One Man's Waste is Anothers Gold

[spacewolflord]

I found this article and thought it was interesting. An New Zealand compainy has made bio-diesel from sewage from a waste treatment plant. They use the cleaning alge that is no longer useful in the cleaning process to make the clean fuel. Most of the time Bio-diesel is made in lab like envoirments this is clearly different. If it does produce more bio-diesel/energy then it takes to run the thing then I say this is a great invention. You what do the rest of you think? Is it a new way to get cheap gas to save the future or just something that will work in the future.
Sewage to Diesel

[SquidDNA]

Of course it produces more useable energy than it consumes-- they couldn't run a business if it didn't.

[Adonis]

Interesting. So now people can literally get shitty gas mileage.

[Kheturus]

We're never going to run out of oil, so what's the point?

[DatonKallandor]

We're never going to run out of oil, so what's the point?

There are no Americans within 100 miles of this city?


Daton

[Invictus]

We're never going to run out of oil, so what's the point?

How can you never run out of a finite resource?

It's a good idea. It's clean energy, unlike oil and other fossil fuels.

[JAL-18]

Trust us. We are never going to run out of oil. You can keep your shit.

[Harmanoff]

I think he refers to the various methods there are to make oil products from coal and wood etc...

Judging from what i've been reading in the newspapers it does indeed look like there is no breaking of the oil dependancy in the near future. Granted, it will be hugely more expensive, more exclusive and rare and will probably be an even greater source of conflict but if it goes away it will not be because it is not available.

[Ammon Ra]

Wait...you want to burn wood, turning it to coal and then convert the coal into oil?!? You'd better be prepared to plant ALOT of the earth in forests (considering current deforestation trend...) and then spend even more energy to generate the oil fromt he trees. Heck, a hydrogen economy would be more efficient, and you're loosing energy to produce the hydrogen...

[Zepherian]

We are at the dawn of the age of the shit czars.

[motiv-8]

I wonder how efficient that crap is

[Busby]

Error 414!

Bad Pun overload! Error! Error!

[Nurizeko]

Soooooooooo, people want to burn wood into coal then turn the coal into oil to be burned in engines......



Why is it so impossible for idiot fuckwit executives to grasp the simple concept of fossil feul = bad for teh enviroment, bad enviroment = bad for us, shit happens, life sucks, general end of humanity.

But i guess the world going to hell is worth rolling in money.......

*shakes head*

I've always held the idea Humanity will continue and prosper and spread out into the stars and become a halfway decent space faring race sometime in the future, but if were going to be stuck with a dependence on fucking over the planet with pollution I've finally come to the realization humanity will become extinct without getting past this oil dependency, and all that will be left will be crumbling ruins and some buried human stuff until the sun expands and puffs away the scourched ruined earth from existance......



:blink:

Seriously though once we find a safer viable alternative to fossil feuls, anyone caught using them should be imprisoned for life...selfish jerks...

[meppa]

Another great source of biodiesel (especially for those americans) is used frying oil from hamburger restaurants. That stuff makes excellent biodiesel and is atm waste. Nothing too radical or new in that link. Anyway, this is the future, everything that can be turned into better quality fuel will be turned into better quality fuel.

[Ammon Ra]

@ nuri. Burning wook as a fuel is not BAD or EVIL. As long as the carbon you are emitting = carbon being reabsorbed by plant life/sea, then you're ok. The BAD and EVIL thing happening now is that humans are mining all the carbon fuels and adding them to the atmosphere, without creating methods to solidify them back out of the air. We're adding green house gasses to the atmoshpere in MASSIVE amounts with disregard to returning it to the ground. Add to that the huge amounts of deforestation, thus the inability of forests to absorb said carbon, and we've made the problem twice as bad, all for the sake of our...no wait, for the american economy.

[Black]

@ nuri. Burning wook as a fuel is not BAD or EVIL. As long as the carbon you are emitting = carbon being reabsorbed by plant life/sea, then you're ok. The BAD and EVIL thing happening now is that humans are mining all the carbon fuels and adding them to the atmosphere, without creating methods to solidify them back out of the air. We're adding green house gasses to the atmoshpere in MASSIVE amounts with disregard to returning it to the ground. Add to that the huge amounts of deforestation, thus the inability of forests to absorb said carbon, and we've made the problem twice as bad, all for the sake of our...no wait, for the american economy.

Since when was the american economy the only industrialized economy?

[meppa]

Right... again this same nice idea how burning wood doesn't pollute. No idea where it comes from but it isn't totally right anyway. All you have to do is compare ozone layer strenght and big forest fires to see the effects of burning wood . Even if woods absorb those greenhouse gases eventually they are still free in athmosphere right after that wood has been burnt and lets say you burn down an oak that was 100 years old and it will take 100 years for that new oak you planted to its place to grow to same size. Thus it takes 100 years to absorb that co2 you released by burning that single tree.

Furthermore, lets be totally honest about how much energy you can get from wood. It isn't that great. And those tree trunks need to be moved to suitable location so that they can be turned into electricity also, which requires use of energy and cuts down the amount of energy you get from wood.

Basically all this combined we should notice how using wood as fuel isn't good in large quantities, but as support fuel or small scale operation it is wise, when you use leftover wood from say furniture industry or sawmills.

[Ammon Ra]

@ black star: It's the largest single industrialized 'polluting' country, biggest consumer of oil, and energy.

[meppa]

Ammon Ra, it is also one of few countries that hasn't signed kioto agreement which would regulate air pollution. I guess it is their choise to pollute instead of trying not to pollute.

[Black]

@ black star: It's the largest single industrialized 'polluting' country, biggest consumer of oil, and energy.

The American economy produces 24.3% of all carbon dioxide emissions. The European Union produces 15.3%, and the People's Republic of China produces 14.5%. I don't see how that can possibly warrant scapegoating the United States.

[Vemarkis]

The scapegoating is due that America doesn't even try to control its pollution, as far as i can see.

[Black]

The scapegoating is due that America doesn't even try to control its pollution, as far as i can see.

Neither is China, they don't even have to meet the Kyoto protocol's requirements for developed nations.

Nevertheless, on a federal level, the United States is weak on environmental issues, but on the state and municipal level, it is strong. There are several regional and state initiatives to curb damage to the environment from pollution. Though overall we suck at protecting the environment, you can't ignore the other major producers.

[Invictus]

The US also consumes 50% of the world's oil every year, despite having 1/20 or less of the world's population. Quite simply, America (the country in a metaphorical sense) is a greedy, dirty bastard that only looks out for number one and keeps shitting on other countries.

And what's more, America knows this, yet does nothing. That's why everyone's annoyed. It's like rubbing salt in the wound, or an ignorant/arrogant person refusing to accept the consequences of their own actions.

The American economy produces 24.3% of all carbon dioxide emissions. The European Union produces 15.3%, and the People's Republic of China produces 14.5%. I don't see how that can possibly warrant scapegoating the United States.

A full quarter of all CO2 emissions come from America. That, with the above, does warrant scapegoating. Especially since America is a mere country in comparison to the continent of Europe, or China, with the biggest population, emitting half of the CO2 America does.

[General Blaze]

Wow...

I'd say a "crap gas" related joke, but I fear that I'd just be repeating the same joke over and over.

The only way we'll be able to break from the dependancy of oil is if we discover something that's just as good or better than oil, only more plentiful and possibly cheaper. I think while we may be a bit far from breaking the dependancy from oil, this is a good step. Heck, Malaysia's also experimenting with the idea for Biofuel, so that one day we could use Palm Oil instead of regular oil. Sounds stupid yes, but so was the invention of the internet.

Also, regarding pollution, we should consult this man for advice: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzkHZ...obot%20chicken

[Ammon Ra]

LEts put that into percapita. 25%, for 300 million[rough estimate], Thus each person in the usa emits 0.000'000'083 %. While china emmits 15%, with 1.3billion people: 0.000'000'011%. The average american thus emmits around 7.5 times as much carbon dioxide than your average chinese.

Look at it this way. if the per-capita useage/emmision of carbon in america were equal to china, there would be 9.75 billion people in america. That's how Clazy! their consumption is.

For the hell of it, Population of Eu is308million with again 15% emmisions. That's 0.000'000'048% emmision per capita. That's almost half the emmisions per capita.

[Scribble]

-Trying to drag the topic away from Yanquis bashing: this does seem like a very good idea. Given how stretched our production has become in real terms, we need a lot more enterprises like this one.

Personally Ive always been appalled by just flushing human sewage into the sea, not only does it knacker the coast, but it's also a waste of a resource.

[Ammon Ra]

One could always use sewage to fertilize crops in hydroponic farms [after filtered etc]...Then again, it will probably go bust once people find out it uses human sewage...

[Black]

The United States, per capita, is ranked seventh for carbon dioxide emissions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ons_per_capita

The ratio of Emissions to GDP for the United States is far, far better than most nations. That means the US economy's use of energy is far more efficient: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...xide_emissions

Blame the federal government, by all means, but don't scapegoat the United States as a whole, or its economy (to name a few examples):
http://www.ci.seattle.wa.us/mayor/cl...fault.htm#what
http://www.rggi.org/

Let's also not forget China's economy is incredibly young compared to the United States and will likely overtake it in emissions within a decade or two.

[Dimension]

obtaining oil from wood and further adding to deforestation/conversion of natural forests into tree monocultures is no sensible solution ffs.

I'm still not convinced Biodiesel alone will be able to solve the energy crisis, but it may play an important role.

[meppa]

Energy crisis is far more then just what to use with cars. And quite frankly whole co2 emission conversation is bit off topic imo. I don't think anyone is planning on using biodiesel to create electrisity but to replace regular diesel on transportation and to fight against increasing fuel costs. If we are talking about solving energy crises we should be talking about alternative ways of getting electrisity, like fusion powerplants, harnessing tidal variation or increasing usage of solor and wind power. At some point oil, natural gas and coal will run out or we stop using them because of pollution and switch to something cleaner but that won't be biodiesel. Point behind biodiesel is to keep using current transportation equipment, or cars, with fuel that doesn't eventually run out.

Biodiesel isn't any more environmentally friendly then regular diesel in use and won't solve any co2 emission problems. It is just diesel made out of natural biological stuff that can be grown like food or even better taken from waste (be it used frying oils from mcdonalds/burger king or some yucky stuff from watertreatment plants)

If you want something that is closer to solving energy crisis remember mad max 3. Pig shit really does generate methane that can be used to fuel powerplants. Now we just need to get all pigfarmers together in a big farm close to a city and build a methane powerplant right next to it. Food and electrisity from same source ftw . Add in watertreatment plants and harvest methane from there as well and you get even biodiesel as sideproduct which can be used to power all tractors that are needed by those pig farmers. Also don't forget to use excess heat from turbines to heat up water and appartments and when it is too cold for that rest can be used to warm up streets to reduce upkeep costs during winters (if it happends to snow).

There is no single solution and all comes from combination of small things put together. We need to save energy, control emission, find alternative sources (even if they work only in small scale) and we might have hope.

[Bonnet]

he US also consumes 50% of the world's oil every year, despite having 1/20 or less of the world's population.

A huge portion of that goes towards the farming, tranportation and devolpment of basic foodstuffs. Of which we produce, wait for it, about 50% of the total world supply.

Oh and btw America now has more forested acres than it did in the entirety of the 19th century.

[No Surrender]

How the hell can the USA produce 1/2 of the world's food stuffs when it's ranked 3rd in the world in production of wheat and 10th in the world's production of Barely? There is no way in hell the US produces 50% of the world's basic foodstuffs.

[AceRimmer]

To me, the fact that the sewage is no longer a threat to the environment, and the production of new biofuel definitely outweighs the disadvantage of continuing the use of chemical fuel for cars. It doesn't solve the problem of emissions, but definitely solves another huge problem in the form of sewage, which cities produce a lot of.

Pity there's no word in the article on whether the new fuel is more efficient or the type of emissions.

[meppa]

The "new" fuel is generally more inefficient, but because it is more dense it is quite close to "old" fuel if you compare efficiency with volume.

[Weavern]

The arguement for never running out of oil biofuels and conversions aside is that the extraction techniques keep developing and more oil is located. Now to reach those deposits may be exceptionally expensive and create shortages of easily accessable oil thus creating supply issues but there will be oil should we find ways to get at it for many years to come.

All those predictions for when we run out of oil are done on consumption and the current fields tapped. One day we will not have enough oil to meet demand and a day or two after that there will not be enough oil to be easily reached to meet those demands. But unless some dirastic change is made the oil will eventually all run out. Just maybe not this generation or the next the earth is big and we have yet to explore much of it with interest to resource finding.

That said, turning sewage into fuel is great. There is lots of sewage and if we could turn treatment plants into refineries it would be an interesting proposition.