digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

See the original image at discovermagazine.com —

Anything Into Ethanol

discovermagazine.com — Forget about corn —future biofuels will be made of wood chips and trash.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • MavTheMaverick, on 10/04/2008, -6/+6I hope we see more initiatives like this in the future!
  • sundamole, on 10/04/2008, -3/+4The ultimate solution for the energy crisis!
    • nick111, on 10/04/2008, -0/+3There won't be a single solution.

      What we'll probably wind up with is decentralised systems taking advantage of the absolutely free energy - eg: Solar, Wind etc, backed up by "burning stuff" at night or when (if) input from the passive systems doesn't keep up.

      If you'll forgive the blog-pimp, I went on about this as part of my Google-Save-The-World http://www.project10tothe100.com/ idea here:

      http://www.ikostar.com/2008/10/01/the-google-savin ...

      Which I confess is probably more to do with my love of gadgets than anything - but people far smarter than me (eg: the Segway guy) are moving in the same direction.
  • DestroyFascism, on 10/04/2008, -6/+2Yes but first you extract oil, heat and methane. But don't tell the government anything sensable, they will kill you or take your house and sell it giving money to big oil and coal lobbyists...

    Sort of..
  • unpolloloco, on 10/04/2008, -4/+10Biofuel works on limited-scale operations, when all that is being used is waste and that waste has a very high energy density (i.e. waste vegetable oil). However, using stuff like this will take more energy to convert it to fuel than would be extracted from the final result.

    The answer is wind/solar/nuclear, combined with better battery technology. Still a decade or so off at least. Until then, it's best if we focus on conserving fuel and researching new technology.
    • wonderchemist, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2Energy balance really depends on what your waste fuel is, and how you account for it. For example, it's not really fair to account for WVO harvest, production, and shipping to the fryer, cause that's going to happen anyway. So really your comparing energy required to land fill vs. energy required to process it into fuel and the energy you get back from burning it.

      I personally believe lots of small solutions will be the answer than any big solution (aside from cheap fusion if we ever learn how to do it).
    • SmartfulDodger, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2Wind, solar and nuclear energy aren't a decade away. Wind power doesn't need any more innovations to make it economical. At this point, its simply an economy of scale problem. Once more people order more wind turbines, manufacturing costs will drop.

      Solar energy isn't ready for the big market yet - it's not efficient enough in generating energy. But industry estimates that it will be ready to rock in 18-24 months.

      Nuclear energy will be the slowest form of new energy - simply because it takes years to get the proper permits and find a proper site before building the reactor can begin.

      • Prototek, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2How do you store the energy that wind and solar create when there isn't any wind or sun? That's a huge problem with solar and wind. Currently, they are technologies which can supplement current supply but not replace it.
      • asskey, on 10/04/2008, -2/+2That's why nuclear is the answer, and it's here now! We just need to friggin' use it.
      • nick111, on 10/04/2008, -1/+2@Prototek ever hear of batteries?

        Maybe you haven't. If you pull your phone apart, you'll find a solid oblong lump in it... that's a battery. Look it up on Wikipedia.
      • scooby2, on 10/05/2008, -0/+3There are inefficient ways to store energy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_storage Basically when there is excess electricity, you use that to pump water into a reservoir that can then release the water to a lower reservoir (hydro electric) when more electricity is needed. It is like a huge battery. Brilliant idea and about the best we have at this point in time.

        The problem with wind and solar is that they are both regional only. It takes more electricity than either generates to push it over the grid from say Arizona to Chicago. They could definitely put wind based up in Chicago but we still need something like nuke power to supplement the wind.

        More electric cars, more nuke plants and breeder reactors, and start pushing wind/solar regionally. Most commuters that drive only really need 40-60 miles round trip. It should not be too hard to come up with technology to take car of that. If GM says the Volt can do 40 miles on a charge, Honda/Toyota should be able to do 60+ miles easy.
      • unpolloloco, on 10/05/2008, -0/+1Economically, they are more than a decade away.....
      • SmartfulDodger, on 10/05/2008, -0/+2To Protek - Utilities don't often rely on just one source of energy. A typical utility company could use wind power (or solar) for the majority of its energy. When the wind isn't blowing, the company can instantly switch to its baseline power source - typically natural gas or coal. While you're correct that we can't currently rely on just wind or solar, I don't believe anyone is arguing for that. What I would like to see if a substantially increase of alternative energy in the market.

        To Asskey - A nuclear powerplant takes a long, long, long time to build. We're talking around 7-10 years before power begins to flow. While its an important part of an energy plan, it will do nothing to help solve our short term problems. And of course, we still have the issue of spent nuclear fuel - the industries' Achilles heel. Wind farms could begin providing energy today - and solar fields could do the same in 1-2 years. Why focus on just one solution when we could have many?

        To Unpolloloco - No, they are less that a decade away. Wind farms are springing up already, and solar power is close to being efficient enough for the market. With tax breaks provided by the Renewable Energy and Job Creation Act of 2008, these alternative energies are competitive in today's market.
    • Dumbledorito, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2Given the amount of money and enegy oil requires, alternate forms of running our infrastructure are looking cheaper and cheaper. I'm speaking of the money and energy expended in the form of military efforts that have somehow made oil even more expensive. Funny, huh?
    • slightlygifted, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2existing cars can be easily converted to run ethanol, and for a small price. maybe use wind, nuclear, and solar to power the production of ethanol but you cant replace every car on the road with wind, solar, and nuclear cars. and we cant have every gas station out there go out of business.
      • SmartfulDodger, on 10/05/2008, -0/+1I have a feeling we'll begin to see more and more cars running on biofuels, CNG, or even electricity. Gas stations can always adapt and offer a new type of fuel without going out of business.
    • nick111, on 10/04/2008, -2/+2Nuke is only the "answer" if you've been sucked in by the ***** put out by the nuke lobby.

      The advantages of decentralised systems are :

      - Small and modular is good systems design : When the technology advances, new units can simply be swapped in/out
      - Massively reduced transmission costs : currently losses are at around 10%
      - Reduced geopolitical fighting over limited or centrally controlled resources.
      - Robustness : No massive power-cuts.[3]
      - Safety : No nuclear leaks or meltdowns.[1][2][4]
      - Independence : People aren’t tied to govt or corporate systems. They can look after themselves.
      - No need to wait : while governments or utilities to “debate” about what’s best for us, the market can simply route around them.
      - Existing monolithic infrastructure, both physical and political need not be affected/involved.
      - A range of possible fuel sources - reduced dependence on resources controlled elsewhere.

      And before you gulliable pro-nuke people chime in with your new, shiney safety claims... please observe:

      [1] http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518 ...
      [2] http://www.euronews.net/en/article/24/07/2008/fran ...
      [3] http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/may/29/bri ...
      [4] http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/may/29/bri ...

  • johndi, on 10/04/2008, -1/+16Ethanol Green is people!
    • wonderchemist, on 10/04/2008, -0/+4Grandpa is sure making my engine knock today.
      • inigomntoya, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1Its all that lettuce and celery Grandma made him eat. Wish he would have stuck with the fatty foods diet...
  • OneLess, on 10/04/2008, -0/+30Next step: Mr. Fusion
  • Wootfaced, on 10/04/2008, -10/+0
  • gozroth, on 10/04/2008, -0/+15where we're going we don't need corn!
  • bactin, on 10/04/2008, -3/+4ethanol fuel releases more CO2 than gasoline without it! that needs to be addressed.
    • tbredofsin, on 10/04/2008, -3/+3Plus it requires just as much energy to make. Ethanol is a total waste of time and money being used to line corn lobbyists' pockets
      • docbob84, on 10/05/2008, -1/+2...did you even glance at the *title* of the article? I mean this takes "read the ***** article" to a whole other level. How does turning wood chips into car fuel have anything to do with corn lobbyists?
    • Prototek, on 10/04/2008, -0/+5Ethanol gets it's carbon from the atmosphere and not the ground. It's not adding any CO2 to the atmosphere.
  • Persian5Life, on 10/04/2008, -0/+8i say we just use geothermal energy, yes i know i will get buried mainly because of ignorance to how abundant geothermal energy really is.
    • jperson, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1I agree completely, actually.
    • SmartfulDodger, on 10/04/2008, -0/+4If you get buried, it will be because you advocate for just one energy solution. A realistic answer should draw on all types of solutions - geothermal, wind, hydro, solar, oil, natural gas, coal, biofuels, algae, and nuclear.
    • WELLDOITLIVE, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1Don't kill the algae
  • Wootfaced, on 10/04/2008, -5/+1
    • cheezintern, on 10/04/2008, -2/+2and you get worse mileage than gasoline, so you have to fuel up more often, and it'll probably cost more in the long run to drivers since ethanol at the pump will probably be as expensive as gas is currently...I don't think producers out to give consumers a break.
    • kinerry, on 10/04/2008, -1/+1it's called cellulosic ethanol you tard
  • SilverBlade2k, on 10/04/2008, -3/+4I'd rather use an electric engine then an ethanol-based engine.
  • smoothmann, on 10/04/2008, -0/+10Sperm into ethanol?

    What? Thats what the title says.........ANYTHING
    • yacks, on 10/04/2008, -0/+4MrBabyman to Ethanol? like you said.. ANYTHING.
    • NickLee808, on 10/04/2008, -0/+3"Son, your father needs help filling up the car..."
    • geologist62, on 10/05/2008, -0/+1they would have to put little cups in everyone's shower or some kind of separator at the WWTP
  • jperson, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2If it were possible for people to rely on themselves for energy, it will be nothing short of a revolution.
  • cheesylobster, on 10/04/2008, -0/+3The catch: the only car that will be able to run on trash will be a time-traveling DeLorean.
    • inverselogic, on 10/04/2008, -0/+0and your mom will be a teenager like you who wants to ***** all the time.
    • DeadBabyFloat, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1Ive got no problem with this.
  • dognose, on 10/04/2008, -0/+4It's bad news. When we can chop down our forests to fuel our cars, we'll do it.
  • LTSVN, on 10/04/2008, -0/+6So...it's like Back to the Future? He runs his car on trash. That'd be awesome =D
    • yurimxpxman, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2That's exactly what I thought of. It'd be really neat if it looked just like it did in the movie.
  • Propethic, on 10/04/2008, -1/+0The best way to get oil and fuel for the future is through biological processes and through nature
  • GeorgeTirebiter, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1Since the passage of the "bailout", we now have another material from which to derive ethanol-the dollar bill! It contains a large percentage of cellulose and is now economically feasible to use in large quantities for ethanol production. It won't be long before the 5 dollar bill becomes viable as well.
  • harrypowers, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1Man, I just wish there was some form of energy close to poulation centers, simply laying about, didn't need to be grown, and not owned by anyone.
  • elumpkin81, on 10/04/2008, -1/+0This is a real and true means to fuel our cars and vehicles and rely less on oil giants.
  • kinerry, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2This is about as old as news gets

    Do people just not read anymore?
  • FaithclubDotNet, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1Sure everyone is for making energy out of trash, but what happens when we get a trash shortage?
    • ypSami, on 10/05/2008, -0/+1We go have a beer, and congratulate each-other on a job well-done.
  • rex84, on 10/04/2008, -0/+3What about hemp? Nobody ever talks about what a great source of ethanol hemp is.
    • svendm, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1Hemp can be turned into ethanol using this process and similar ones, yes.

      However, hemp competes with food crops.
    • Charkol3, on 11/03/2008, -0/+0Hemp even has some *caugh* useable byproducts.
  • Hollyvvood, on 10/04/2008, -1/+0FTA:

    “We’re rich in opportunities to make fairly epic gains,”

    EPIC GAINS.
  • ericjohnson0, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1Look, biofuels are smart, profitable and patriotic.

    Nice post. Thanks, BabyDude...
  • armakaryk, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2if its got cellulose it can be made into ethanol.
    i'm waiting for local fermentation stations where you take dead leaves and grass clippings for fuel credits, that'd be nice.
  • peaceninja, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1is this story going to go into the 'promising news' mortuary with all the other stories? such as the story that bubbled up a few months ago of how we can get ethanol from an oil of a tree that produces it naturally?
    • illegalcortex, on 10/05/2008, -0/+1Seriously. I've been reading the "Anything into Ethanol" (and its father, "Anything into Oil") article for at least a decade.
  • depro9, on 10/05/2008, -1/+1Stop burning ***** & dumping it into OUR atmosphere!

    assholes!
    • geologist62, on 10/05/2008, -1/+1that is a good point....burn *****....we have tons of chicken farms, cows, pigs, etc that do nothing but make *****.
  • eMPathicOne, on 10/05/2008, -0/+0Needs more Thermal Depolymerization!
  • MattH, on 10/05/2008, -0/+1The History of the whole Distilation industry from rum ,vodka whisky and ethanol has been to take a product thats in surplus or a byproduct and add value to to it by fermenting it and then clarify and concentrate it by distillation .
  • bipolarruledout, on 10/05/2008, -1/+1Because people will eventually figure out that corn ethanol is a big scam? Next going to tell me that future sweeteners might actually be made out of sugar.
  • geologist62, on 10/05/2008, -0/+1wind and solar are way too unreliable. converting wood chips from lumber mills (post production) is one. curbside collection of yard wastes; agricultural waste to name a few.

    Also, not hearing anything about tides.
  • slapthemonkey, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1Interesting article
  • Smaug52X, on 10/07/2008, -0/+1Funny how it's all about a bio-mass that can be controled by a few. Why do we have to be "controlled" at all in our energy use. We pay for it! Now there is the algae angle, which will put a ton of algae into our air, and who knows where it will be growing next. It is a highly suspect method that is frought with danger and failure.
    Every single "answer" to bio-fuel need has been wrong. All bio-mass that is used has only one use.
    Enter Hemp. A material that has so many uses it is staggering. Why not try it? Afraid to get "high"?
    Idiots! You will not be smoking clothing, building materials, oils, paper, or medicines. You will have to grow your own hybrids to enjoy, as an inalienable right to happiness and well being. Demand the use of hemp now!
    Do not fail, America.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.