Biofuels: Salvation or Crimes Against Humanity?

In my opinion crime against Humanity :iagree:

Story here

IMO, biofuels are a joke and only being pushed by agribusiness that sees it as a cash cow of biblical proportions. Producing biofuel is energy intensive in itself, pollutes the environment, wreaks havoc on top soil and depletes world food reserves while increasing food prices. Plus it does nothing to eliminate the internal combustion engine. The only way to go green with automobiles is all electric. Hydrogen fuel cells are just a pipe dream, IMO.

Electricity is the common denominator for renewable sources of energy and it can be distributed to every household in the country. Any hybrid sold today is capable of being all electric with a little tweaking and a set of long lasting, quickly recharged batteries. Once battery technology allows 300+ mile range on a charge and 85% capacity recharge time gets down to around 5 minutes, the internal combustion engine is toast. If the government wants to do us all a favor then spend several billion dollars on battery research.

Yep … and most of the worlds Electricity is generated through polluting technologies.
Anyone that argues that Nuclear Energy is clean should be belted with 6 feet of steel conduit.

[QUOTE=UTR;1919570]If the government wants to do us all a favor then spend several billion dollars on battery research.[/QUOTE]
They could just invest lots of cash in production for clean fuel cells, like solar cells, and then the price would drop as the market is flooded with a cheap source of energy.
It’d help the third world too.

So far the US, Australia & most of the civilised (and I use that in the vaguest possible sense) world is intent on forcing Clean Energy sources on the third world, while maintaining their own crappy polluting technologies. Of course, the old polluting technology is significantly cheaper than clean tehcnologies, and telling the 3rd world that they can’t use cheap polluting technology is basically telling them that they can’t have electricity.

[QUOTE=debro;1919733]Yep … and most of the worlds Electricity is generated through polluting technologies.
Anyone that argues that Nuclear Energy is clean should be belted with 6 feet of steel conduit.[/QUOTE]

Currently the means of producing most of our electricity pollutes. The beauty of electricity in itself is its non-polluting nature. It is also a common product from many renewable resources like geothermal, solar, wind, tides, ocean currents etc. We have no other form of energy that can be produced by such a wide variety of means and be distributed without the need for conventional transportation systems.

[QUOTE=debro;1919733]They could just invest lots of cash in production for clean fuel cells, like solar cells, and then the price would drop as the market is flooded with a cheap source of energy.
It’d help the third world too.

So far the US, Australia & most of the civilised (and I use that in the vaguest possible sense) world is intent on forcing Clean Energy sources on the third world, while maintaining their own crappy polluting technologies. Of course, the old polluting technology is significantly cheaper than clean tehcnologies, and telling the 3rd world that they can’t use cheap polluting technology is basically telling them that they can’t have electricity.[/QUOTE]

I think China’s (and eventually India’s) need for oil is going to push the major developed countries into alternative fuels. The price of gasoline here in the USA is approaching $3/gallon and at that price vehicles using alternative fuels become more viable and desirable. Personally, I think the auto companies are using the current hybrid vehicles to test the market for acceptance by the public of these cars and to provide some real world R&D in their use. The public here has basically accepted the concept of hybrids and I believe an all electric car would sell well if it had a decent range and could be recharged quickly. IMO, the high global demand for oil is here to stay and this is actually good news for the development of all electric cars and the development and use of alternative energy sources.

HydrogenHydrogenHydrogenHydrogenHydrogenHydrogenHydrogenHydrogenHydrogen

made from Nuclear power plants have them ,make electricity in the day and hydrogen at night .

Cars do not have to be fuel cell cars to run on it either.

[QUOTE=samlar;1920255]HydrogenHydrogenHydrogenHydrogenHydrogenHydrogenHydrogenHydrogenHydrogen

made from Nuclear power plants have them ,make electricity in the day and hydrogen at night .

Cars do not have to be fuel cell cars to run on it either.[/QUOTE]

Why take electricity and use it to create hydrogen and suffer the hit of the energy loss in the conversion process? Just use the electricity to charge batteries and skip the conversion altogether and the associated loss of energy.

Also, the distribution of hydrogen isn’t as simple as trucking around petroleum. It will need to be done with high pressure tanks as will the storage at the stations. I just don’t see it ever becoming a viable alternative to electricity from the grid supplying all electric vehicles. As I mentioned earlier, it takes a good deal of energy just to create hydrogen gas from electricity.

One also has to consider the benefits regarding maintenance of all electric cars. There is no used oil, transmission fluid, antifreeze, etc. that you have with a combustion engine. Electric cars are about as low maintenance as you can get. I won’t even get into the performance possibilities of electric cars.

The problem wit electric cars is in the USA we like to go on long long long trips and they just want to that. For around town I think you are right electric will be the car of the future. Propane is done with high pressure tanks and people are using it to run cars now. Calif. is going to Hydrogen in cars. For is developing a car now that will run on hydrogen that is not a fuel cell. I am sure in the future they will be fuel cell but it has already been proven that hydrogen cars work. The have already done a study and with a Nuclear power plant it would not be that hard to make hydrogen.

Hydrogen storage though is an issue … it’s volatile and has a tendency to explode.

Hydrogen is a clean fuel but it takes a lot of energy to produce it and a fairly intense rework of the storage and delivery systems to distribute it as widely as gasoline is today. I think battery technology will advance before we see viable fuel cells and wide dispersion of hydrogen. Also, burning hydrogen in an internal combustion engine cleans up the exhaust but does nothing to eliminate the waste byproducts and inefficiencies associated with it. I think the interim fix for electric cars is a gas/diesel/propane etc. powered generator that would be used on long trips or low charge situations. The generator could also be used to recharge the car while it is parked if a plug isn’t available. The only thing keeping electric cars off the road is batteries with a good range and quick charge ability.

I don’t understand why CA is pushing hydrogen when they must know it doesn’t stand a chance of replacing gasoline. Enough of it can’t be produced economically to even remotely meet the needs of the state, let alone the nation. IMO, it is just politicians trying to look like they are doing something in order to get re-elected. If the government is serious about getting us off gasoline then they need to put billions of dollars into battery R&D. That would make a meaningful difference, IMO.

Please don’t take my reply as an attack on you because that is not the way I meant it. I just get worked up over this because we have elected people in government that have absolutely no knowledge of how to solve our problems and really don’t care about solving them. Everything most of them do is based on getting re-elected and gaining more power. They could care less about what is good for the country. This applies to both political parties here in the USA. The government should be at the forefront of creating better battery technology. IMO, the people are wanting an alternative to high priced gasoline and our elected government is letting us down at all levels.

And people call me cynical :wink: J/k
But everything you said agrees with me, and it’s all true :stuck_out_tongue:

Alcohol batteries would be a good one :wink:
Pull in … unload the old fluids … non-working substances & refill :wink: Drive off :wink:

[QUOTE=debro;1920958]And people call me cynical :wink: J/k
But everything you said agrees with me, and it’s all true :stuck_out_tongue:

Alcohol batteries would be a good one :wink:
Pull in … unload the old fluids … non-working substances & refill :wink: Drive off ;)[/QUOTE]

I was actually responding to samlar but you slipped in there while I was typing my long winded reply. :slight_smile:

If humanity had the best intentions for this planet, we would have stopped destroying it a long time ago.

:iagree:
The world is the toilet paper, and humanity is a bunch of @r$3hol3$.

Humans are just an itch on the planet’s backside. One day, if the itch is irritating enough, Mother Earth will scratch it and we will be no more. Life on Earth has sustained much worst calamity than the human race can come close to dishing out. Look at the mass extinctions that have occurred and each time life returned even more diversified than before. Besides, 99.99% of all species to have lived on the Earth are now extinct. Extinction is the normal course of events and I doubt we will buck that trend forever no matter how we treat the planet while we are here. In 100 million years there won’t be a trace of us remaining. In geologic terms 100 million years is a fleeting moment.