|
|
|
|
|||||
|
||||||
From: Arild Jensen (no email)
Date: Mon Feb 17 2003 - 00:22:53 EST
-----Original Message-----
I can't imagine "all diesel" being sold (in Ontario) to be biodiesel.
There just would not be enough supply to meet demand.
There could be a requirement to include some bio with the regular
stuff just like ethanol in gasoline.
REPLY
The editor of Homepower magazine makes a compelling argument concerning
energy self sufficiency.
While some of his assertions could be questioned subject to verifiable data,
in general he makes a valid argument.
By virtue of wanting to live aboard a boat we collectively have already
made a statement that we support alternative lifestyles.
I don't want this to devolve into a green versus "rape the earth"
discussion.
However, the very act of trying to live on a boat involves compromises and
the accceptance that natuer often ower powers us and our technology.
With a few exceptions we also have accepted the premise that the
accumulation of money is not the primary goal in life.
We see how many live aboard people enjoy a comfortable lifestyle despite
the absence of unlimited wealth.
Some live aboards do not even have a regular income such as wages,
investment or pension income.
Time and again pioneers have demonstrated that alternative to the status
quo are viable only to find themselves stomped on by the vested interests
that profit from this status quo.
Gordon wrote:
I think biodiesel is a bit of a misnomer. Regular gas and diesel come from
a bio-source, namely crude oil. Something like "eco-diesel" would make more
sense to me. I think most oil and grease from restaurants is used in some
way, maybe cattle feed for example, so it doesn't go in the dump like it may
have at one time.
REPLY
This may become a discussion of semantics. However, there is now sufficient
evidence that petro chemical reserves deep in the planetary crust may have
inorganic origins. When methane gas is perrcolated through an existing
pool of crude oil the pool appears to grow in volume.
The variance in sulfur content of crude located in different parts of the
world also supports the notion that oil may have been formed in more than
one way ( ie. from organic remains)
Meanwhile we face a political, economic and cultural dillemma concerning
where and how to obtain additonal supplies of crude oil from which we
extract energy to power our society.
Gordon wrote:
Turning it into diesel is fine with me as long as someone guarantees the
quality.
It wouldn't make sense to wreck an expensive engine to save a few hundred
dollars per year.
REPLY
I think this thread spun off from a discussion on hybrid power in general.
There have been comments on this list about the desirability of only having
to handle and store one kind of fuel aboard; be it for main engine
propulsion, genset , dinghy motor, furnace ( heat ) and stove ( cooking).
The spillage of normal diesel fuel is now considered a major environmental
offense, incurring the levy of fines ( sometimes very large) and worse.
Concern over the effect of exhaust emissions on our health, and our air
quality, not to mention how the extraction and transport of crude oil
affects our world all combine to make a compelling motivation to find
viable alternatives.
Especially among cruising folk who anchor out, the use of conventional
gensets is starting to acquire the taint of undesirable social
behaviour.
Not only is the use of conventional fossil fuels raising questions, but
the use of internal combustion engines also raise questions of
desirability.
Alternatives such as fuel cells look promising. The drawback is how to
handle and distribute the hydrogen in a safe manner comparable to how we
now handle diesel fuel. But how about something available off-the-shelf
right now?
How about something that is technically feasible now and cost comparable to
the conventional diesel fired internal combustion engine that makes noise
and emits smelly fumes.
Right now used cooking oil is not considered a valauble resource. In most
places it is considered a waste product with attendant disposal problems
not to mention costs. The possibility that someone can take this waste and
convert it into something useful , even valuable should at least pique our
interest.
Has anyone on this list ever see a steam boat rally?
Have you ever marvelled at how so much power can be generated almost
silently and applied so effectly?
Our most modern warships employ a system very similar. The only difference
being the source of heat to produce steam.
Does anyone realize that a Stirling engine burns clean enough that the
exhaust can be permitted indoors in an exhibition hall?
The engine is as silent as steam engine, but it does produce electricity
which can be stored. There are other power converters which will convert
this stored energy into motive power or cooking heat or light as required.
Stirling engines can use a variety of fuels, not just diesel.
>From the perspective of stored energy, diesel fuel probably stores the most
BTU per cubic unit.
When you translate this into $$$ per cubic unit , then the picture may
alter depennding on availabilty of alternatives.
Especially if the alternatives are very cheap by comparison.
Food for thought.
Cheers
Arild
--- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.423 / Virus Database: 238 - Release Date: 11/25/2002 ___________________________________________________________________________ || The Live-Aboard List : send a "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" request || || in body of message to: ||
|