Rape Seed is definatly a step in the right direction, at the least its about growing a crop based on its potential energy density rather than based on what seeds Monosato can sell to farmers. I do not know its overall energy balance however, and it still uses a ton of cropland without any real hope of replacing oil entirely. The info on it specifically is fairly light, but here is what Wikipedia comes up with: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_seed#Biodiesel

Slightly off topic, but here is the energy density of potential fuel products for the manufacture of Ethanol: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fu ... production
You'll note that corn is pretty much one of the worst stock we could be using for production. Even sugar cane is not very good. You'll note that the top two possibilities are varieties of grass, which yield as much as four times the amount of ethanol per acre, plus they grow with very little water and very little nutrients required. Unfortunatly there is not much money to be made in selling grass seed, and as a result they have not recieved the subsidies that instead are being plowed into something as useless as corn.

_________________
2006 Jeep Liberty Sport CRD

I think people confuse "renewable eneregy source" as something with "no ecological impact". Almost everything that we use to make energy has an environmental impact. If home brewers use WVO (waste vegetable oil) to make biodiesel and reclaim the water and methanol as best they can (you can recover a large percentage of both and reuse), then the process is worthwhile IMHO. Then you can use this "biodiesel" in an older type Mercedes, ect and make a small impact on "oil resources". Once you try to take this to a commercially larger scale, you will find more drawbacks as "Reflex" has pointed out. Do not underestimate the "cost" of producing biodiesel on a larger scale. Reflex also mentioned the possible damage to injectors using biodiesel...funny that Bosch also does not approve any high concentration of Biodiesel (they say that B5 is the current maximum that they trust) for our CRD or any of thier newer systems.

What we really need to do is manage our current resources (on a worldwide basis) in a more responsible way to give us (humanity in general) more time to develop better methods to improve our situation. Taking food producing land and changing it to solely energy producing land will have negative effects in the short long run. Now with the Algae type Biodisel, if it is from water treatment plants and helps in the recovery of fresh water...that could be a good thing. The main thing to remember is that there needs to be a "balance" in our approach. Everything you do in this world has an effect on something else. We need to find solutions that have minimal detrimental effects on other ecosystems. Right NOW the biggest changes we can make is in our own habits. We just need to be a little less "lazy" (for lack of a better word) and use some common sense.

We need to take "politics" out of the equation and put "science" back in when it comes to fuel sources. The quick fixes such as using "corn" to make ethanol, are not the best solutions. If we were using corn products that were not replacing food products, then it would be viable but we are replacing food producing land use with fuel producing land use...that is counterproductive in the very short run. Cutting down oxygen producing forrests to produce more energy is obviously not a good choice. You are placing too high a cost to save a little bit of $$$ for energy. The biggest problem is that people have come to look for the easy way out without having to make any sacrifices along the way. The problem with that method is that we are making sacrifices that we are choosing to ignore. What we really need is a long term plan that involves other countries that will hold to a higher standard of solutions based on the "overall picture"...not a politically advancing solution that keeps players in office. We need to come up with solutions that take all aspect of producing and delivering engery to us into account.

Over Population is our biggest problem...we reproduce too many of ourselves

_________________
Founder of L.O.S.T.
2006 CRD Sport
Mods: GDE Hot Tune w/ 364#@2000rpm/Air Box /3" Str8 Exhaust/ASFIR Alum Skids/245-75R-16 Cooper STT PRO/OME LIFT w/Clevis & 4 Spring Isos/AirTabs/Rigid 10" S2 LED/4xGuard Ctr Matrix Bumper
Drag Strip:Reac=.1078_60ft=2.224_1/8=10.39@64.8mph_1/4+16.46@80.8mph

Reflex,

Thank you for your in-depth reply.

Regarding eco-disasters, sometimes there are too many rabbits and the foxes flourish in response. That's just nature finding equilibrium. I don't lose sleep over it, I surely don't alter my purchasing habits because of it. We were supposed to have global famine, nuclear winter, a magnetic pole flip, flying cars, aliens on the White House lawn and a bunch of other problems that never surfaced, so forgive me if I'm glib. I'm still waiting for Peak Oil to really get going, but it never seems to hit... I just switched to Biodiesel because its is cheaper in the summer months.

As far as your education level goes, unless we have a mutual friend or you are willing to "go public" with your real name, diplomas, etc... I'll just treat you as a fellow CRD enthusiast and leave it at that. You see, everywhere I go online I meet a surprising number of highly-educated experts in various fields: Medical Doctors, Special Forces War Vets and cute, barely-legal 18-year-old girls who want me very badly. So if I just go by published studies and not internet experts or a friend's cousins' brother's anecdotes, forgive me.

What those studies tell me is that the pH of correctly-made Biodiesel is right around that of tap water, maybe my saliva.

It is a solvent and it will readily absorb other hydrocarbons, but this does not mean it absorbs metals. In fact, thanks to its hydrophobic (non-polar) nature, it reacts not at all to steel and other metals. Water and oxygen are a threat to metals, not methyl esters. Even the most dangerous chemical used to make biodiesel, sodium hydroxide, is inert to steel and iron.

The viscosity of Biodiesel is quite similar to that of diesel fuel, but in cold weather (as I mentioned) this rises until waxes form and THAT places a strain on the fuel supply system and thus the engine as a whole. However, this is not really an issue either once the vehicle is warmed up, and even diesel can gel in extreme cold. It clearly would not take years off the life of the vehicle.

Therefore, in consideration of your initial statements, I request that you explain by what scientific process the Biodiesel would harm the engine or shorten its lifespan. Acidity, reactivity, viscosity, improper combustion, gamma radiation, gremlins? I am especially interested to hear why biodiesel will harm VM motori engines moreso than other brands...

_________________
Yours Truly,

Special Agent

Jez this is getting deep, but I must agree with Special Agent. Hey if you just go to Fred's TDI forum and/or the MB diesel forum you can find people who have used Bio fuels for years, then do some number crunching and interviews from the real world and see what shakes out.

_________________
91 MB 300D 2.5L Turbo. Her's

05 MB E320 CDI. Mine

Oldnavy -- aren't there some early model (mid to late 90s) Passat TDIs on TDIclub with nearly 300k miles -- many of them done on B99/B100?

My whole point to this debate is that the VW 1.9 liter TDI motor seems to handle biodiesel extremely well from many owner experiences on TDIclub. Given that this is the case, I doubt that the VM 2.8 CRD motor would be weaker than the TDI motor when biofuels were used, unless the VM engine has a specific design weakness for biofuels -- which has yet to be proven.

_________________
The folks: 2006 Liberty CRD Limited, Lt. Khaki (picked up 7/21/06 w/ 300 miles). Rotella 5W-40.

And: 1995 Grand Cherokee 4.0 Laredo, Silver, Selec-Trac, custom free-flow exhaust by local shop.

Me: 1998 Subaru Outback AWD, 2.5 DOHC, 5-speed manual. Nearly 170k miles & runs awesome.

Just picking nits here, and have a quick correction- Most people are using Potassium Hydroxide (KOH) for their catalyst these days rather than Sodium Hydroxide (NaOH), as it is much easier to work with, process-wise. The rest of your post is spot-on, though.

_________________
2006 Liberty Sport CRD

Yup one or two are personal friends. One has about 350,000 miles on home brew and WVO when he had to replace a fuel pump due to water contamination while running standard D2 last winter on a trip. He was PO to say the least, since he had just had a head off to repair damage from broken TB that led him to remove the GP's and while doing that had one break. I had a lot of phone calls durring that long drawn out repair. It was almost comical.

I do have another friend with a beautiful old Passat TDI that has been using BioD for about 4 years now, and has been driving the car 170+ miles a day to work and back and has never had a problem. I think he is approaching 300k miles and has never had the head off, runs a Stage II Rocket chip.

_________________
91 MB 300D 2.5L Turbo. Her's

05 MB E320 CDI. Mine

Actually isnt it the other things inside water? Are there not boats sunken in cold booty water that are like 300 years old and perfect looking?
-c

Only if water is cold enough and depending on type of metals, but even that doesn't stop the process. Check out the Titanic and the way it is slowly disappearing.

_________________
91 MB 300D 2.5L Turbo. Her's

05 MB E320 CDI. Mine

It is actually the type a organisms present. The HMS Titanic is going away rapidly in ice water, but the HMS Lusitania (spelled wrong) her sister ship that was sunk by a Gerry mine in the Med is still pretty much all there.

_________________
2006 Sport CRD

Could the Aztecs have known, that in 2012 after a 4 year experiment, our country would cease to exist?

A few comments, and I'll try to avoid getting involved in the flame war...

1. Probably the most dangerous chemical involved in making biodiesel is not the catalyst (NaOH or KOH), but the methanol. Very nasty stuff, breathed or absorbed through skin.

2. As I've stated on the biodiesel forum I'm involved with, anecdotal data whether pro or con is just that: anecdotes. I would dearly love to see some serious research done comparing long-term effects of representative petrodiesel, biodiesel, and SVO on like engines. In particular, the newer high-pressure common rail engines replete with aluminum.

3. Fuel quality is a problem in both petrodiesel and biodiesel. Making biodiesl is not as easy as baking a cake, as was reported in a local newspaper last year. Sure, anyone can do it, but doing it right and being able to do proper QC on it not trivial. But manufacturers typically don't warranty fuel-related issues no matter what fuel type is used.

_________________
George Reiswig
2005 Jeep Liberty CRD
Suncoast, SEGR, lift, InMotion tune, homebrew B100
At 138k, new head & gasket, timing belt, rockers and swearing vocabulary

Still, she went under long ago. Sure the water is cold too, which means that there is less disolved in the water causing the corrosion. My only point was that I think that Mr. Man scientist (reflex) is being silly. Air is corrosive too, maybe we should remove air from automobile engines too. I'm just saying there are things out there worse than biod. If his concern is it is bad for seals then make new seals. Its not that tough. He kinda sounds like my old man. Afraid of anything new because one thing might have to change. If somebody has actual science to toss out, then toss it out. You have no idea what anybody here does for a living or what their level of education is. Maybe we will get your science, maybe we won't but you just sound like a E-thug saying you know but can't explain it to us. Do you have a girlfriend too, but she goes to another school so we don't know her?
-c

You miss my point. It isn't the temp of the water, but what is in the water that is HUNGRY. There is still wood being found from spanish ships off the Florida Coast in warm water. The metal isn't rusting from corosion, it is disappearing and the rust like stuff you see is the organisms CRAP.

_________________
2006 Sport CRD

Could the Aztecs have known, that in 2012 after a 4 year experiment, our country would cease to exist?

That works too. I don't even think I had read your reply when I made mine. I had my post screen open for like 10 minutes while at lunch
-c

That's COOL. I'm a History Channel junkie.

_________________
2006 Sport CRD

Could the Aztecs have known, that in 2012 after a 4 year experiment, our country would cease to exist?

Darby - Great post, once again I agree with everything you said. One thing I would add that makes algae based BD make sense is the fact that it can be grown in salt water, not just fresh water. That means that cultivating it will not impact our fresh water supply, which as I stated before is dwindling.

To those calling for proof of damage: I have nothing to offer you, and in fact thats honestly my point here. There are no formal long term studies on this. It simply has not been in common use long enough. All anyone has, including myself, is anecdotes. I feel mine is more valid than yours simply because the source is a military contractor, but you are free to disagree or simply disbelieve, there is nothing I can do to prove something where I was not privvy to the results or numbers via methods other than word of mouth. There is plenty of circumstantial evidence however, as Darby says Bosch won't support more than B5, and I believe Chrysler says they won't support more than B20, if that. If it was really harmless, B100 would look much better to the press for support than B5 or B20. But people can believe what they wish.

The point of posting six explicit and large points against Biofuels was that even if you did not buy into the engine damage issue, there are five more(plus a handful of issues I did not take the time to detail) that are strong reasons to avoid biofuels. Any one of those issues I took the time to detail is fairly major and in and of itself a good reason not to support this change. Since people rarely all have the same concerns, just pick the one that is important to you and do the research. Ultimatly that is all that I am asking, that you go and read deeper than what the fan sites put out there.

Finally, as I have stated elsewhere, I am not a scientist. I am also not an automotive engineer, which is why I won't claim to know what all is damaged nor how. I am a software engineer in Seattle. And because it may make DadsDiesel feel better, I'll also mention that I do not have a college degree of any sort. I am very active with the local Democratic Party, and energy issues are one of three areas that I am very involved in(the others being immigration and technology). I have been an elected delegate, and my girlfriend has given lectures to groups and congressmen about the energy cycle and alternative energy(I mentioned her specialties elsewhere). I do not claim to be an expert on the topic, but I do know enough to ask the right questions when someone comes up with the new 'solution' to all our energy problems.

I love my CRD. I bought it because there were no diesel small trucks and I wanted to be more responsible than my S-10 allowed me to be. I am happy with that decision, and when biofuels start making sense, I will strongly consider moving there as I have every intention of doing my best to help the planet(and my gf would kick my booty if I didn't). But I am not going to do so while the detrimental effects outweigh the benefits, and the benefits themselves are mostly still lip service.

_________________
2006 Jeep Liberty Sport CRD

DCX draws the line at B5 for now with the CRD.

_________________
2006 Sport CRD

Could the Aztecs have known, that in 2012 after a 4 year experiment, our country would cease to exist?

Reflex- it sounds to me like you've resolved yourself to apathy regarding the fuel situation, and are digging to find excuses. Sure, biofuels aren't a completely 100% perfect closed-loop fuel source, but they do produce a carbon lifecycle that is refreshed within a human lifetime, and are a heck of a lot better than burning dead dinos. If you don't at least TRY to help the situation, it will never improve. Putting money in the oil companies' pockets simply says to everyone that you are happy with the status quo and don't see a need for change. If enough people adopted biofuels to create a supply problem, then we would be attacking THAT problem, not where to put in a few more oil wells.

_________________
2006 Liberty Sport CRD

Not at all. I am calling on people to contact their representatives and help build support for the New Apollo Energy initiative. It allocates federal funding to renewable and alternative fuels(as well as tropsch-fischer and nuclear power) for R&D and implementation. It seeks to treat the energy problem as seriously as we treated getting to space in the 60's. I absolutely do NOT want people to be complacent.


If they accomplished this, I would be in favor of them. But they do not. Since they are not an 'energy positive' source of energy, they actually increase our consumption of fossil fuels, both in the farming(diesel farming equipment), and in the refining and distribution(gas and coal fired plants). It is simply shifting the problem from one area to another.


There are better ways to go about it than deforesting the country, polluting it with farm runoff, consuming precious water resources to essentially burn them in cars, and increasing our fossil fuel consumption via the BF process. Re-read my post on the previous page, I addressed all of this already. We DO need to take action, but it should be intelligent action, based on sound science and research. Otherwise we are simply leaping from the frying pan and into the fire.

Call your congressman!

_________________
2006 Jeep Liberty Sport CRD

Reflex,

Thanks for your candor about not knowing of any longitudinal studies on effects on engines. I wish there were some. I fear that there is a rather tight link between the petroleum and automotive industries...tight enough to make it at least plausible that this very link might make Bosch not approve of alternatives, rather than having actual data. Also, there may be laziness at work: why should Bosch invest anything into actual research? Easier to just disapprove.

Now for my main quibble with what you've written, regarding potential benefits of biofuels. As with many scientific studies, there are contradictory results. But I've only seen one study done on biodiesel that showed a net energy loss, and that one was later contradicted rather directly by a U. of Minnesota study: they found a net increase in energy yield of +93% for biodiesel, versus +25% for ethanol. The same study found that biodiesel produced 41% fewer greenhouse gases compared with petrodiesel. From what I understand, they tried to factor in all energy consumption, including fuel for tractors, fertilizers, etc.

You are also not including the fact that there is actually a fair amount of biodiesel that is made from a recycled product: old restaurant oil. If that source of oil were put under the same test that U. Minn. did, the energy yield could (arguably) be way up from +93%, given that the crop was actually grown for a different initial purpose and would have been produced anyway.

Like you, I have high hopes for algae-based fuels. And as for fertilizing the algae, the slickest thing I've heard of was an MIT experiment retrofitting a factory with algae-based scrubbers. Previously the factory had failed emissions standards...emitting sulpher, nitrous oxides, and greenhouse gases of various flavors. The algae loved that pollution, and could be periodically harvested and pressed to make oil for biodiesel. The emissions left the scrubbers clean.

_________________
George Reiswig
2005 Jeep Liberty CRD
Suncoast, SEGR, lift, InMotion tune, homebrew B100
At 138k, new head & gasket, timing belt, rockers and swearing vocabulary