Biofuels for Cars

road_high

I wish our short sighted FF govt (can't see beyond the next election in a desperate cling for power) would seriously invest in biofuel for cars.
Why can they offer greater incentives and develop a proper inductry like the Scandinavians. They are years ahead of us as usual.
It would help reduce our chronic reliance on imported oil for cars and help our balance of payments.
Also give a much needed boost to agriculture here.The technology exists, all we need is real support from central powers to kickstart it.Or am I being cynical when I say they have too much of a vested interest in fosiil fuels i.e. excise duty and VAT on fuels...

Oldtree

saw a programme on tv about Cllr Brian Meaney of Clare County Council who makes his own, but has to pay tax on it nonetheless. Imagine you collect waste products from producers and convert it into something useful and you have to pay tax on it! When I get a biodiesel generator going they can jump for the tax!

piraka

mfitzy wrote:

I wish our short sighted FF govt (can't see beyond the next election in a desperate cling for power) would seriously invest in biofuel for cars.
Why can they offer greater incentives and develop a proper inductry like the Scandinavians. They are years ahead of us as usual.
It would help reduce our chronic reliance on imported oil for cars and help our balance of payments.
Also give a much needed boost to agriculture here.The technology exists, all we need is real support from central powers to kickstart it.Or am I being cynical when I say they have too much of a vested interest in fosiil fuels i.e. excise duty and VAT on fuels...

Not only is it shorted sight, but they have failed to implement a EU directive on biofuels.

http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2003/l_123/l_12320030517en00420046.pdf

Article 1.
(a) Member States should ensure that a minimum proportion
of biofuels and other renewable fuels is placed on
their markets, and, to that effect, shall set national indicative
targets.

(b) (i) A reference value for these targets shall be 2 %,
calculated on the basis of energy content, of all
petrol and diesel for transport purposes placed on
their markets by 31 December 2005.

(ii) A reference value for these targets shall be 5,75 %,
calculated on the basis of energy content, of all
petrol and diesel for transport purposes placed on
their markets by 31 December 2010.

SeanW

Even the oil-crazed Americans are a gazillion miles ahead of us on this one.
Just put the term "Biodiesel" into Google News.

1huge1

id say we will just be copying the UK as usual on this
when they do it so will they
the only time we ever were ahead of the game was with the smoking ban

FillSpectre

1huge1 wrote:

the only time we ever were ahead of the game was with the smoking ban

No the plastic bags also. We were also head of the game on recognising certain civil rights etc... It is very easy to make such throw away comments. It simply isn't true and is a sign of the laziness on the speaker that the government are accused of.

I am surprised to see you have to pay tax on something you produce yourself. How does that work? If you make home brew you don't have to pay tax on it so what is the logic? Any link to explain

road_high

FillSpectre wrote:

No the plastic bags also. We were also head of the game on recognising certain civil rights etc... It is very easy to make such throw away comments. It simply isn't true and is a sign of the laziness on the speaker that the government are accused of.

I am surprised to see you have to pay tax on something you produce yourself. How does that work? If you make home brew you don't have to pay tax on it so what is the logic? Any link to explain

I'm sorry but the job of govt is to implement policy- our lazy governments policy on energy has been to continue importing 90% of our fuel needs while paying mere lip service to the renewables sector-fact!
Why isn't the semi-state ESB forced to purchase more electricity from the wind sector??; because they want the market to themselves, that's why!And this is a semi-state company, so its clear there is no real govt appetite for supporting renewablea at present- I wish there was for all our sakes.

AdrianR

Noel Dempsey was asked why the government weren't promoting it and his response was something like [SIC] There wouldn't be a demand for it as we don't have engines which can run on it or something equally stupid.

FillSpectre

Mfity

I was addressing one lazy point and am certinly not going to defend the governments actions on everything. I am not going to entertain conspiracies and beleifs that the government are organised enough to have mass plans to sc**w everybody. If you want to do that raise a different thread.

Now does anybody have actual information on the statement that if you produced your own fuel you have to pay the government taxes? I find it next to impossible to beleive and would like to confirm this.

setanta59

it is(amazingly!) true that you must pay FULL excise on biofuel you make yourself, I am 100% certain on this.

Saruman

mfitzy wrote:

The technology exists, all we need is real support from central powers to kickstart it.Or am I being cynical when I say they have too much of a vested interest in fosiil fuels i.e. excise duty and VAT on fuels...

You are right to say the technology exists.. it has existed for almost the whole life of the car! the very first Model T ran on Ethanol until the Oil companies got their claws into the motor industry.

SeanW

What I will never understand is why the government let the sugar industry die after the EU mandated end to the preexisting subsidy scheme.

They should have mandated that any petroleum fuel sold in Ireland contain X% of Irish Sugarbeet Ethanol where X = Petrol demand/Ethanol capacity * 100/1.

That would have kept the sugarbeet industry and all its jobs alive while reducing our national reliance on fossil fuels slightly at the stroke of a pen.

The government would have got the votes of some environmentalists and all the sugar farmers to boot. Why oh why did this not happen?

McSandwich

SeanW wrote:

What I will never understand is why the government let the sugar industry die after the EU mandated end to the preexisting subsidy scheme.

They should have mandated that any petroleum fuel sold in Ireland contain X% of Irish Sugarbeet Ethanol where X = Petrol demand/Ethanol capacity * 100/1.

That would have kept the sugarbeet industry and all its jobs alive while reducing our national reliance on fossil fuels slightly at the stroke of a pen.

The government would have got the votes of some environmentalists and all the sugar farmers to boot. Why oh why did this not happen?

Because someone made a fortune from the sale of the the factory land to the local property developer. Our short sighted Government has traded a viable industry with huge growth potential for a few cheaply built but very profitable apartments.. :mad:

OfflerCrocGod

McSandwich wrote:

Because someone made a fortune from the sale of the the factory land to the local property developer. Our short sighted Government has traded a viable industry with huge growth potential for a few cheaply built but very profitable apartments.. :mad:

No. The Ethanol market is virtually non-existent therefore such a law would have made no difference to the farmers because there is no market for them to grow fat from by government fiat (I doubt the legality of such a law within the EU tbh). Also you need to learn what "viable" means; viable is not "sustainable only because of government subsidies" in fact it's the exact opposite.

McSandwich

OfflerCrocGod wrote:

No. The Ethanol market is virtually non-existent therefore such a law would have made no difference to the farmers because there is no market for them to grow fat from by government fiat (I doubt the legality of such a law within the EU tbh). Also you need to learn what "viable" means; viable is not "sustainable only because of government subsidies" in fact it's the exact opposite.

If it's "viable" in so many other countries, then why not here? There is a ready market for biofuels in Ireland - not to mention EU requirments.

I wasn't suggesting that the Government invoke any laws, I can't think of any which would apply. My point was that if there was serious Government support for production of renewable fuels (as there is for construction), then the sugar beet industry would have a future.

ednwireland

fridays irish times

road transport in the uk consumes 37.8 million tonnes of petroleum products a year
the most productive crop which can be grown in the uk is rape. the average yeild is between 3 and 3. tonnes per hectare. one tonne of rapeseed produces 41.5 kilos of biodiesel. so every hectare could produce 41.5 kilos of transport fuel. to run all cas buses and lorries on this would require 25.9 million hectares - there are only 5.7 million hectares of arable land in the uk !!!!!!!
this means acheiving the eu target of 20% would take the whole of the uk's arable cropland.
this is from a book by george monbiot heat: how to stop the planet burning


http://www.turnuptheheat.org/

http://www.monbiot.com/

dont know how accurate these figures are but food for thought on the real possibilities of biofuels

Tazz T

SeanW wrote:

What I will never understand is why the government let the sugar industry die after the EU mandated end to the preexisting subsidy scheme.

They should have mandated that any petroleum fuel sold in Ireland contain X% of Irish Sugarbeet Ethanol where X = Petrol demand/Ethanol capacity * 100/1.

That would have kept the sugarbeet industry and all its jobs alive while reducing our national reliance on fossil fuels slightly at the stroke of a pen.

The government would have got the votes of some environmentalists and all the sugar farmers to boot. Why oh why did this not happen?

This really gets my goat. The Mallow factory becomes a luxury hotel and a block of apts instead of providing a readymade source of alternative fuel. Whoever allowed this to happen will be crying down the line that it's too expensive to setup a ethanol plant when there was one sitting there begging to be used. What on earth does Mallow need a luxury hotel for?

BendiBus

But wasn't Mallow a sugar factory not an ethanol one? Are the processes so similar that a sugar factory can automatically become an ethanol refinery?

Besides, ednwireland is quite correct on the volume limitations of biofuels.

McSandwich

ednwireland wrote:

dont know how accurate these figures are but food for thought on the real possibilities of biofuels

The sugarbeet yield per hectare is approx 53 tonnes. Also, the conversion to ethenol is simplified as there is no need to convert to sugar first - as required for other crops.

http://www.esru.strath.ac.uk/EandE/Web_sites/02-03/biofuels/quant_bioethanol.htm#sugarbeet_yields

Tazz T

Mallow could have been fitted out to convert sugar to ethanol much quicker and cheaper than starting from scratch several years from now when someone sees that it was something we should have done several years ago.

OfflerCrocGod

McSandwich wrote:

If it's "viable" in so many other countries, then why not here?

So other EU countries who lost their sugar subsidies had no problem in continuing the production they had before? If that's the case it's a terrible indictment for our sugar producers and a great relief and a step forward for the countries who now produce sugar sans-subsidies.

McSandwich wrote:

There is a ready market for biofuels in Ireland - not to mention EU requirments.

Large enough to consume all that previously inviable sugar beet production? If it is why hasn't it steeped in to take over after market distorting subsidies where removed?

McSandwich wrote:

I wasn't suggesting that the Government invoke any laws, I can't think of any which would apply. My point was that if there was serious Government support for production of renewable fuels (as there is for construction), then the sugar beet industry would have a future.

That was more a response to something you quoted by SeanW who was asking for the goverment to mandate. Don't get me wrong I support the use of Bio-fuels and would welcome more goverment support for them but I took issue with anyone describing subsidy farming such as what we have here in Europe as viable when it is far, far from such.

probe

There was an item in the Wall St Journal about biofuels the other day and they mentioned the Jatropha plant as being one of the most efficient biofuel plant sources. It grows in poor soil, and while it produces a max crop in wet climates, the plants can last two years without rainfall, in arid environments. It can be planted in poor soils and is thus the least likely to compete with food production.

www.jatrophabiodiesel.org

McSandwich

OfflerCrocGod wrote:

So other EU countries who lost their sugar subsidies had no problem in continuing the production they had before? If that's the case it's a terrible indictment for our sugar producers and a great relief and a step forward for the countries who now produce sugar sans-subsidies.

Not sure what your getting at here??

OfflerCrocGod wrote:

Large enough to consume all that previously inviable sugar beet production? If it is why hasn't it steeped in to take over after market distorting subsidies where removed?

I'm not sure what your asking but producing sugarbeet for biofuel is completely different to producing it for sugar cubes etc. See the link in my last post...

OfflerCrocGod wrote:

That was more a response to something you quoted by SeanW who was asking for the goverment to mandate. Don't get me wrong I support the use of Bio-fuels and would welcome more goverment support for them but I took issue with anyone describing subsidy farming such as what we have here in Europe as viable when it is far, far from such.

We're on common ground here. Long term I don't see why bio-fuel production would need subsidies? Obviosly more Government support would be helpfull in assuring this.

OfflerCrocGod

McSandwich wrote:

Not sure what your getting at here??

I'm saying that if other European farmers where operating under the same subsidies and yet they didn't collapse when the subsidies where removed then clearly Irish farmers where less efficient then the other farmers.

McSandwich wrote:

I'm not sure what your asking but producing sugarbeet for biofuel is completely different to producing it for sugar cubes etc. See the link in my last post...

I know it is but if it was viable then I'm sure someone or some business would have stepped in with the investment required for the sugar cube --> ethanol transfer to happen.

McSandwich wrote:

We're on common ground here. Long term I don't see why bio-fuel production would need subsidies? Obviosly more Government support would be helpfull in assuring this.

Not subsidies but a helping hand i.e. removing tax for the producers and other incentives for motorists to use this fuel just until the industry was on it's feet. Won't happen with our government as such things require vision and drive which it lacks - doesn't matter once other EU countries do this we will follow as usual.

luapenak

OfflerCrocGod wrote:

INot subsidies but a helping hand i.e. removing tax for the producers and other incentives for motorists to use this fuel just until the industry was on it's feet.

I think that the government needs to somehow develop the bio fuels resources by encouraging industry to invest in growing and processing whatever crops ae necessary. But it is necessary for the government to make commitments that the motorists will use this fuel or else the government will take responsilbilty. This should not be necessary. Although the problem comes with when you get motorists to switch (refering to the "incentives for motorists", as obviously biofuel could just be mixed with diesel and petrol to a large extent the way it is done in brazil and motorists would have no say).
Back to the problem. I had thought switching to bio diesel would be a good idea for me. But i would not make this change untill the bio diesel is in wide spread production in Ireland. There is no point in motorists changing to biofuels untill they are produced locally. So that means industry has to make the first move, but they wont want to untill there is a consumer base.


If we all change to biodiesel it will all be imported. The carbon emissions due to transporting them from half way across the world is quite large. Also much rainforest is being replaced with agriculture for bio fuels. Personally I rather save the rainforest from destruction as it is such a huge sink for carbon emissions. I think i stick with the regualr stuff and just try to reduce how much i use my car.

It is also necessary to analyse the land use in the area that one would like to grow bio-crops (or whatever). There is no point replacing vegitation that is a better carbon absorber then the crops for biofuels, with these crops. Particlularily forested area( because we all know of the lack of that in Ireland)

luapenak

OfflerCrocGod wrote:

INot subsidies but a helping hand i.e. removing tax for the producers and other incentives for motorists to use this fuel just until the industry was on it's feet.

I think that the government needs to somehow develop the bio fuels resources by encouraging industry to invest in growing and processing whatever crops ae necessary. But it is necessary for the government to make commitments that the motorists will use this fuel or else the government will take responsilbilty. This should not be necessary. Although the problem comes with when you get motorists to switch (refering to the "incentives for motorists", as obviously biofuel could just be mixed with diesel and petrol to a large extent the way it is done in brazil and motorists would have no say).
Back to the problem. I had thought switching to bio diesel would be a good idea for me. But i would not make this change untill the bio diesel is in wide spread production in Ireland. There is no point in motorists changing to biofuels untill they are produced locally. So that means industry has to make the first move, but they wont want to untill there is a consumer base.


If we all change to biodiesel it will all be imported. The carbon emissions due to transporting them from half way across the world is quite large. Also much rainforest is being replaced with agriculture for bio fuels. Personally I rather save the rainforest from destruction as it is such a huge sink for carbon emissions. I think i stick with the regualr stuff and just try to reduce how much i use my car.

It is also necessary to analyse the land use in the area that one would like to grow bio-crops (or whatever). There is no point replacing vegitation that is a better carbon absorber then the crops for biofuels, with these crops. Particlularily forested area( because we all know of the lack of that in Ireland)

McSandwich

OfflerCrocGod wrote:

Not subsidies but a helping hand i.e. removing tax for the producers and other incentives for motorists to use this fuel just until the industry was on it's feet. Won't happen with our government as such things require vision and drive which it lacks - doesn't matter once other EU countries do this we will follow as usual.

Exactly, that's what I was getting at when I said government support is required if bio fuel production is to get off the ground. I don't see how subsidies would ever be necessary for an industry with a ready market.

piraka

McSandwich wrote:

Because someone made a fortune from the sale of the the factory land to the local property developer. Our short sighted Government has traded a viable industry with huge growth potential for a few cheaply built but very profitable apartments.. :mad:

Not only was it short sighted. They put aside €137 million of taxpayers money for the closure. That money could have being used in whatever conversion of plant that was required.

Clare gunner

Tazz T wrote:

Mallow could have been fitted out to convert sugar to ethanol much quicker and cheaper than starting from scratch several years from now when someone sees that it was something we should have done several years ago.

While definately for anything that brings down our cost of juice wether petrol or diesel.Concentrating all this in one plant is just not feasabile.It violates the 2nd law of thermodymanics.You must get more out of a project than what you stick into it.In this case more energy than you put in.
So input energy= power to electrify,and operate plant from fossil fuels,fossil fuels burnt to deliver beet,etc.
Output= ethonal ; trucks used to deliver the ethynol are diesel powerd at the moment. The ethynol must be mixed somwhere with dino[saurus] fuel somwhere.In Ireland that would be the Whiddy oil refinery as it must be done in bulk to get it properly mixed.More fossil fuel burnt to deliver to Whiddy and rexport to petrol stations.Thats if Whiddy can handle such a process,as it is an ancient refinery as well.
This is a VERY simplified explanation,but it hopefully illustrates that we will proably burn more fossil fuel produceing the ethynol than what we get out of it.Plus how much will it cost to convert the plant in mallow to a refinery as well?Also ethynol does not give you as much "bang for your buck"as normal dino fuel.It is also a major PITA to start motors from cold on pure ethynol,and modern motors are not easy to work on to convert.You need to go back to old style double carbed motors or double barrelled carbs.Cool,my old V8 Range Rover will do fine.:D or develop a pre heating system for your alcohol motor.
What would be better is;we concentrate on setting up small co ops in areas where it is viable to grow bio fuel crops and grow and produce the fuel in those areas.Centralisation will not work for somthing like this.
Why do you have to tax this fuel ??It is alcohol ,and alcohol has been taxed here for centuries.Sure you can brew alcohol in beer,below a certain proof content.See what happens if you said to the rev you wanted to brew your own spirits ,nothing stopping you.Just pay the gov.Nothing else.
However if you are doing bio diesel refining via triserfication.Careful where you source the chemicals.The rev might be watching those stores.:)
Ironic thing on tax.The Germans had it up to last year at a lower price than Dino diesel.The idiot Greens,then demanded a tax increase on bio fuels to stop diesel motors from benefitting and everyone buying a diesel motor.Now the stuff is more expensive than Dino diesel,and the Germans are driving on fossil fuel again.:rolleyes: Stupid is is as stupid does.:eek: