Image: MATT COLLINS
Americans burn through 140 billion gallons of gasoline a year. And even if drivers switch to more fuel-efficient cars and trucks, the nation’s fuel needs are expected to increase by a fifth over the next 20 years, thanks to dramatic increases in car and airplane use. Which is why, in addition to developing solar, wind and geothermal energy, policy makers, including President Barack Obama, are advocating biofuels to transform the transportation culture.
They’re not talking about ethanol from corn, however, which has already proved wasteful and environmentally damaging. Instead eyes are on a handful of high-tech labs around the U.S. that are perfecting ways to make the equivalent of gasoline and diesel from the lowest life-forms on the totem pole: yeast, algae and bacteria. The challenge is to make enough of these fuels economically and in a form compatible with today’s vehicles.
This article was originally published with the title The Next Generation of Biofuels.
See what we're tweeting about
16 Comments
Add CommentBack in the sixties, we were told that farming bacteria would end world food shortages. It hasn't happened yet...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhen leaders have no business background and no resurch background, the myths will be premoted and in the end we will have no energy. The present admin is cutting off exploration by removing the tax deduction or preventing access to land or sea leases.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf we used our own oil and nat gas we could become energy independent in about two years.
The amount of lies told about our nat energy supply- Clinton, Bush and B O are just as bad as the oil companies.
Words are words- just check out the U.S. Geo suv on the Bakken reserve. This not the only pool reserve.
An strong economy can drive all kinds of changes, a week econ can do little or nothing.
These bio projects are 20 or more years out there, if they work.
Stupid is big, junk science is big- you will pay for this with your jobs, freedoms and your childrens incomes.
Wake-up, the government is not going to make good descissions for our future- they haven't so far- change can go from bad to worse, and so far they have done just that.
Why does people not consider methane gas when it is the easiest form of energy man can find? I mean, we produce it everyday (with or without consciousness) and yet few countries get involved in turning it into an alternative fuel.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think that's the cheapest form of fuel and energy and environment friendly too, take for example all the methane produced EVERYDAY by the cows' feces all over the world that can be used!!
at least for SouthAmerica, most of the vehicles for example, in Peru are starting to run with gas (but not yet methane) .
All those biofuels gotten from corn and other cereals are such a waste of money and it takes away the food of our tables (making them much more expensive internationally and locally, by the way)
Do you know where I can find more information on how to get energy from methane? I know in China, it is used to produce light for houses. why is it still not used for all cars?
@Lupeames
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe thing is with methane is that it is a gas, and storing gas for travel is a very expensive and riddled with faults. For example, methane is far less energy dense than petrol, i.e. you need to burn a hell of a lot more methane to get the same energy output as less amounts of petrol. This creates problems with fuel tanks. In order to get a good amount of fuel for normal journeys, we would have to have really big/expensive tanks, which also defeats the purpose as more fuel is burned to carry the larger tanks. Also, even if we do solve the tank problem, it would very very difficult to integrate it into the current infrastructure quickly, effectively and cheaply (you would have to modify more than 3SD of the cars, and heavily mod the combustion engine, fuel stations, etc.). Change is a long, and expensive process, and it does not happen overnight. To explain China's situation (well only the part you said) they have only recently established it (compared with other industrialised nations) and because it is an economically viable source there. Any radical sorts of changes, especially ones that intended to replace economically and socially established practices are no exception to this rule.
In general, there is no "one size fits all" solution to problems of this complexity, except in very exceptional circumstances. Each niche must find the method that is best suited for it.
For example, in a few areas in India, their main source of energy for heating is pat cakes (dried cow dung cakes). This is one of the best fuels there can be: it costs nothing, it is carbon neutral, and it is renewable and a sustainable power source.
COW DUNG ALL THE WAY!!!!
Rish ;)
Methane it's have to be part of the process of Biodiesel from microalgae if you don't use the microbe from Synthetic Genomics. I think that Biodiesel from Microalgae is the answer to our problems with transportation fuels.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisRead the paper "Biodiesel from Microalgae" written by Yusuf Chisti from Massey University.
Also read the paper: "Selection of microalgae for lipid production under high levels carbon dioxide." from Yoo et al.
Very interesting report
Greetings from Chile.
I am all for progress to cellulosic ethanol and lipid based algae fuels, however it is tiring to hear the continuous misinformation spewed out by "scientists" who criticize corn based ethanol. Distillers grain is a byproduct of the ethanol process, and is a superior animal feed to straight corn. The farmer deserves to make a profit. It is well proven that any food price increase due to ethanol is minimal. The livestock and grocery industries use this as an excuse to raise their prices. The corn in a box of corn flakes costs only a few cents, and the same is true for all products that are corn based. Regarding water use; corn is grown in areas with heavy precipitation and an overabundance of water. Water is returned to the land through the transpiration cycle. It is not "used up."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisronwagn
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"Scientists" like Paul Crutzen who won a Nobel Prize for his work ozone found that corn ethanol can be up to 70% worse than gasoline because of nitrous oxide release from the fields, never mind land displacement effects.
List of recent science findings:
http://home.comcast.net/~russ676/biodiesel/page3.html
The box of corn flakes analogy grows old. There is literally about a handful of corn in a box of cornflakes. Of course the price of corn has little impact on it, that's why biofuel proponents use it as an example.
The CBO just said that ethanol will raise the cost of food programs about a billion dollars. That translates to a cost to all Americans to about 8 billion dollars.
If putting all of our corn into our gas tanks would be a disaster, putting a third of it into them is a third of that disaster.
Farmers are just businessmen. They have to earn profitability like the other businessmen.
A World Bank study found that 75% of the "global" increase in food prices came from biofuels:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/jul/03/biofuels.renewableenergy?fb_page_id=6176732491&
70% of a kernel of corn is lost to the human food chain (which includes livestock) when you make ethanol out of it. Distillers grains left over don't make up for that loss and has problems of its own:
http://www.autobloggreen.com/tag/distillers+grains/
http://www.biodiversivist.com
The Economist see's it differently read BIOFOOLS http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13437705
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe result of biofuels is people starve.
By converting our excrement to hydrogen people get to eat first. This also works on cattle excrement as well.
generating all the electricity the USA requires.
Dennis Baker
103-66 duncan ave west
penticton bc canada V2A6Z3
cell 250-462-2771
fax 250-493-3463
dennisbaker2003@hotmail.com
RE : The solution to climate change.
( human excrement + nuclear waste = hydrogen )
The USA discharges Trillions of tons of sewage annually, sufficient quantity to sustain electrical generation requirements of the USA.
Redirecting existing sewage systems to containment facilities would be a considerable infrastructure modification project.
It is the intense radiation that causes the conversion of organic material into hydrogen, therefore what some would consider the most dangerous waste because of its radiation would be the best for this utilization.
I believe the combination of clean water and clean air, will increase the life expectance of humans.
yours sincerely
Dennis Baker
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/newsarticle.aspx?id=13046&LangType=2057&terms=hydrogen
http://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/010/0001/0001/0012/0002/0008/s7_e.htm
I never hear of the work that a small company, Syntroleum, has done the the Fischer-Troupes Process of turning carbon base material into diesel fuel. A couple of years ago, they have teamed up with Tyson Foods to produce diesel from uneatable waste from chicken processing. No carbon dioxide is released into the air; also no sulfur or other contaminants released into the air. The two partners are now building a large scale plant to produce diesel at a reasonable cost. Diesel engines are more efficient,travels further per gallon and with the Syntroleum-Tyson product will be cheaper and cleaner than any other transportation fuel used today. Did I mention the Syntroleum process can use methane produced from land fills. Also, their process can produce jet fuel as well-it was used in the Air Force demonstration with the B-52 Boomer.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiswell now I guess you know that I designed a Portable wheat starch paint removal system 3 months prior to BOEING approval on all the aircraft they manufacture.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIts also been approved on the Stealth Bomber 'newer than a b52". I was tortured and imprisoned to facilitate the theft of that technology
The reality is nothing is proposed to replace fossil fuel powered electrical generating facilities, except my
Human excrement + Nuclear waste = Hydrogen
One major problem for improving energy efficiency is that people want cars that will do everything in any situation. It is a simple matter to run cars on wood. But such cars are only good for long distances. Instead of building hybrids, a hire system where you rent a vehicle as a function of your exact immediate need would be far better. A small personal low-speed electric car could do the rest.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThere are still relatively few people aware of the process of obtaining biofuels from biomass pyrolysis. I have been following this technology since 2001, which can be seen at WWW.EPRIDA.COM . It converts any biomass into hydrogen and biochar, a usefull fertiliser, economoically and with no need for energy inputs. Therefore it is effectively sequestering CO2, and as such deserves carbon credits...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat you fail to comprehend is the fact that none of these so called solutions is seen as a potential threat to the fossil fuel industry. None of these activities could replace fossil fuel powered electrical generating facilities, so lets pretend and play stock market profiteer.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFossil fuel powered electrical generating facilities are with out peers when it comes to being the largest emitter of the greenhouse gases that are attributed to inducing climate change. There are 1000 in North America according to the NAFTA / CEC.
My suggested solution would replace these facilities.
Dennis Baker
penticton bc canada
fax/ phone 250-493-3463
dennisbaker2003@hotmail.com
RE : The solution to climate change.
( human excrement + nuclear waste = hydrogen )
The USA discharges Trillions of tons of sewage annually, sufficient quantity to sustain electrical generation requirements of the USA.
Redirecting existing sewage systems to containment facilities would be a considerable infrastructure modification project.
It is the intense radiation that causes the conversion of organic material into hydrogen, therefore what some would consider the most dangerous waste because of its radiation would be the best for this utilization.
I believe the combination of clean water and clean air, will increase the life expectance of humans.
yours sincerely
Dennis Baker
Dennis Baker
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thispenticton bc canada
fax/ phone 250-493-3463
dennisbaker2003@hotmail.com
RE : The solution to climate change.
( human excrement + nuclear waste = hydrogen )
The USA discharges Trillions of tons of sewage annually, sufficient quantity to sustain electrical generation requirements of the USA.
Redirecting existing sewage systems to containment facilities would be a considerable infrastructure modification project.
It is the intense radiation that causes the conversion of organic material into hydrogen, therefore what some would consider the most dangerous waste because of its radiation would be the best for this utilization.
I believe the combination of clean water and clean air, will increase the life expectance of humans.
yours sincerely
Dennis Baker
Comment on "the next generation of biofuels," section: "going beyond corn," second paragraph, last sentence. This statement is not correct. Depending upon how the corn is raised, the fuel used might be a half gallon per acre resulting in 100-200 bushels of corn or 300-600 gallons of ethanol. Furthermore, if no-till farming is employed the fuel used to produce corn could be much less.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnother issue concerns the use of the land when corn is not produced. Since land is relatively expensive, if corn is not being produced, another crop will fill its place and approximately the same amount of fuel will be consumed. Cosequently, I question whether the fuel used for raising the corn is really an important factor in the cost of ethanol.
I grew up on several farms in Kansas, spent nearly 30 years working as a physicist, and have now been farming for about 15 years. We do not produce corn; we produce wheat, sorghum and beans. However, the farming costs for corn are about the same as other crops, depending more on farming methods than crop differences.
Thanks to all the Inventors for all the efforts that they did for the beneficials of mankind. why there's a lot of people minding much more on criticize than helping to develop the things to make it works. but hopefully all the inventions should be more on humanitarian purpose not for destruction. How about if study the coconut oil and develop it for more and bring it to possibilities of producing it same as gasoline? I think that is more easy because coconut has its natural product for humanitarian purposes. Thank you!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this