Biofuels aren’t reducing gas prices or emissions

longknife

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2012
Messages
42,221
Reaction score
13,043
Points
2,250
Location
Sin City


Another phony Greenie move that did nothing but reduce the amount of land growing corn to be fed to livestock and provided for human consumption. Didn’t do a thing to help the environment and actually hiked prices for things containing corn products.

The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) was pushed through under the Bush 43 administration at a time when rising gas prices and global warming were both weighing heavily on the minds of the public. Ethanol blending was touted as a way to fight both of those concerns.

So how has it worked out? According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) it hasn’t done much on either score. The net effect on gas prices has been basically a wash and the changes have had only a negligible effect on emissions. (Bloomberg)

Read more @ Study: Biofuels aren't reducing gas prices or emissions
 

abu afak

ALLAH SNACKBAR!
Joined
Mar 3, 2006
Messages
3,016
Reaction score
652
Points
315


Another phony Greenie move that did nothing but reduce the amount of land growing corn to be fed to livestock and provided for human consumption. Didn’t do a thing to help the environment and actually hiked prices for things containing corn products.

The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) was pushed through under the Bush 43 administration at a time when rising gas prices and global warming were both weighing heavily on the minds of the public. Ethanol blending was touted as a way to fight both of those concerns.

So how has it worked out? According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) it hasn’t done much on either score. The net effect on gas prices has been basically a wash and the changes have had only a negligible effect on emissions. (Bloomberg)

Read more @ Study: Biofuels aren't reducing gas prices or emissions
A BUSH "Greenie Move" that benfited small Midwestern Farming Red States?

That Trumpov is happy to promise more of?
`
`
 

Augustine_

Silver Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2019
Messages
2,775
Reaction score
719
Points
90
Location
Nunya


Another phony Greenie move that did nothing but reduce the amount of land growing corn to be fed to livestock and provided for human consumption. Didn’t do a thing to help the environment and actually hiked prices for things containing corn products.

The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) was pushed through under the Bush 43 administration at a time when rising gas prices and global warming were both weighing heavily on the minds of the public. Ethanol blending was touted as a way to fight both of those concerns.

So how has it worked out? According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) it hasn’t done much on either score. The net effect on gas prices has been basically a wash and the changes have had only a negligible effect on emissions. (Bloomberg)

Read more @ Study: Biofuels aren't reducing gas prices or emissions
Trump has gone all in on ethanol as a subsidy for farmers. Maybe you didn't know.

Trump administration announces plan to put more ethanol in gasoline
 

harmonica

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
28,850
Reaction score
5,732
Points
290
a LOT of these laws/policies are DUMBSHIT/unworkable
they look good on paper--that's it
 

Toddsterpatriot

Diamond Member
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
59,864
Reaction score
9,261
Points
2,030
Location
Chicago
Always be skeptical of green energy skeptics. They have fossil fuels up there sleeves one way or another without exceptions.

How many millions in taxpayer dollars got sunk into that thing?

How much is the fuel you get out? $50 a gallon? $100?

Post a link, I'm intrigued!
 

Angelo

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2019
Messages
19,998
Reaction score
6,016
Points
360
Location
_Arkansas~_The Natural State_

Manonthestreet

Platinum Member
Joined
May 20, 2014
Messages
24,599
Reaction score
9,135
Points
980
How many millions in taxpayer dollars got sunk into that thing?

How much is the fuel you get out? $50 a gallon? $100?

Post a link, I'm intrigued!
I suppose we have to wait until BP and Exxon corner most of the market first.
Advanced biofuels and algae research: targeting the technical capability to produce 10,000 barrels per day by 2025
Advanced biofuels and algae research | ExxonMobil
lgae has the capability of doubling in size over a 24-hour period. It can grow in numerous locations as well, including in the water supplies that are around power plants or paper factories. We could potentially have access to more energy resources with this biofuel than we would if we continue to concentrate on petroleum products. Since the reserves of crude oil, coal, and natural gas are expected to be gone in 60-80 years, this product could be a realistic Plan B.
15 Advantages and Disadvantages of Using Algae as a Biofuel
Another hoax driven by lies.
 

Dick Foster

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2018
Messages
6,907
Reaction score
3,226
Points
390
Location
The People's Republic of the Californicated


Another phony Greenie move that did nothing but reduce the amount of land growing corn to be fed to livestock and provided for human consumption. Didn’t do a thing to help the environment and actually hiked prices for things containing corn products.

The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) was pushed through under the Bush 43 administration at a time when rising gas prices and global warming were both weighing heavily on the minds of the public. Ethanol blending was touted as a way to fight both of those concerns.

So how has it worked out? According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) it hasn’t done much on either score. The net effect on gas prices has been basically a wash and the changes have had only a negligible effect on emissions. (Bloomberg)

Read more @ Study: Biofuels aren't reducing gas prices or emissions
Biofuels are bunk and a really stupid idea since it takes more oil to produce them than they save. Basically biofuels are just another scandalous welfare program for big farming enterprises to grow more corn that we never needed in the first place. It's time to stop subsidizing farming and everything else that can't stand on its own. Subsidies are a mechanism of socalism.
 

Manonthestreet

Platinum Member
Joined
May 20, 2014
Messages
24,599
Reaction score
9,135
Points
980


Another phony Greenie move that did nothing but reduce the amount of land growing corn to be fed to livestock and provided for human consumption. Didn’t do a thing to help the environment and actually hiked prices for things containing corn products.

The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) was pushed through under the Bush 43 administration at a time when rising gas prices and global warming were both weighing heavily on the minds of the public. Ethanol blending was touted as a way to fight both of those concerns.

So how has it worked out? According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) it hasn’t done much on either score. The net effect on gas prices has been basically a wash and the changes have had only a negligible effect on emissions. (Bloomberg)

Read more @ Study: Biofuels aren't reducing gas prices or emissions
Biofuels are bunk and a really stupid idea since it takes more oil to produce them than they save. Basically biofuels are just another scandalous welfare program for big farming enterprises to grow more corn that we never needed in the first place. It's time to stop subsidizing farming and everything else that can't stand on its own. Subsidies are a mechanism of socalism.
2. It requires significant fertilizer use.
We can grow algae in massive quantities only when there is sufficient fertilizer available to the producers. It would require up to 15 million metric tons of nitrogen to create enough algae to create 39 billion liters of biodiesel through this effort, along with 2 million metric tons of phosphorus, which represents roughly half of what is already in use on American croplands today. Since some of these nutrients come from petroleum-based products, it shifts the needle on carbon neutrality somewhat. There is also the threat of run-off that could impact local waterways.
3. It offers a high production cost using current technologies.
Solix was able to create biodiesel from algae as early as 2009 using current technologies, but it came at a high price. You would need to pay about $33 per gallon because of the energy levels required to circulate gasses and materials inside bioreactors to encourage growth. Estimates back then suggested that the price of this resource could eventually come down to $5.50 per gallon. If the byproducts of this commercial product could also be sold, then pricing might reach $3.50 to $4 per gallon. That is still the equivalent of crude oil begin $150 per barrel. 15 Advantages and Disadvantages of Using Algae as a Biofuel
All falls under the heading of "Prices must necessarily rise"....
 

Angelo

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2019
Messages
19,998
Reaction score
6,016
Points
360
Location
_Arkansas~_The Natural State_
Biofuels are bunk and a really stupid idea since it takes more oil to produce them than they save. Basically biofuels are just another scandalous welfare program for big farming enterprises to grow more corn that we never needed in the first place. It's time to stop subsidizing farming and everything else that can't stand on its own. Subsidies are a mechanism of socalism.
Nobody takes a fossil fuel shill seriously.
You really need to work on some better composure
in your arguments.
 

Manonthestreet

Platinum Member
Joined
May 20, 2014
Messages
24,599
Reaction score
9,135
Points
980
When you produce biofuels like biodiesel from algae, then it takes the energy equivalent of several gallons’ worth of a petroleum-based fuel to produce a single gallon of the eco-friendly variety. Using current farming techniques, it can take roughly 120% more energy to produce a gallon of algae biofuel when compared to the energy it contains. 15 Advantages and Disadvantages of Using Algae as a Biofuel
Called waste written large....waste of water....waste of energy.....waste of fertilizer which will drive price of food thru the rood
 

Toddsterpatriot

Diamond Member
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
59,864
Reaction score
9,261
Points
2,030
Location
Chicago
How many millions in taxpayer dollars got sunk into that thing?

How much is the fuel you get out? $50 a gallon? $100?

Post a link, I'm intrigued!
I suppose we have to wait until BP and Exxon corner most of the market first.
Advanced biofuels and algae research: targeting the technical capability to produce 10,000 barrels per day by 2025
Advanced biofuels and algae research | ExxonMobil
Wow! 10,000 barrels a day!!
No mention of cost at that link.
 

Angelo

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2019
Messages
19,998
Reaction score
6,016
Points
360
Location
_Arkansas~_The Natural State_
How many millions in taxpayer dollars got sunk into that thing?

How much is the fuel you get out? $50 a gallon? $100?

Post a link, I'm intrigued!
I suppose we have to wait until BP and Exxon corner most of the market first.
Advanced biofuels and algae research: targeting the technical capability to produce 10,000 barrels per day by 2025
Advanced biofuels and algae research | ExxonMobil
Wow! 10,000 barrels a day!!
No mention of cost at that link.
I'm not arguing it's not too expensive now, between the ethanol and oil and gas lobbyists,
without subsidies like the ones owned-Congress members give fossil fuel- especially nuclear.(subsidies in general)

Private ventures will never be feasible without the infrastructure in place and cooperation of auto-makers.
 

Dick Foster

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2018
Messages
6,907
Reaction score
3,226
Points
390
Location
The People's Republic of the Californicated
Biofuels are bunk and a really stupid idea since it takes more oil to produce them than they save. Basically biofuels are just another scandalous welfare program for big farming enterprises to grow more corn that we never needed in the first place. It's time to stop subsidizing farming and everything else that can't stand on its own. Subsidies are a mechanism of socalism.
Nobody takes a fossil fuel shill seriously.
You really need to work on some better composure
in your arguments.
Well that just goes to show that you don't know diddly squat shit about anything at all. I'm about as far from an advocate of continued reliace on fossil fuels as you can imagine. However I'm not stupid enough to be taken in by foolish notions that have no chance of ever being economically viable either.
What I am for is something that makes some sense to first power the grid and that is nuclear fission but not the inherently dangerous lightwater crap that's running now but thorium fueled molten salt reactors or LFTRs. LFTRs could be employed in very short order since most of the development has already been accomplished leaving only some simple engineering work regarding scaling to be done.
Once you have the grid taken care of only then does other stuff like the currently idiotic electric cars make any sense. But the grid is the first and foremost problem to address and neither the silly solar or wind idiocy will ever be the answer.
The only energy technology that makes any sense from engineering or economic standpoints today is thorium fueled nuclear fission. The rest are all just so much noise and snake oil being peddled to the liberal arts shitforbrains and largely technically illiterate population.
 

KissMy

Free Breast Exam
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
15,729
Reaction score
2,919
Points
255
Location
In your head


Another phony Greenie move that did nothing but reduce the amount of land growing corn to be fed to livestock and provided for human consumption. Didn’t do a thing to help the environment and actually hiked prices for things containing corn products.

The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) was pushed through under the Bush 43 administration at a time when rising gas prices and global warming were both weighing heavily on the minds of the public. Ethanol blending was touted as a way to fight both of those concerns.

So how has it worked out? According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) it hasn’t done much on either score. The net effect on gas prices has been basically a wash and the changes have had only a negligible effect on emissions. (Bloomberg)

Read more @ Study: Biofuels aren't reducing gas prices or emissions
FAKE NEWS! Prior to Ethanol, Gasoline Prices were HIGHER than Diesel Prices. Now Gasoline Prices are ALWAYS LOWER than Diesel!
 

Toddsterpatriot

Diamond Member
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
59,864
Reaction score
9,261
Points
2,030
Location
Chicago
How many millions in taxpayer dollars got sunk into that thing?

How much is the fuel you get out? $50 a gallon? $100?

Post a link, I'm intrigued!
I suppose we have to wait until BP and Exxon corner most of the market first.
Advanced biofuels and algae research: targeting the technical capability to produce 10,000 barrels per day by 2025
Advanced biofuels and algae research | ExxonMobil
Wow! 10,000 barrels a day!!
No mention of cost at that link.
I'm not arguing it's not too expensive now, between the ethanol and oil and gas lobbyists,
without subsidies like the ones owned-Congress members give fossil fuel- especially nuclear.(subsidies in general)

Private ventures will never be feasible without the infrastructure in place and cooperation of auto-makers.
subsidies like the ones owned-Congress members give fossil fuel

Writing off business expenses isn't a subsidy for fossil fuels.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top