Maker Pro
Maker Pro

OT. Louisiana Leads the way

A

amdx

Jan 1, 1970
0
Louisiana has figured out that ethanol from corn is an inefficient stupid
process and produced legislation to back it.
http://news.mongabay.com/2008/0701-ethanol.html
Now if the rest of the states can follow.
Farm lobby by d$*^#d. No more corn subsidies..

And what about Butanol.

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butanol_fuel

Butanol better tolerates water contamination and is less corrosive than
ethanol and more suitable for distribution through existing pipelines
(important to an efficient use MK)

High octane rating .

Higher specific energy than ethanol

The feedstocks are the same as for ethanol: energy crops such as sugar
beets, sugar cane, corn grain, wheat and cassava as well as agricultural
byproducts such as straw and corn stalks (reference needed).

Can be made from Algae

We need nuclear power and a better battery for autos.
We need energy independence.
Mike (MK)
 
E

Eeyore

Jan 1, 1970
0
amdx said:
Louisiana has figured out that ethanol from corn is an inefficient stupid
process and produced legislation to back it.
http://news.mongabay.com/2008/0701-ethanol.html
Now if the rest of the states can follow.
Farm lobby by d$*^#d. No more corn subsidies..

Damn right. Corn is a relatively poor feedstock for bio-fuel production.. Not
maybe useless but far from ideal.

And what about Butanol.

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butanol_fuel

Butanol better tolerates water contamination and is less corrosive than
ethanol and more suitable for distribution through existing pipelines
(important to an efficient use MK)

High octane rating .

Higher specific energy than ethanol

The feedstocks are the same as for ethanol: energy crops such as sugar
beets, sugar cane, corn grain, wheat and cassava as well as agricultural
byproducts such as straw and corn stalks (reference needed).

And currently being developed in the UK using sugar beet as feedstock.

Graham
 
A

amdx

Jan 1, 1970
0
Eeyore said:
Damn right. Corn is a relatively poor feedstock for bio-fuel production..
Not
maybe useless but far from ideal.



And currently being developed in the UK using sugar beet as feedstock.

Graham
I wonder if there is any extra energy input to produce butanol instead of
ethanol? I t seems silly to make ethanol when butanol has all these
advantages.
Mike
 
E

Eeyore

Jan 1, 1970
0
amdx said:
I wonder if there is any extra energy input to produce butanol instead of
ethanol? I t seems silly to make ethanol when butanol has all these
advantages.

You'll need to ask Du Pont.

Graham
 
A

amdx

Jan 1, 1970
0
amdx said:
Louisiana has figured out that ethanol from corn is an inefficient stupid
process and produced legislation to back it.
http://news.mongabay.com/2008/0701-ethanol.html
Now if the rest of the states can follow.
Farm lobby by d$*^#d. No more corn subsidies..

And what about Butanol.

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butanol_fuel

Butanol better tolerates water contamination and is less corrosive than
ethanol and more suitable for distribution through existing pipelines
(important to an efficient use MK)

High octane rating .

Higher specific energy than ethanol

The feedstocks are the same as for ethanol: energy crops such as sugar
beets, sugar cane, corn grain, wheat and cassava as well as agricultural
byproducts such as straw and corn stalks (reference needed).

Can be made from Algae

We need nuclear power and a better battery for autos.
We need energy independence.
Mike (MK)

http://www.butanol.com/
Mike
 
N

NotMe

Jan 1, 1970
0
| Louisiana has figured out that ethanol from corn is an inefficient stupid
| process and produced legislation to back it.
| http://news.mongabay.com/2008/0701-ethanol.html
| Now if the rest of the states can follow.
| Farm lobby by d$*^#d. No more corn subsidies..
|
| And what about Butanol.
|
| From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butanol_fuel
|
| Butanol better tolerates water contamination and is less corrosive than
| ethanol and more suitable for distribution through existing pipelines
| (important to an efficient use MK)
|
| High octane rating .
|
| Higher specific energy than ethanol
|
| The feedstocks are the same as for ethanol: energy crops such as sugar
| beets, sugar cane, corn grain, wheat and cassava as well as agricultural
| byproducts such as straw and corn stalks (reference needed).
|
| Can be made from Algae
|
| We need nuclear power and a better battery for autos.
| We need energy independence.
| Mike (MK)
|
|

One word SUGAR.

If politicians really meant what they say they'd approve other sources such
as industrial hemp. (it's a weed after all)
 
| NotMe wrote:
|> |> | Louisiana has figured out that ethanol from corn is an inefficient stupid
|> | process and produced legislation to back it.
|> | http://news.mongabay.com/2008/0701-ethanol.html
|> | Now if the rest of the states can follow.
|> | Farm lobby by d$*^#d. No more corn subsidies..
|> |
|> | And what about Butanol.
|> |
|> | From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butanol_fuel
|> |
|> | Butanol better tolerates water contamination and is less corrosive than
|> | ethanol and more suitable for distribution through existing pipelines
|> | (important to an efficient use MK)
|> |
|> | High octane rating .
|> |
|> | Higher specific energy than ethanol
|> |
|> | The feedstocks are the same as for ethanol: energy crops such as sugar
|> | beets, sugar cane, corn grain, wheat and cassava as well as agricultural
|> | byproducts such as straw and corn stalks (reference needed).
|> |
|> | Can be made from Algae
|> |
|> | We need nuclear power and a better battery for autos.
|> | We need energy independence.
|> | Mike (MK)
|> |
|> |
|>
|> One word SUGAR.
|>
|> If politicians really meant what they say they'd approve other sources such
|> as industrial hemp. (it's a weed after all)
|>
|>
|>
|
| Come on man, get real. Support of hemp or marijuana is the sure road to
| political suicide.
|
| To bad for us, but it aint never gonna happen.

It would take a real _leader_ to stand up and say that we need to dispose of
our legacy prejudices and accept the use of hemp (a product that has no
significant levels of any psychotropic drugs) in the many useful ways it can
be used for. The problem is, no real _leaders_ ever become politicians.
2008 is just yet another election year where Americans are expected to choose
among a few non-leaders.
 
J

James Arthur

Jan 1, 1970
0
Kris said:
I agree with this writer:
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2004/09/lets_change_the.php

He points out that "rape seed oil" was renamed Canola Oil because people
got all upset over the name "rape seed" - based upon that, he proposes a
"rebranding" (pseudonouveau dopey word for "rename") of low-THC hemp.

How about a "rename the weed" contest?

The real objection to hemp is it's hard for cops to tell
from marijuana, especially from the air.

Legalize 'em both.

James Arthur
 
S

Steve Ackman

Jan 1, 1970
0
["Followup-To:" header set to alt.energy.homepower.]
One word SUGAR.

If politicians really meant what they say they'd approve other sources such
as industrial hemp. (it's a weed after all)

Hemp doesn't provide sugar. Rather, it provides a
high grade cellulose easily substituted for petroleum
in a LOT of industrial processes.

As to hemp for fuel:
Henry Ford produced 1000 gallons of methanol from
each acre of hemp he grew. One might hope the massive
hemp growing efforts during WWII would have added to
the knowledge base, and we could do better than that
now.
Hemp seed oil is as suitable as any other VO for
use in diesels, though at today's prices, quite
uneconomical to burn all those valuable omega3 and
omega6 fatty acids as fuel. Increase hemp seed
availability, and who knows...
 
K

krw

Jan 1, 1970
0
Except that isn't necessarily relevant, because, if someone is growing it
legally, it'll be grown out in the open, not secreted away in wooded
areas, areas inside other crop fields, or basement hydroponics setups.
If someone wants to grow it as a legal crop, heck, make them pay a fee
for signs that are visible from the air.

plus, if the cops are local, why wouldn't they already know who is
growing it legally, and where they're growing it?

You don't think hemp growers are sharp enough to realize there's
money to be made growing pot too? Pot growers aren't sharp enough
to get into the hemp business? Pot growers aren't sharp enough to
secret a few plants inside other's hemp fields?
It just doesn't make for a good-enough excuse, IMO.

It makes for some very good excuses.
Well, IMO, that'd save the most not only in terms of money, but also,
given the violence associated with the cartels bringing the stuff in,
lives as well. And, heck, it'd keep the money in the country rather than
simply adding to the trade imbalance (and funding violent activities) -
they subsidized tobacco for I don't even know how many decades, and it's
long been known to directly cause disease. Also, nicotine is supposedly
one of the most addictive substances around, whereas pot is only habit-
forming if someone is already prone to liking getting buzzed a lot - IOW,
the problem isn't with pot so much as it is with personal probably-
biological predelictions, and the solution with those is never to simply
make stuff illegal.

Not such a big deal with pot, because so much (of the good stuff) is
grown locally.
One would think people *might* have learned from Prohibition that trying
to outlaw every single little petty vice only succeeds in first creating,
than feeding, organized crime. But nope. Too many people, in various
sectors of society, make far too much money off of the current situation.
And it's soooo easy to get various voters all riled up by jumping
immediately into worst-case scenarious. Like tha tgoofy old movie
"Reefer Madnes" - all the evidence shows that it doesnt' exist, but
belief doesn't require proof...

Typical tired weenie arguments.
So, a highly useful, and profitable, crop will go unused by the US, but
used by other nations (whose products we'll import), while violence and
deaths increase - and use of pot continues, except of course where it's
being overtaken by other drug use. The fact that people love to ignore
is, drug use is almost always a symptom of something else, and not self-
causational.

Nonsense.
 
Top