The Facts

Biomass Electricity Myths Dispelled

The Facts , , , , 0 Comment

There are plenty of myths associated with biomass power but don’t let these fallacies keep you from capitalizing on one of the most reliable green energy sources around.

Myth: Alternative energy sources are unreliable.

Truth: Some alternative energy sources are unreliable. For example, you can’t really depend on solar energy because:

• The sun doesn’t shine brightly every single day. You have to worry about cloud cover. • The cells that harness the solar energy are largely inefficient when it comes to storing energy.

Wind energy is also unreliable because:

• Wind speed can be inconsistent. • You have no control over it.

But this idea of unreliability becomes a myth when applied to biomass energy. Once you’ve found your raw materials and matched it with the correct biomass technology, biomass is reliable – as long as you carefully develop a plan for acquiring a consistent supply of biomass fuels.

Myth: You have to build a new power plant to create biomass electricity.

Truth: Thanks to a process known as co-firing, creating biomass power does not always require building a completely new power plant. Instead, a biomass energy company can design and install a system in an existing fossil fuel burning plant that will partially convert it to biomass, which will significantly reduce emissions and fossil fuel consumption. This is an attractive option for those already running power plants who do not wish to invest in brand new facilities.

Myth: It’s easy to match the proper biomass technology with your raw materials.

Truth: If you have no experience in biomass, figuring out what type of technology you need in your plant can be difficult. This is where most people go wrong. There have been numerous situations where a company implemented biomass technology, only to find they installed the wrong biomass technology. As a result, their new biomass system just sits there unused, millions of dollars flushed down the drain.

Where did they go wrong? They didn’t initially perform an adequate analysis of their raw material resource in order to determine what type of biomass technology was needed. Luckily, this mistake can easily be avoided. All you need to do is hire an experienced biomass engineering company to assist you in the planning process. They can help you match your biomass technology to the available fuels and improve your plants reliability. This cuts out any and all guesswork.

Myth: Only power companies can benefit from biomass power.

Truth: You don’t have to be a power company to capitalize on biomass advantages. Case in point: industrial facilities. An industrial facility creates waste throughout its production process. Ordinarily that waste would end up in a landfill. However, if the facility owners install a biomass system, they can use their waste to create electricity, which will in turn power their facilities. And they may even have enough left over to sell back to the grid.

Before you get involved in biomass power, sort the facts from the myths. You can easily do so by employing a biomass engineering company.

Biofuels – Saving the World Or a Waste of Money?

The Facts , 0 Comment

There is a steady buzz about biofuels, and there are some strong opinions about this timely topic. At one extreme are people who believe that biofuels will save the world from a dependence on evil petroleum and stave off global warming. On the other side are those who say that biofuels are uneconomic and just the latest government-subsidized boondoggle. What is the real story? No short article can cover the topic comprehensively, but this short primer will sort out a few facts so that you can decide for yourself.

Typically, the term biofuels means transportation fuels, replacing or at least reducing the requirement for gasoline derived from petroleum. This is worth remembering because biologically generated ethanol, vegetable oils, and animal fats have been used for centuries for cooking and lighting (think of alcohol burners, old-fashioned street lamps, candles). But today, almost no one is thinking about using biofuels for anything other than powering internal combustion engines (The idea is not a novel as it sounds; Henry Ford originally designed the Ford Model T to run on ethanol, not gasoline).

Currently there are two biofuels available in large enough quantities to have an impact: bio-ethanol and biodiesel. Bio-ethanol is essentially the same substance humans have been producing for 6000 years in beverages by fermenting sugars present in almost any starchy vegetable or sugary fruit. The main difference is the refining needed following distillation to produce ethanol to the substantial exclusion of water. Only then can it burn efficiently in a truck or automobile.

Biodiesel is completely different, chemically. It is produced by reacting plant or animal fats with methanol to produce long-chain fatty acid methyl esters, which can be blended in substantial amounts with traditional petroleum-derived diesel and used as a transportation fuel. Biodiesel is, in point of fact, a good fuel, and it is cleaner-burning than traditional diesel. On some farms all the tractors and farm equipment are run on 100% biodiesel.

Both bio-ethanol and biodiesel are considered first generation biofuels: producible now using existing technology. Second generation biofuels are the next wave, comprising compounds that are more fuel-like such as butanol or hydrocarbons. There is a second generation biodiesel as well, using oils produced by algae in place of plant oils derived from soybean, canola or corn.

The real plum will be when biofuels-ethanol first, but eventually second generation biofuels such as butanol or hydrocarbons-can be produced from waste cellulosic materials such as corn stover (the stalk left after corn is harvested), bagasse (the sugar cane stalk left after sugar has been pressed out), corn cobs, wood chips, straw, and the like. These sources are waste products, already produced anyway, so no crowding out of agricultural food products will occur. I don’t care whether this is called third generation or not. What is important is that using waste agricultural materials instead of food materials will essentially eliminate the upward pressure that current biofuels production has exerted on food prices.

What is indisputable is that every gallon of biofuels generated replaces roughly a gallon of fuel that would otherwise come from petroleum (the equation is not exact due to the varying energy value of different biofuels). This both reduces our dependence on foreign oil and extends our domestic oil supply. Economics are another matter. Biofuels cannot compete with petroleum at today’s (February 2009 when this was written) oil prices of less than $ 40 per barrel. But biofuels do help set a cap on the price oil. What that price level is remains a subject for debate and varies from one biofuel to another. Delving into the details of the cost of biofuels is a topic we will address another time. It is important, however, to acknowledge that the capping effect on fuel prices exists as long as biofuels are maintained as a viable alternative.

Regarding greenhouse gas emissions there is also a range of opinion. In general, however, most observers agree that corn-based biofuels provide a relatively small benefit in this regard, if any. Biofuels derived from existing sources of cellulosic waste would provide a larger reduction, simply due to the fact that no additional energy to harvest the raw material is required. How important it is to achieve this reduction in greenhouse gases is also debatable and outside the scope of this article.

One take-away conclusion about biofuels is the following: corn-based biofuels, whether first or second generation, should only be considered as a stop-gap measure, to be used until the cellulose-based technology has been sufficiently developed. If, within 2-5 years, the displacement of corn by cellulose-based technology has taken place in the USA, upward pressure on food prices due to biofuel production will have abated, and an alternative to petroleum will exist that both reduces our dependence on foreign oil and helps to put a cap the market price of oil.

David Rozzell maintains a web site and blog dedicated to the latest developments and news in biofuels, biocatalysis, and indsutrial applications of biotechnology at http://www.bio-catalyst.com

Contact him at david@rozzell.com.

Article Source:
http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=David_Rozzell

Homemade Biodiesel Fuel

The Facts , , , , 0 Comment

Did you know that biodiesel is the only alternative fuel approved by the Environmental Protection Agency? The EPA along with many other government and independent agencies have vigorously tested biodiesel, and have discovered countless benefits.

These tests have proven that biodiesel is both environmentally and economically beneficial, and is also better for your cars engine and personal health than regular diesel. Another advantage of biodiesel is the process of making it is actually quite simple, leading to an interest in people wanting to make there own homemade biodiesel.

Homemade biodiesel will bring your fuel cost down substantially, and is just as good, if not better for your cars engine as commercial biodiesel.

The process of making biodiesel is by converting vegetable oil it biodiesel by mixing the oil with methanol and lye.

The procedure used to making biodiesel is to mix the ingredients, allowing the lye to separate the glycerine from the vegetable oil, and the methanol to replace the glycerine.

The mixture is then left to settle usually for 24 hours, while the glycerine settle to the bottom the mixture, and is then washed and cleaned.

This really is a simple procedure, that you can do yourself. The best way to start out is to make a few test batches before moving on to the real thing. With a test batch you only need a few simple ingredients – veggie oil, methanol and lye – and a small blender.

Where to get the ingredients

1) Vegetable oil is readily available at many restaurants and takeaways.

2) Lye is manly used in soap, and can be found at most convenience stores.

3) Methanol can be found at most hardware stores.

Making biodiesel fuel can be a fun and rewarding hobby!! the skills you learn from making homemade biodiesel can be used to teach friends and family, or even make some additional money on the side. If your interested in making your own biodiesel and biodiesel processor, I have plenty of information at my blog, just visit this link homemade biodiesel

Bio Fuels – Avoiding Unintended Environmental Consequences

The Facts , , , 0 Comment

One of the many ag news sources I digest (Get it?) recently reported that many dairymen throughout the country are closing down their dairies, selling the cows, and preparing to plant corn and soybeans instead. This is largely due to the fact that dairy work is long, hard and arduous, and the lure of money from the ethanol market seems like a much better gig. It is a shift that can make a lot of sense, but look for it to have an effect on milk, and other dairy prices. This brings me to my point. The ripple effect in economy and environment.

This is often very tricky and unpredictable, particularly with such volatile industries, but it is worth spending a little time in consideration, particularly since it could bring about some unintended consequences, and perhaps, some inconvenient truths.

Nowhere is this more evident than in the movement away from fossil fuels, and toward bio fuels.

I like the idea of growing our fuels. It would be great for the environment, at least to a point. Let me explain my concern.

If in the process of raising the raw materials for this change, we can avoid creating new environmental problems, it will be not only great, but bordering on the miraculous! One of the things we will need to deal with is the question of erosion. The ethanol market will, without a doubt, draw many people into farming, most of whom will have little interest in maintaining environmental integrity. Can we accomplish this without producing a new “dust bowl?”

What if we find that production will be insufficient for our needs due to drought or flooding, after we have become dependent on these new methods? Will we then turn to methanol production and suffer the effects of billions of people stripping the forests and pastures in order to drive.

What will happen if so many of our farmers ranchers and dairymen migrate to ethanol production, and away from food production that it affects the prices and availability of food adversely? Great, we have fuel to get to the store, but no food to buy when we get there!

I am not saying that bio fuels are not the answer.

When coupled with other technologies and innovations, including solar technology, storage cell improvements, better ways to harness wind and kinetic energy, more efficient power generation and application, hydrogen power, and many others, all working in tandem, great progress can be made. We need to make sure that we do not put all our eggs in one basket, as we seemingly have done with fossil fuels. We also need to make sure that we are prepared to deal with the different set of consequences that are possible with any emerging technology.

James Burns is a licensed pest control professional, has been a Certified Professional Turfgrass Manager for more than 16 years, has a lifetime of experience in horticulture and agriculture, and is the owner of Rational Environmental Solutions, an IPM based pest control company in East Texas. He also has many helpful gardening tips at http://www.texpest.com, and writes on environmental and social issues from http://www.rationalenvironmentalsolutions.com

Biofuels Score Big But Can They Cut Oil Imports?

The Facts , , , , 0 Comment

Biofuels have stormed forward with a series of advances that could give the sometimes maligned alternative energy sector a major boost.

On the federal side, President Obama has allocated $ 510 million to produce the fuel for military jets and ships and commercial vehicles. And the Army has established the Energy Initiatives Office Task Force, which is charged with figuring out how to meet a 25 percent renewable energy goal by 2025.

A national security issue

Much of the task force’s efforts could be directed to biofuels. Oil dependence has long been considered a national security issue. A 2006 report by the Council on Foreign Relations said the United States must manage the consequences of unavoidable dependence on foreign oil. “The longer the delay, the greater will be the subsequent trauma,” the report said.

In mid August 2011, Obama emphasized the importance of biofuels to energy security, and Navy Secretary Ray Mabus said, “America’s long-term national security depends upon a commercially viable domestic biofuels market.”

But it won’t be easy. Obama’s plan is to produce 36 billion gallons of biofuel by 2022, with 20 billion gallons coming from advanced biofuels, 15 billion gallons from corn ethanol and one billion gallons from biodiesel.

Biofuel targets by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for 2012 are about 9 percent greater than the previous year and show a modest but increasing role for non-corn biofuels. The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 requires that a percentage of fuel sold in the country contain a minimum volume of renewable fuel.

What exactly is biofuel?

Biofuel is a pretty broad category that includes ethanol, biodiesel, cellulosic ethanol, gas-tank-ready isobutanol and, depending on how it’s classified, algae fuel. But biofuel manufacture requires energy and, like petroleum products and coal, burning it creates greenhouse gases. Similar to natural gas, those emissions aren’t as bad, but the distinction marks its green credentials with an asterisk.

Ethanol, which remains a widely used gasoline additive, may have lost some of the momentum it had five years ago, especially that derived from corn. However, research and development appear undeterred.

At the U.S. Department of Energy’s BioEnergy Science Center in Oak Ridge, Tenn., a team of researchers at believe they have “pinpointed the exact, single gene that controls ethanol production capacity in a microorganism.” The discovery, officials say, could prove the missing link in developing biomass crops that produce higher concentrations of ethanol at lower costs.

“This discovery is an important step in developing biomass crops that could increase yield of ethanol, lower production costs and help reduce our reliance on imported oil,” said Energy Secretary Steven Chu in a statement.

New biofuel discoveries

Further underlining my premise for acceleration in biofuel development is yet another announcement from the DOE, this time about two promising biofuel production methods. Both are referred to as “drop-in” biofuels technologies because they can directly replace or be used in lieu of gasoline, diesel and jet fuel without alteration to engines.

The National Advanced Biofuels Consortium, which received $ 35 million from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to accelerate biofuel development, selected the “technology pathways” for extra attention.

The consortium plans to develop the technologies to a “pilot-ready” stage over the next two years. One of the two methods focuses on converting biomass into sugars that can be biologically and chemically converted into a renewable diesel and is dubbed FLS, for fermentation of lignocellulosic sugars. The second, catalysis of lignocellulosic sugars, or CLS, focuses on converting biomass into sugars that can be chemically and catalytically converted into gasoline and diesel fuel.

Speed is important, partners needed

“Biofuels are an important part of reducing America’s dependence on foreign oil and creating jobs here at home,” Obama said, adding that the job requires partnering with the private sector to speed development.

Officials said that to accelerate the production of bio-based jet and diesel fuel for military purposes, Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack, Secretary of Energy Steven Chu and Secretary of the Navy Mabus have developed a plan to jointly construct or retrofit several drop-in biofuel plants and refineries.

Oil remains the dominant player

The United States relies on imported oil for 49 percent of its fuel supply, but about half of that comes from the Western Hemisphere with Canada at the top with 25 percent, followed by Venezuela’s 10 percent and Mexico’s 9 percent, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Some 12 percent of the nation’s imports come from Saudi Arabia.

And while U.S. dependence on imported oil has declined since peaking in 2005, the cause can be traced to the recession, improvements in efficiency and various changes in consumer behavior, the EIA says. “At the same time, increased use of domestic biofuels (ethanol and biodiesel), and strong gains in domestic production of crude oil and natural gas plant liquids expanded domestic supplies and reduced the need for imports,” officials say.

Undoubtedly that biofuel percentage will rise. The next decade will be the test.

Mike Nemeth, project manager of the San Joaquin Valley Clean Energy Organization, spent 24 years working as a newspaperman editing and reporting from Alaska to California. The SJVCEO is a nonprofit dedicated to improving quality of life through increased use of clean and alternative energy. The SJVCEO is based in Fresno, Calif. and works with cities and counties and public and private organizations to demonstrate the benefits of energy efficiency and renewable energy throughout the eight-county region of the San Joaquin Valley. For more information, go to http://www.sjvcleanenergy.org.

Article Source:
http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Mike_Nemeth