Researchers Develop Biofuel Alternative To Ethanol
coondoggie writes "Researchers say they have developed a method of using bacteria to convert decaying grass directly into isobutanol, which can be burned in regular car engines with a heat value higher than ethanol but similar to gasoline. The research could mean great savings in processing costs and time, plus isobutanol is a higher grade of alcohol than ethanol, according to the Department of Energy's BioEnergy Science Center (BESC) and its Oak Ridge National Laboratory"
Some grassoline that most of us can use. I've been intrigued by the biodiesel movement for some time now, but there are so few Diesel cars available for purchase in this country that it hasn't even been worth considering for me. If this will burn in a regular gas engine, though...
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
are backing this process? Because they're going to be up against some huge opposition from the big agribusiness firms plus Big Oil.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
Ethanol fuel in the US is a subsidy for corn growers, plain and simple. Any effect is has on the fuel supply is a distant afterthought. Therefore, any alternative to ethanol that isn't made from corn, corn, and only corn completely misses the point and won't get any national attention. I tell you, the first and most important step in balancing the US budget is to move the first few. most inluential, presidential primaries to states that don't grow corn!
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
"We" aren't doing anything. I'm using my grass to create food, and fuel, and whatever else I need. You can use your grass however you want.
"I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
Hold them all on the same day. Then you get it out of the way immediately without all the stupidity of a state with less than 1% of the population weeding out candidates before others get to vote on them. This makes it the perfect time to get in alternate voting methods as well to bring about a likelihood that someone will get a majority vote.
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
If I remember correctly, a couple of the proposed crops for making cellulosic ethanol are switchgrass and miscathus, and they both grow fine without human intervention. Switchgrass is native to North America. My understanding is that either crop could be used on land that isn't actively being farmed for food crops or that is "resting" for a few years as part of a normal crop rotation cycle.
That's why it's an advance if we can create it from cellulose. It's not like we couldn't synthesize isobutanol from plants before. Making fuel out of sugar is no big secret. What's new is that this time, it's from parts we can't eat. It's not perfect, but it's an advance.
The law of unintended consequences has proven many times that moving food to the starving tends to put the local farmers out of business creating the need to continue moving food. Why subsidize something to make it profitable? If there is not a natural profit in the venture, a government should do it directly thus saving taxpayers the "profit". Lowering the cost of transport does not fall under the term "simple solution". I'm not advocating letting people starve, but I don't know of any simple solutions that work though eliminating farm subsidies is a good start.
The US government have made it clear that we have no inalienable rights; any we do not defend vigorously will be taken.
Or, you know, build some modern nuclear power plants.
"It is our blasphemy which has made us great, and will sustain us, and which the gods secretly admire in us." - Zelazny