Replacement Fossil Fuel?

[RookParliament]

Enter Defensive Mode: Like I wrote in my edit, I know cars won't be running on energy provided from fission, nor did I deny the need for a mix of energy sources: End Defensive Mode. Although I had overlooked the building materials used in construction.

What do you think of the possibility of ethanol? Brazil is obviously an important real world example on the viaibility of ethanol used for vehicles, in their case from sugarcane. Virtually no waste as every portion of a crop that isn't used for food, can be refined. I have also read that ethanol provides a net energy surplus after all the calories put into growing and refining it, although I can't provide the source I saw that in just now, and they may be completely wrong. Perhaps in due time, with enough political will, the world can put petroleum low enough in the energy mix that the most important job of petroleum is in making plastics. Wonderful, beautiful plastics.

Edit: Also it seems that corn might be less efficient than sugarcane, because of the oil used for the harvesting vehicles. Still this is one of the few bits of optimism in my endlessly cynical self

 

[Justin S.]

Rook, I appreciate the interest and discussion. I read your edit, but simply wanted to be thorough in answering the question. Dont worry, your ass is covered

About ethanol: I think it, like many other alternative fuels (especially the bio) shows great potential for limited applications- and this is the catch. There are really two issues here- local or limited application, and macro level infrastructural systems. There are innumerable ways to power something at a small level (an arbitrary closed system) when one doesnt take into account all the complexities of a broader view. The phrase "source-to-service" represents the most robust analysis of energy systems, because it acknowledges the entire process. The small, bounded picture is a convenience for the human mind, but is not the reality at hand.

The bio fuels represent all other sorts of problems. Where to grow these crops? Factors appear such as soil conditions, rainfall, the very real possibility of climate change, deforestation, less food grown, the list goes on and on. This is the crux of a energy source- it basically has to be sitting there waiting for us. If we have to put all sorts of labor into acquiring it (like growing millions of hectares of crops) it simply wont cut it at a large scale- which we always are faced with due to our population!

 

[the alumnus]

interesting discussion. i have looked into a coherent energy policy myself, and am currently drafting a paper on the subject.

i'll start with the most politically charged. ethanol is, as i understand it, a net energy loser. ethanol is made from corn, and corn requires vast amounts of fossil fuels to grow. basically it requires more oil to make ethanol than it does to just make gas. brazil is a different story, because their ethanol comes from sugar cane. being in the tropics, they have the ability to grow a crop that produces huge amounts of sugar and doesn't have the same energy inputs (fertilizer) that corn does. perhaps we could make ethanol from sugar beets? but then, sugar beets don't have a large lobby group (adm) and powerful senators backing them.

i'm not sure about biodiesel. i've read many reports that biodiesel from soybeans are a net energy winner, because they require less fertilizer (legumes have nitrogen fixing bacteria). the inherent problem is that we can't grow enough food feed ourselves and gas all of our cars. there simply isn't enough arable land.

the only solution i see is a comprehensive program of reduced gas usage (increased public transit, more dense urban development), increased use of photovoltaic arrays coupled with hydrogen fuel cell batteries to release stored solar energy during dark times, increased use of nuclear power, increased use of wind power (again coupled with an efficient power storage mechanism) all dispersed throughout the grid. add to that increased use of diesel hybrid cars which can be plugged into the grid to recharge. it would require enourmous investments, but all the technology exists currently. even still, it might require cut backs in per person energy usage. any thoughts?

 

[Lord SteveO]

I think we all have to do our bit to some extent. It pretty obvious that the USA uses a ridiculous ammount of energy per person, when people there could easily live on much less usage.
The same is true in many developed countries.

But at the same time a change in thinking is needed to help with any change in usage. I can hardly see the USA dropping its love of big hungry cars and using small hybrid or electric ones any time soon!
The world needs a big change of mind to bring about the changes we all know are going to have to come about at some point in the future.

As far as power sources go, i think solar cells is one way. Even if you make every house have a roof made of them you can lower the volume you need to make elsewhere. Where we live there are houses actually making so much energy with solar and wind that the sell it to the grid and profit from it! Imagine a city with every roof coated with energy generating tiles!

 

[MURAI]

All these "miraculous" alternative fuels share the same decisive flaw- They are not energy sources.

"Clean" energy storage mediums are useless on a large scale because they always, due to unavoidable laws of entropy, result in net losses of usable energy (start-up energy coming from polluting sources).

Take the device in the video. Water by itself produces no usable chemical energy, only kinetic (dams, mills, etc). Notice that he uses electricty- where and how is this generated, transported, stored? At every stage there are losses no matter how efficient. The ammount put in to the chemical reaction of water conversion will always be greater than the amount out- saying otherwise breaks with every discovery concerning matter and space time (in addition to your own personal experience).

I spent a great deal of time on a research paper dealing entirely with energy. There is no neat "solution".

A solution can be drastically reducing energy-use entirely.

 

[RookParliament]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5080732.stm

Posting this for amusement value.