleum is shipped half way around the world in huge petroleum powered tankers. With some sources, the production of biodiesel comes after the source has already been processed for other uses, as in the case of soybeans. The production of biodiesel from such sources is only a portion of the total greenhouse gas emission from farming that source. So, when we calculate greenhouse gas emissions in the production of biodiesel, we need to consider that not all of the greenhouse gas is the result of biodiesel production. Biodiesel can be produced from a wide variety of sources, including some species of salt-water alga, which would not require huge agricultural mechanization nor compete with a food source. Ethanol, on the other hand, has a murkier pedigree and more questionable record as a reducer of greenhouse gas.

I'm suspicious of some of the anti biofuel commentary because the petroleum industry has shown amazing skill in subverting science for their own short term profits. When the tide turns a little stronger against petro fuel, watch and see how big oil begins to co-opt biodiesel production.

tripp · May 14, 2007

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(vdubstress @ May 13 2007, 11:15 PM) [snapback]441468[/snapback]</div>

Contrast this to the carbon released when we burn any fossil fuels. The carbon in gasoline, for example, is from the petroleum we extract out of the ground. That carbon itself was likely in the atmosphere at one point â€“ but billions of years ago, when the earth was much younger, and had much higher levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide. The bacteria that grew on the young earth took carbon out of the atmosphere, and over billions of years of dying, not fully decaying, â€œsequesteredâ€ that carbon within the earth.
[/b]
Click to expand...

...Except for the billions part. Any oil that created over a billion years ago was long since destroyed (long before we could get our hands on it). The oil that we're using is much younger, but still millions of years old.

F8L · May 14, 2007

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tripp @ May 14 2007, 11:10 AM) [snapback]441784[/snapback]</div>

...Except for the billions part. Any oil that created over a billion years ago was long since destroyed (long before we could get our hands on it). The oil that we're using is much younger, but still millions of years old.
[/b]
Click to expand...

Unless they find oil in Namibia, Australia, or a part of Iceland? lol

Biodiesel won't drive down global warming

F8L Protecting Habitat & AG Lands

Bob Allen Captainbaba

tripp Which it's a 'ybrid, ain't it?

F8L Protecting Habitat & AG Lands

About PriusChat

Quick Navigation

Like us on Facebook

Buy us a beer!

Useful Searches

Biodiesel won't drive down global warming

F8L Protecting Habitat & AG Lands

Bob Allen Captainbaba

tripp Which it's a 'ybrid, ain't it?

F8L Protecting Habitat & AG Lands