After fossil fuels

[tempo]

For the purposes of this thread, let's stipulate that fossil fuels are fucked. Too expensive to get, too harmful to burn, whatever.

What's next? Political will aside, what is physically possible?

Here's my current understanding. Please correct me where needed.

corn ethanol - Pros: renewable, provided that good weather and fertilizer are available. Cons: still consumes more energy to make than it delivers when burned. Who knows when that might change. Also consumes agriculture resources that could be used for other purposes.

cellulose ethanol - Pros: similar to corn ethanol, plus it's much more energy efficient. Cons: Made from agricultural scrap, and there's not enough of it to satisfy a significant fraction of today's demand.

nuclear - Pros: plenty of fuel available, and the technology is available today. Cons: Radioactive waste. Risk (though small) of catastophic accidents. Security overhead on materials and technology.

solar and wind - Pros: captures renewable solar energy without agriculture, well suited to local, small-scale generation. Cons: poorly suited to centralized, large-scale generation.

hydrogen - Pros: clean burning. Cons: It's a pipe dream. There's no natural source of hydrogen. Why did I even bother listing it? I might as well have listed "batteries" as a source of energy.

Nuclear seems like the winner to me, but it's not renewable. Is there any source that can sustain our current consumption?

[Patas]

Well if you are talking about cars you have to talk about the air car: http://zeropollutionmotors.us/

[tempo]

Well if you are talking about cars you have to talk about the air car: http://zeropollutionmotors.us/

Yeah, I saw a show about that recently. Cool technology. An efficient storage mechanism, but it's not an energy source.

[wileE]

There are other sources that can be used for Ethanol: Sugar can and switchgrass to name two. Both of those are much more efficient to use than corn. Plus, farmers have been selling land all over because it is no longer needed. If ethanol takes off, farmers can still make money and even start new farms because the demand will be there.

Nuclear is probably the best candidate. With some reactors (the kind the rest of the world uses, but US isn't allowed) have very little nuclear waste. They re-use spent plutonium. The side affect, which is the cause of the ban in the US, is weapons grade plutonium.

[Slar]

I firmly believe that the current energy crisis will be solved once prices are high enough to cause them to start canceling races. Their fans will not allow that to happen, and that's where the jumps in technology will occur. It's a volatile mix of engineering know-how and rabid dedication.

[Patas]

Yeah, I saw a show about that recently. Cool technology. An efficient storage mechanism, but it's not an energy source.

So, when you are talking about energy sources you are strictly talking about means to produce electrical energy?

What could be more efficient than power our cars with compressed air? To me the only con of compressed air is that it is only practical at the small scale.

[jneale]

cellulose ethanol - Pros: similar to corn ethanol, plus it's much more energy efficient. Cons: Made from agricultural scrap, and there's not enough of it to satisfy a significant fraction of today's demand.

this is the one that drives me nuts - there have been tests for years using giant miscanthus:

http://www.bluestem.ca/images/miscanthus-giganteus3.jpg
Hybrid grass may prove to be valuable fuel source

Molly McElroy, News Bureau
217-333-5802; mmcelroy@uiuc.edu

link (http://www.news.uiuc.edu/NEWS/05/0927miscanthus.html)
9/27/05


CHAMPAIGN, Ill. — Giant Miscanthus (Miscanthus x giganteus), a hybrid grass that can grow 13 feet high, may be a valuable renewable fuel source for the future, researchers at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign say.

Stephen P. Long, a professor of crop sciences and of plant biology, recently took that message to Dublin, Ireland, where the British Association for the Advancement of Science sponsored the annual BA Festival of Science Sept. 3-10.

Closer to home, two of Long’s doctoral students, Emily A. Heaton and Frank G. Dohleman, delivered their Miscanthus findings at the 49th annual Agronomy Day, held on campus Aug. 18 and attended by more than 1,100 visitors from across the Midwest.

“Forty percent of U.S. energy is used as electricity,” Heaton said. “The easiest way to get electricity is using a solid fuel such as coal.”

Dry, leafless Miscanthus stems can be used as a solid fuel. The cool-weather-friendly perennial grass, sometimes referred to as elephant grass or E-grass, grows from an underground stem-like organ called a rhizome. Miscanthus, a crop native to Asia and a relative of sugarcane, drops its slender leaves in the winter, leaving behind tall bamboo-like stems that can be harvested in early spring and burned for fuel.

Rhizomatous grasses such as Miscanthus are very clean fuels, said Dohleman, who is studying for a doctorate in plant biology. Nutrients such as nitrogen are transferred to the rhizome to be saved until the next growing season, he said.

Burning Miscanthus produces only as much carbon dioxide as it removes from the air as it grows, said Heaton, who is seeking a doctorate in crop sciences. That balance means there is no net effect on atmospheric carbon dioxide levels, which is not the case with fossil fuels, she said.

Miscanthus also is a very efficient fuel, because the energy ratio of input to output is less than 0.2, Heaton said. In contrast, the ratios exceed 0.8 for ethanol and biodiesel from canola, which are other plant-derived energy sources.

Besides being a clean, efficient and renewable fuel source, Miscanthus also is remarkably easy to grow. Upon reaching maturity, Miscanthus has few needs as it outgrows weeds, requires little water and minimal fertilizer and thrives in untilled fields, Heaton said. In untilled fields, various wildlife species make their homes in the plant’s leafy canopy and in the surrounding undisturbed soil.

Illinois researchers have found that Miscanthus grown in the state has greater crop yields than in Europe, where it has been used commercially for years, Long said. Full-grown plants produce 10-30 tons per acre dry weight each year. Miscanthus yields in lowland areas around the Alps, where the climate is similar to the Midwest, are at least 25 tons per acre dry weight, wrote Heaton and colleagues in a paper published in 2004 in the journal Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change.

Last year, Illinois researchers obtained 60 tons per hectare (2.47 acre), Long said at the BA Festival of Science.

Using a computer simulator, Heaton predicted that if just 10 percent of Illinois land mass was devoted to Miscanthus, it could provide 50 percent of Illinois electricity needs. Using Miscanthus for energy would not necessarily reduce energy costs in the short term, Heaton said, but there would be significant savings in carbon dioxide production.

The Illinois Miscanthus crop began three years ago when Heaton planted 400 Miscanthus rhizomes, which were generated from three rhizomes donated by the Turfgrass Program in the department of natural resources and environmental sciences. Because Miscanthus is sterile, cuttings of Miscanthus rhizomes must be used to create new plants.

Now in their third year, the three 33-by-33 feet Miscanthus plots at the intersection of South First Street and Airport Road in Savoy, Ill., are considered mature. Their 10-foot tall stems are twice as high as switchgrass, a prairie grass native to Illinois. Grown side by side, Miscanthus produces more than twice as much biomass as switchgrass, Heaton said.

To investigate how Miscanthus is so productive, Dohleman and others take measurements of photosynthesis throughout the day. He measures the intensity of the sun and then places a leaf in a chamber, allowing him to measure the rate of photosynthesis depending upon ambient sunlight. Preliminary results show that Miscanthus has a 27 percent greater rate of photosynthesis at midday compared with switchgrass.

Nine different fields across the state are being used to help estimate Miscanthus productivity, Heaton said. Plots in Champaign and Christian counties each have more than 2 acres of Miscanthus, and DeKalb, Pike, Pope, Wayne, Fayette and Mason counties have smaller plots. Plots in Champaign County have shown the greatest yearly yields, according to Long’s 2004 progress report to the Illinois Council on Food and Agricultural Research, which funded the experiments.

“It is my hope that Illinois will take the lead in renewable energy and that the state will benefit from that lead,” Long said.

Other varieties of Miscanthus have been grown successfully in Indiana, Michigan and Ohio. However, the giant Miscanthus being grown by the Illinois researchers has the greatest potential as a fuel source because of its high yields and because it is sterile and cannot become a weed, Heaton said. “Miscanthus sacchariflorus and some of the other fertile Miscanthus species can be quite invasive,” she said.

At a research station near Hornum, Denmark, giant Miscanthus has been grown for 22 years in Europe’s longest-running experimental field. The crop has never been invasive and rhizome spread has been no more than 1.5 meters (4.92 feet), said Uffe Jorgensen, senior scientist for the Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences.

The next step, Long said, is to demonstrate how Miscanthus goes from a plant to a power source. Existing U.S. power plants could be modified to use Miscanthus for fuel as in Europe, he said.

Long collaborates with researchers at the Institute of Genomic Biology to study whether Miscanthus could be converted to alcohol, which could be used as fuel.

[tempo]

So, when you are talking about energy sources you are strictly talking about means to produce electrical energy?

Yes, I'm wondering about the source.

The future may indeed be filled with vehicles that run on batteries or compressed air cannisters, but you still need an energy source to charge up the battery or compress the air. If the car plugs into the electrical grid, then something has to power the grid.

[lutz]

What could be more efficient than power our cars with compressed air? To me the only con of compressed air is that it is only practical at the small scale.Isn't there also the problem of the containers needing to be very strong and heavy to cope with the pressure? And small risk of explosion...

[Fourthisto]

I really think something like this will be a real consideration in the next five years (http://www.greasecar.com/)

Oh, and the one that runs on bacon grease..... now THAT'S a fuel source I could generate daily! :D

[Jumpman]

I think it will need to be a mixture of things. One we will need to lower consumption, I don't think there is any doubt about it. Some may be through technology (see LED's and such) for lighting homes, but must also come through changing habits.

I also think there will need to be a mixture of power generating sources that are complementary: Solar and wind for individual homes and neighborhoods (This might also be able to supply power to electric cars), Nuclear for large scale/industrial applications.....

I don't think there is a single magic bullet, or that there is likely to be.

[Tommyboy]

Isn't there also the problem of the containers needing to be very strong and heavy to cope with the pressure? And small risk of explosion...

Opposed to running around with a flimsy tank holding 20 gallons of a highly flammable liquid? Think Ford Pinto (http://www.fordpinto.com/blowup.htm).

Nuclear is iffy to meet the future demand. Need to solve the waste disposal issue. So now they sit in metal containers next to each plant waiting for trouble.

Never mind the next China Syndrome crisis that reverse public opinion.

Hmmm, what do you call a nuclear reactor emergency in China? Thought I heard with the recent quake activity that a reactor research facility was in trouble?

[markalot]

Soylent Green!



Solar. Solar might be panels on top of your car to charge the batteries or it might be renewable fuel sources (plants convert solar energy into growth, we then use the plants to reclaim some of the energy). We need to switch to 'everything hybrid', then continue to work on efficiency to minimize the amount of fuel required.

Hydrogen. Easy to make, burns real good.

[berzerker]

Certainly there must be some way to grow some sort of corn - or, maybe miscanthus or whatever - based plant item, that can be processed via wind, soloar and hydrodynamic technologies, irradiated in a nuclear plant, stored in a compressed air tank, shipped to Arabia, buried for a couple thousand years, and them drilled for later...

[Patas]

Yes, I'm wondering about the source.

The future may indeed be filled with vehicles that run on batteries or compressed air cannisters, but you still need an energy source to charge up the battery or compress the air. If the car plugs into the electrical grid, then something has to power the grid.

Well what about the compressed air cultivating machinery we are going to use to plant and harvest crops for ethanol, which in turn will provide energy to compress the air? A reciprocal agreement.

[dannyboy]

Kill two birds with one stone. (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/04/070418091932.htm)

[drougan]

Kill two birds with one stone. (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/04/070418091932.htm)

Awesome.

Also, are there any organic chemists out there familiar with photosynthesis who remember how that process works? I kinda glazed over during that part of biology. :o

[Fourthisto]

The future may indeed be filled with vehicles that run on batteries or compressed air cannisters, but you still need an energy source to charge up the battery or compress the air.But they've developed cars that will run using the reaction between hyrdrogen and oxygen. There's no "plugging in" involved.


http://green.yahoo.com/news/ap/20080616/ap_on_bi_ge/japan_honda.html

A breakthrough in the design of the fuel cell stack, which is the unit that powers the car's motor, allowed engineers to lighten the body, expand the interior and increase efficiency, Honda said.

The fuel cell draws on energy synthesized through a chemical reaction between hydrogen gas and oxygen in the air, and a lithium-ion battery pack provides supplemental power. The FCX Clarity has a range of about 270-miles per tank with hydrogen consumption equivalent to 74 miles per gallon, according to the carmaker.

The biggest obstacles standing in the way of wider adoption of fuel cell vehicles are cost and the dearth of hydrogen fuel stations. For the Clarity's release in California, Honda said it received 50,000 applications through its website but could only consider those living near stations in Torrance, Santa Monica and Irvine.

[Tweak Tweak]

Nuclear energy is "non-renewable" only under specious definitions concocted to guide the outlay of subsidies. Practically speaking, it is inexhaustible.

In other carbon news, acolytes of warming have apparently been resorting to Pascal's Gambit as far back as 1992, and touting it proudly in Australian newspapers as recently as last week. In reasoned debate, this is the Cheynes-Stokes breathing of an argument:

"I recall the perspective offered by former Australian science minister Barry Jones. In his World Meteorological Day Address in 1992, he applied the famous wager of the 17th-century French scientist Blaise Pascal to the climate change problem. If there were no God and one believed, pondered Pascal, what is the loss? Pascal's wager would seem to make the case against the dissenters."

Luck with that, hippy.

[Merv Kemp]

Nuclear energy is "non-renewable" only under specious definitions concocted to guide the outlay of subsidies. Practically speaking, it is inexhaustible.


There's your answer, fishbulb.

Let's go nuclear.

[Duemellon]

There's your answer, fishbulb.

Let's go nuclear.All the cars in that future need to have bumpers as thick as Chernobyl concrete and airbags of lead.

[Merv Kemp]

All the cars in that future need to have bumpers as thick as Chernobyl concrete and airbags of lead.

I was thinking more along the line of Nuclear power plants powering the grid, and therefore powering the plug-in cars.

[Breeze]

There's your answer, fishbulb.

http://i289.photobucket.com/albums/ll207/briannasphotography/z75459348.jpg

[wileE]

All the cars in that future need to have bumpers as thick as Chernobyl concrete and airbags of lead.
Like nuclear submarines and aircraft carriers? Those seem to be contained rather well. Of course, they aren't running into each other every day and driven by idiots.

[Breeze]

Of course, they aren't running into each other every day and driven by idiots.
Of course not--we're not talking about oil tankers, after all.

[tempo]

Hydrogen. Easy to make, burns real good.

But they've developed cars that will run using the reaction between hyrdrogen and oxygen. There's no "plugging in" involved.

Okay, maybe I need to be educated here, but where the hell are we going to get hydrogen?

There's no natural source! You have to make it with some other energy source. The only manufacturing process with a positive net energy output is to make it from natural gas, which is a fossil fuel.

[markalot]

Water.

http://www.nmsea.org/Curriculum/7_12/electrolysis/electrolysis.htm

It takes energy of course.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/blogs/science_news/2936846.html

[tempo]

Currently, Hydrogen production is also limited to industrial refineries and agricultural areas, where the gas is produced on-site using methane, says Bourgeois. ... If electricity needed to produce the hydrogen is wind- or solar-generated, the entire process is, essentially, emissions-free.

This is my point -- hydrogen is not an energy source. It is a storage and distribution mechanism only. You have to make it from fossil fuels or some other energy source.

[Fourthisto]

I think the most important part of that quote is "Currently production is limited".... there are developing studies being done on Photoelectrochemical cells that produce hyrdogen that could, in the future, yield fantastic results for the usage and availability of hydrogen as an energy 'carrier'.

I agree with what you're saying. Right now the most common way to produce hydrogen is getting in from natural gas. Your scenario is that fossil fuels are gonzo, so that wouldn't be an option. But as long as we're looking into our crystal balls, it is a decent estimation that hydrogen will be amongst the choices we will have.

This is my point -- hydrogen is not an energy source. It is a storage and distribution mechanism only. You have to make it from fossil fuels or some other energy source.You could also CURRENTLY get it from an algae bioreactor. Just not in big enough quantities to feed a nation of energysuckers. ;)

Oh yeah, and if you want a real laff, check out the comments on this pertinent vid:

Here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMrRKFETsbo)

[tempo]

Oh yeah, and if you want a real laff, check out the comments on this pertinent vid:

Here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMrRKFETsbo)

Ha! Perfect example of how people confuse an intermediate fuel with the energy source that makes it. His water-based cutting torch seems kewl enough, but yeah, it requires an external power source, folks. :)

[tempo]

Well what about the compressed air cultivating machinery we are going to use to plant and harvest crops for ethanol, which in turn will provide energy to compress the air? A reciprocal agreement.

:D

Homer Simpson: Okay, boy. This is where all the hard work, sacrifice, and painful scaldings pay off.
Employee: Four pounds of grease... that comes to... sixty-three cents.
Homer Simpson: Woo-hoo!
Bart Simpson: Dad, all that bacon cost twenty-seven dollars.
Homer Simpson: Yeah, but your mom paid for that!
Bart Simpson: But doesn't she get her money from you?
Homer Simpson: And I get my money from grease! What's the problem?

[Patas]

:D

Homer Simpson: Okay, boy. This is where all the hard work, sacrifice, and painful scaldings pay off.
Employee: Four pounds of grease... that comes to... sixty-three cents.
Homer Simpson: Woo-hoo!
Bart Simpson: Dad, all that bacon cost twenty-seven dollars.
Homer Simpson: Yeah, but your mom paid for that!
Bart Simpson: But doesn't she get her money from you?
Homer Simpson: And I get my money from grease! What's the problem?

Possibly, the best simpsons episode. :D. However, I think the love-love relationship between compressed air and ethanol would be much better than Homer's bacon grease relationship.