"Inspired" by gas prices...

I don't think bio fuels are the answer but if you are going to use up acres of land producing the stuff then at least plant hemp. It grows anywhere and produces 4 times the energy of any other plant . Using corn or even sugarcane is just stupid.

 

more like artificial lakes, bio-algae is about 20 times more productive that the best of the terrestrial feedstocks. There's numerous pilot programs out there and about two years ago something like 4 billion went into bringing those pilots up to speed. Seems like any day now they should start producing big times.

I suppose I should go look up what happened to them, probably things stalled a bit when the economy took a dump and oil prices fell. Now that they're back up again. Things should be going full tilt.

 

That --will always be the problem unless it is government backed. When stocks return and fuel prices fall those making alternative fuels see no gain and shelf the project.

Every government in the world , some much more than others are massively invested in oil exploration and or refining, with parts of shore line dedicated to oil production . Employment in oil is billions. It can not be closed down over night.

And of course lets not forget the millions in one day that will have to replace the revenue accrued from oil production in taxes.

It will take decades to ween us of oil. Ide like to see some direction though,--but from todays selfish politicians, not a chance.

 

what is going to replace dino oil though and at todays volume?

 

Training,combined with growing up on a farm.Also birch sap can make a nice beer and syrup.

I almost got sucked into investing into a hemp oil fuel scheme,and in doing due diligence I found a chart that showed me it is rather low down on the scale of gals/acre.

Canola @ 127 and castor bean @151 -for N American crop production-are the best.
And the thing is after the first crop,no petro fuel is required.

http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_yield.html

 

The lowly peanut only yields 113 gallons per acre but it isn't toxic like castor bean.

 

Its going to be a composite of fuels that replace dino oil. The technologies are already there, its just a mater of implementing there use. There's an algae based bio-fuel plant not far from where I am. It specializes in selling the technology of various methods to produce the stuff, depending on the prevailing climate in whatever area the manufacturer is in. You can grow the stuff just about anywhere.

Solar just got a lot cheaper with India now pounding out solar panels for about $100 bucks a full panel.

Wind is moving towards smaller vertical axis installations

Lots of alternatives, just depends on where you live and what works best in your area.

 

I hope not - small VAWT are not very efficient.
Even worse are so-called rooftop "micro-turbines" which are a waste of
materials and money.

 

And while we're on wind power... let's make sure to keep *offshore* wind turbines offshore!

http://www.saveoursound.org/

This project (Cape Wind) is a travesty. It looks like it will never go through, but it would destroy one of the nicest places to use a boat in the United States. Not only that, it raises the cost of electricity for MA residents when plentiful and cheaper hydro power electricity is available from Canada.

If you care about Nantucket Sound, Martha's Vineyard or Cape Cod, help that organization in the link above. I have done so. I don't want to see them destroy Nantucket Sound like they destroyed the Gulf of Mexico:

 

Either be for wind generators everywhere or nowhere. If they are too ugly for a rich neighborhood they are too ugly for mine too. I don't want to see any more birds being knocked out of the sky than you do. I know "he who has the gold makes the rules" but those things are crap on a high stick.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtgBWNKwBkE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=liNIqYNHRXE

 

You missed the underlined point. I don't want them anywhere near your back yard either. To be frank, I am more for solar than wind too, but it's this particular installation that is troubling.

Keep "offshore" wind farms offshore. That was the point.

Offshore means at a distance, such that the wind farms cannot be seen from the local beaches and waters due to the curvature of the Earth.

They are trying to stick a wind farm between Nantucket and Cape Cod inside Nantucket Sound. They are calling it "offshore." Clearly, it is not. It's in a sound:



It's 26 nautical miles from Cape Cod to Nantucket. Nantucket Sound is what is between the two bodies of land. They are looking to destroy this:

 

What are you taliking about..OFFSHORE.

Dont get in my face with your power needs. If the New York city folks living on Cape Cod need extra power for their dam AIR CONDITIONERS and city lifestyle...the holy grail...then put the whirlybirds in their neighborhood. Cover the beaches with solar panel while youre at it. Put it in thier face..not mine

 

Despite the way you just said that by trying to insult me, I'm all for your plan. Ban them entirely. Let the land dwellers have them on land if they want them. Keep them out of the water.

But... they will put them in the water because land people see it as "just the water." No reason to ruin the tourism industry and the nature that is enjoyed by people putting them inshore. Might as well actually be offshore if they are going to be putting them in the water.

Why so hostile to me and my business needs about my charter boat? Are you dreading summer in Turkey this season?

 

My vote means nothing but I also say ban them entirely.

 

Come on hoyte, your vote means something to somebody...

-Tom