A new biofuel for airlines - CSIRO report

[Flying Binghi]

.


E-gads!..:eek: ... them kero burner villans are responsible fer two percent of those hellish vapors...


"The CSIRO has released a report which shows that, with oil around $US100 a barrel, lower emission jet fuels are economic for the Australian aviation industry.
It predicts that 40 per cent of an airline's fuel could be the lower emission biofuel by 2050.
The CSIRO says the global airline industry emits 2 per cent of carbon dioxide emissions a year...

...replacement of regular jet fuels with so-called bio derived fuels - made from biomass such oil seed trees, algae, the stubble from crops as well as urban waste.

Paul Graham says the Australian aviation industry could cut emissions by 17 per cent over the next 20 years with the use of such fuels..."

Biofuels promise cleaner, greener flight: CSIRO - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/05/25/3226719.htm?section=justin)


Fluffing around with biofuels..:hmm:


The Chinese are likely to get into methane hydrate production soon enuf so that's car gas etc taken care of. Peak fuel is apparently near, so with Australia's massive coal deposites why the heck aint we doing coal to jet fuel conversion planning right now ?

Some might be concerned with that CO2 emmissions hysteria... though wait until all that methane starts leaking when Chinese drilling/mining disturbs the methane hydrate deposites..:ooh:




The Chinese do not build deep sea bases just to look at the fishys...

" Construction of China's national deep-sea base is expected to begin this year... ... a multi-functional institution that will aid China in its study and exploration of the ocean....Scientists believe that the area's seabeds hold abundant deposits of rare metals and methane hydrate, a solidified form of natural gas that may serve as a new source of energy..."

China's national deep-sea base to begin construction this year (http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/china/2011-05/16/c_13877396.htm)








.

[ampclamp]

The Chinese are likely to get into methane hydrate production soon enuf so that's car gas etc taken care of. Peak fuel is apparently near, so with Australia's massive coal deposites why the heck aint we doing coal to jet fuel conversion planning right now

There are companies doing that right now.Linc energy in Australia for one.
Linc Energy - Welcome (http://www.lincenergy.com/)
Doing diesel now but they say jet fuel is possible. I asked them what grade but no reply was received.

[Flying Binghi]

via ampclamp: Linc Energy Doing diesel now but they say jet fuel is possible.

Be interesting to see how much cheaper they can sell the product at the bowser.

[Cost Index]

I believe in climate change. I also believe in reducing emmisions.

However. Does this report take into account the CO2 emissions created by manufacturing and refining these fuels?...

[Pukka]

While I have great respect for the CSIRO and believe in protecting the environment, we need to get the whole bio fuel discussion into some perspective.

Bio-fuel will cost considerably more than $US130 a barrel.

To produce the 21Billion gallons of fuel the industry uses, we need to have 29 million acres constantly under cultivation.

It takes 1 acre of sugarcane to produce 900 gallons of bio fuel.

Not all land is suitable for bio fuel production and in any case we cannot simply turn over land ro bio fuel production. We have preople to feed.

If you reflect on the destruction to crops that we see each cyclone season, are we satisfied with the risk profile?

Do we have enough water for the crops?

So. Is bio fuel practical or theoretical in our industry? Is the CSIRO report practical or theoretical?

[HF3000]

Cost Index,

CO2 emissions don't matter unless they come from fossil fuels. A commonly misunderstood aspect of CO2 induced climate change.

As long as the manufacturing process of bio-fuel itself uses bio-fuel as it's energy source, it is carbon-neutral. (Or any other renewable energy source.) So if you run your bio-fuel manufacturing machinery, trucks and factories on bio-fuel it is all carbon neutral. (If you want to be picky, the machinery needs also to come from factories that also run on bio-fuel, and were built with materials manufactured using bio-fuel etc).

The reason any fuel that is sourced from fossil fuel (which of course includes coal-to-liquid fuels mentioned above and methane-hydrate fuels mentioned above) is bad is that it releases carbon dioxide into the atmosphere that was created from carbon previously sequestered underground.

Bio-fuels are carbon neutral because the plant absorbs the carbon from the atmosphere, which is then re-released when the fuel is burned. A closed cycle.

In summary, you can use any fuel you like, as long as you don't dig a hole to find it.

Pukka,

Your perspective has some merit, but the whole point of the CSIRO story is that they are working out how to use previously "wasted" material, such as stubble from crops, to make bio-fuel. The whole point was that some bio-fuel can be manufactured without setting aside land previously cultivated for food production. For example, presently when we harvest a food crop, we extract the seeds, or vegetables, or whatever, and all the stems, leaves etc are discarded and either burned, left to rot or dug back into the soil. I believe the CSIRO is saying amongst other things these stems and leaves can collected during the harvest to produce biofuel.

No-one is suggesting putting 29 million acres or whatever under bio-fuel production overnight is feasible, or desirable, but all technologies take time to develop. The CSIRO has come up with some new technologies, and if they think we can provide a bio-fuel source of 17% of Australia's jet fuel consumption in 20 years time then I think that's a good start.

As for your quoted cost of production, look how the cost of solar panels has come down in the last 10 years - and will continue to drop. Once people actually start using a technology on a large scale, it tends to become a lot cheaper. CSIRO don't put a price/barrel on it but they do say it becomes competitive with oil at $100/barrel, so I guess they're saying it's around that mark.

Not all fossil fuels need to be replaced by bio-fuels. But aircraft fuels do - there is no other practical fuel storage on an aircraft. Cars can use batteries, hydrogen, whatever. Grid electricity can be sourced from wind, solar, hydro, nuclear, whatever. Aircraft can't. So the eventual replacement of fossil-fuel derived kerosene to a synthetic or bio-fuel alternative is more critical to our industry above all others. There may be no rush, but we need to make a start. If not now when? At $150/barrel? At $200/barrel? When?

I won't be around in the 22nd century but my grandkids hopefully will be. We need to start working out how to power their future, one small step at a time. If we wait until some future "crisis" sends oil prices through $300/barrel or more and then suddenly turn around and realise that despite knowing it was coming all these years we have all sat on our arses and done nothing, where will we (or our grandkids) be?

[Jake.f]

Biomass has to be where we are going in the future with fuels. One of the great things is a fuel can be derived from waste organic matter (EG waste sugar cane crop) The only problem is the process of breaking down the cellulose polymers is not the most economically viable, and it takes a lot of materials to do so such as some nasty acid catalysts...
I'm sure if the government spent as much money as they are spending on selling the carbon tax to us on biofuel research, more viable ways could be found......

[Flying Binghi]

I'm sure if the government spent as much money as they are spending on selling the carbon tax to us on biofuel research, more viable ways could be found......

Hmmm, i were once keen on biofuels. Not so much any more. More research wont go astray though. Probably a geneticly engineered algae will be a goer.

I seems to remember about 20 odd years ago there were a lot of grain cropys looking at setting up their own crop-to-fuel processing plants... thinkin about it i'm fair certain i seen a stand on it at the TWB ag show back then. I wonder how them farm based biofuel producers are going now ?




.

[HF3000]

There will be a lot of different things tried. Entrepreneurs and speculators will bet on things they think will strike gold. Eventually, certain technologies will win out and be successful. Eventually, it will be cheaper not to drill holes in the ground. But without trying, we will never know. We need to keep up the research. And that takes big money, and until the Governments of the world make it worthwhile to invest that money before the average voter realises we need it, we will be caught out.

There is enough solar energy hitting this country that just a 100km square paddock in the middle of the Australian desert could power the country, if only we could work out how to capture, store and distribute it.

And by that I'm not referring to subsidised photovoltaic cells on every rooftop, which is a political stunt which has helped solar research by providing additional sales, but does not look any further to the bigger picture.

The bigger picture is hydrogen fuel, latent heat storage, heat to chemical to heat conversion, stirling engine heat to power generation, fuel cells, infrastructure to support emerging technologies, such as quick-charge electric outlets at petrol stations, hydrogen at petrol stations, the kind of stuff that California is doing and Australia is not.

Wouldn't it be great if Australia lead the world on alternative fuel research, and held patents that yielded our great nation into prosperity in the alternative energy future? Or should someone tell me I'm dreamin...

[stewser89]

HF3000 Your dreaming, mate

You'd actually have to have a government/ corporate interest a little while back for that to happen. :rolleyes: It would have been nice though.

[onetrack]

I wonder how them farm based biofuel producers are going now ?Nearly all of them are in the aviation equivalent position of AF447 at FL100. They are all stalled, and don't have a lot of chance of recovery. Most have either shut down, been placed on care & maintenance, or been converted to produce alternative products besides bio-fuels.
The problem stems from the fact that bio-fuels are ALWAYS more costly to produce than oil-based fuels. Its only when the price of oil climbs to ballistic levels, that the bio-fuel producers jump on the bandwagon and fire up.

They fire up as risk-taking business ventures, using public company subscriptions. If they fail, the directors walk away and try another venture, and the investors are left to shrug/weep/wring hands, and write off that particular bad investment. Such is the attitude of the business world.

The problems associated with bio-fuels are that no-one has yet produced a bio-fuel that can be produced ECONOMICALLY (i.e. - at such a low cost, that it can cope with substantial falls in the oil price, and still be a viable proposition).

The bio-fuel-producing algae are possibly the area of greatest potential... but they still need vast amounts of research work done on them. Bio-fuels are currently not, and are not likely to be in the near-future, any robust economic alternative to Jet A-1. As a fuel-extending, fuel-improving additive, Yes. As a stand-alone fuel, No.

One has to be careful of CSIRO announcements that may have political gain as the driver. Despite the high standing of CSIRO, it still is a semi-autonomous Govt organisation, and is not totally free of political pressure to make announcements, or promote projects, that back up (current) Govt policy and aims.

[CelticRambler]

And by that I'm not referring to subsidised photovoltaic cells on every rooftop, which is a political stunt which has helped solar research by providing additional sales, but does not look any further to the bigger picture.


I beg to differ. Part of the enormous demand for oil is to feed the glorified boilers that produce electricity. A significant proportion of that is lost en route to the end-user, who then uses it in great quantities to generate heat. :* Creating an environment (political or otherwise) where people actually think about the source and destination of their various energy options must be part of the strategy for efficient use of our resources.

The internal combustion engine in its various forms is probably the ideal power source for most vehicles, particularly weight-sensitive ones, but there is very little justification for using one to heat your bathwater or floodlight your local church. Energy-dense fuels like oil should no longer be sacrificed for terra-firma applications when there are plenty of cost-effective alternatives. On-site electricity generation is a perfect example of intelligently fitting local supply to demand.

[breakfastburrito]

A good source of info on alternative energies, peak oil and photo voltaic cells on homes as a distributed network is Nicole Foss of The Automatic Earth (http://theautomaticearth.********.com/).

She wrote a long article on Renewable Power, Not in your lifetime (http://theautomaticearth.********.com/2009/07/july-1-2009-renewable-power-not-in-your.html). She discusses that in an interview Here: Peak Oil: An Inflationary & Deflationary Perspective. (http://www.financialsense.com/financial-sense-newshour/big-picture/2010/10/23/02/nicole-foss-jeff-rubin/peak-oil-an-inflationary-and-deflationary-perspective)

She also has lots of info on the problems with all sorts of renewable(processes that don't scale). Well worth a couple of google search Nicole Foss renewable energy (http://www.google.com.au/#sclient=psy&hl=en&safe=off&source=hp&q=nicole+foss+renewable+energy&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=b49c60dddd7522a7&biw=1599&bih=797).

[zappalin]

Could Australia become the 'Saudi Arabia of biofuels?' (http://atwonline.com/eco-aviation/article/could-australia-become-saudi-arabia-biofuels-0513) -ATWonline 16 May 2011, by Geoffrey Thomas :E

The CEO of what potentially is the world’s biggest algal biofuel operation described Karratha in Western Australia as the “Saudi Arabia of algal fuels” as he unveiled the project. California-based Aurora Algae CEO Greg Bafalis told media on May 9 that the company searched the globe to find the best site and stumbled across Karratha after a chance meeting with Austrade (ATW’s Eco-Aviation Today Jan.18).

“We started with meteorological data and we came to Karratha and thought it was perfect; it had everything we needed,” Bafalis said. “It was the highest solar radiation on the planet, a great CO2 source from the natural gas business that’s here and great land for us to expand on.”

The 8-hectare demonstration site, built with up to A$2 million ($2.2 million) in government grants, has six half-hectare production ponds already producing more than 15 tonnes a month of algal biomass. When Aurora reaches full commercial capacity with several thousand ponds on 607 hectares 20 km. from the demonstration site, it will be 10 times bigger than any other operation in the world.

“We produce roughly 30 tonnes a year out of each acre of algae--so you go could grow up to 10 tonnes of fuel a year out of each acre,” Bafalis told The West Australian.

Karratha is also the site of another algae pilot plant constructed by Murdoch University and the University of Adelaide, which has been in operation for more than a year.

And I think to myself. What a wonderful world...

[onetrack]

Lemme get this right. This American bloke, Bafalis, has come to Australia, lauding Karratha as the ultimate place in the world to become the Saudi Arabia of bio-fuels.

He garners a sizeable sum of Govt funding to set up his trial plot... then goes on to state that the 607Ha (1500 acres) he has earmarked for his Saudi Arabian replacement, is going to produce a grand total of 15,000 tonnes of fuel ANNUALLY?? :rolleyes:

I have a sneaking suspicion this bloke is only going to be producing SNAKE OIL from his 607ha bio-fuel farm. There would be more energy wasted in one small gas leak on the Dampier-Perth natural gas pipeline, over a couple of hours, than there would be produced from his farm, annually! :rolleyes:

Perhaps someone should tell this bloke... about the absolutely VAST amounts of LNG, that is shipped daily to all the major countries in Asia, from Karratha .. and which fuel already promises to have enough reserves on the North West Shelf of Western Australia... and able to be converted into liquid fuels to power aeroplanes, trucks, tractors, machinery and cars... for the next 100 years.

As Michael Caton says in that famous line.... "Tell 'em they're dreaming..." :hmm:

[Flying Binghi]

...a sizeable sum of Govt funding to set up...



Careful onetrack, yer might frustrate that carbon profiteering John Hewson with your skepticism...


"...I became frustrated with the paucity of the business interest and skepticism and decided to get involved with a number of New Age climate response industries to satisfy myself of the significant and profitable(in time) business opportunities that would inevitably flow from an appropriate national response to the challenge of climate change...

...I am also presently involved with a large carbon credit trader that is in the process, even in this recessed economy , of hiring some 2000 new staff..."

A CARBON ECONOMY | Open Forum | Independent public policy think-tank, blogs & forums | openforum.com.au (http://www.openforum.com.au/content/carbon-economy-0)






.

[18-Wheeler]

It does seem a rather poor output.
I'm pretty sure I've seen other algae projects that make vastly more quantity than that.

Edit - This is the company I was thinking of.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItMRlJ85x9Y

Seems to be quite a lot better production rate per unit of area.

[zappalin]

The article I dug up was written by Geoffrey Thomas onetrack, so those figures may be not the most reliable...

[Flying Binghi]

"BIODIESEL producer Natural Fuel has launched a $500 million float as the push for cleaner energy intensifies.The company, chaired by former federal Opposition leader John Hewson, is in the process of commissioning a 140 million litre biodiesel plant in Darwin and has plans to... Whoops!!! ...THE owner and operator of Australia's largest biodiesel plant, Natural Fuels Australia Ltd has been placed in administration..."

I wonders how their gettin along..:hmm:


Biodiesel float 'natural' progression | Adelaide Now (http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/business/biodiesel-float-natural-progression/story-e6frede3-1111112550035)

Natural Fuels Australia in administration as B&B unit pulls out | The Australian (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/mining-energy/nfal-in-administration-as-funds-pulled/story-e6frg9df-1111117553639)




.

[RATpin]

"Hewson backs carbon Tax"wonder why.

[HF3000]

Celtic, where I live, electricity is powered by coal and small percentage of renewable at 20c/kwh.

Solar photovoltaic cell installations have been subsidised by the Government - these installations cost approximately $5000/kw nominal.

Solar insolation levels in this region dictate that an average of 1000 kwh per year will be generated from a 1 kw solar installation. That is $200 worth of electricity per annum from a $5000 investment. At current interest rates, if you borrowed the $5000 you couldn't save enough to cover half the interest - forget about ever recouping your capital.

With current installation prices, electricity would have to rise to 80c/kwh to even make this a breakeven investment. That's four times current levels.

However, the Australian government makes it "look" like a good investment to voters by subsidising it. That's why I'm calling it a political stunt.

What the government have effectively done is invest in a multi-million dollar distributed photovoltaic power station that they have no control over that loses them multi-millions of dollars per year. They have done nothing in the process to foster alternative energy research and development in this country. These solar panels are all made in China, and they have lined the pockets of a bunch of fly-by-night solar installers.

I am saying I would love to see my tax dollars invested by my government in alternative energy research, development and installations - but solar photovoltaics are not what I would be spending that money on. It's a pointless waste of money. I wouldn't spend the money to put solar photovoltaics on the roof of my house - and therefore I wouldn't expect my government to subsidise it on my or anyone else's house. That money would be better spent elsewhere.

Do you know why Toyota do not put a photovoltaic cell on the roof of a Prius? Pointless waste of money, that's why. Exactly the same reason why you should not put one on the roof of your house.