Etanol.nu

Forum för föreningen etanol.nu
Aktuellt datum och tid: tor 24-03-28 23:33

Alla tidsangivelser är UTC + 1 timme




Ny tråd Svara på tråd  [ 3 inlägg ] 
Författare Meddelande
InläggPostat: sön 09-03-01 02:40 
Offline
Forummoderator

Blev medlem: mån 07-01-01 20:57
Inlägg: 6015
Ort: Hindås
Tänkte jag skulle kolla upp den här Robert Edwards som får uttala sig för hela EU gällande biobränslen och hur förkastliga de är.
Hittade detta till att börja med:
http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/jrc/downloads/j ... report.pdf

Citat:
2.2. Second Generation Biofuels
Second generation
biofuels can be made
from almost any form
of biomass…
Second generation biofuels can be made from almost any form of biomass. If made
from forest- or crop-residues, they do not compete with food for feedstock.
However, if made from dedicated energy crops, they compete for land and water
resources. Some energy crops (switchgrass, poplar...) can be also grown (at
reduced yield) on present grassland. It is not known how much soil carbon would
be released by this change in land use. Much depends on ground cover and how
much soil is disturbed in planting.
…but are still at the
pilot plant stage…
Second generation processes are still at the pilot plant stage. They are complex
and very expensive, but can use cheaper feedstock. They emit much less GHG
than typical 1st generation biofuels because the growing the feedstock has low
inputs, and the processes use biomass waste streams for process heat
Thermochemical processes (“biomass to liquids”, BTL) work by gasifying wood
then synthesizing road-fuel from the gas. The sub-units (gasifier, gas separation,
Fischer-Tropsch synthesis…) already exist in other industrial processes: they only
need integration. This means one can predict performance and cost, but scope for
future improvement is limited.
The cellulose-to-ethanol process (which best uses straw and wet biomass), is more
innovative. Technology breakthroughs are needed to make it competitive, and
these are unpredictable.
…and are unlikely to
be competitive by
2020.
It is unlikely that 2nd generation biofuels will be competitive with 1st
generation by 2020, and will anyway use largely imported biomass. Technoeconomic
analysis [JEC 2007] indicates 2nd generation biofuels will be much more
expensive than first generation biofuels.
Costs are dominated by investment cost of
the plant. In order to arrive at overall production costs competitive with first
generation biofuels, one would have to assume very significant “learning” to reduce
the capital cost by 2020. However [JEC 2007] used detailed costings for full-size
plant in series production, not for the present pilot plants. Further reduction of these
costs by learning will not start until after several plants have been built. Even if
targeted high subsidies result in the construction of several full-size plants by 2020,
the learning will not have an effect until after 2020. Therefore 2nd generation
biofuels will be still much more expensive even than 1st generation ones in 2020.
Also its inputs will be
imported to a large
extent.
The latest authoritative study on EU wood supply1 indicates that there will not be
enough wood available to meet both the renewable electricity/heat plans and the
needs of the existing wood industries. Therefore rather than forest sources
contributing wood to 2nd generation biofuels, the electricity sector will compete for
bioenergy crops produced on agricultural land.
The PRIMES model, used to estimate the energy mix in 2020, assumed a constant
cost for wood. By the time 2nd generation plants come on line, the more accessible
EU wood will already be used in local district heating/electricity plants, so only the
most remote and expensive sources will still be available. JRC has generated the
1 see the background paper for UNECE/FAO-European Forestry Commission joint policy forum Oct. 2007 at:
http://www.unece.org/trade/timber/docs/ ... uments.htm
8
first estimate of a cost-supply curve for energy-wood resources in EU (see
Appendix 2). This shows how the cost of wood rises as demand increases, and that
it will be cheaper to import wood than exploit much of the assumed EU supply.
. 2nd generation plants are sophisticated and therefore expensive. They can only
hope to become commercial on very large scale: e.g. 1 GWth. To gather enough
wood without high transport costs, they have to be at a port. Then it would mostly
be cheaper to buy imported wood (see Appendix 2), in competition with the
electricity sector


Jaha, och i USA har man inte fattat det än bara att det "aldrig" kommer att gå att komma ned till samma produktionskostnad som för bensin?
De blåägda amerikanerna kommer snart att ge upp?

_________________
http://direktdemokraterna.se
Myndigförklara dig själv.


Dela på FacebookDela på TwitterDela på TuentiDela på SonicoDela på FriendFeedDela på OrkutDela på DiggDela på MySpaceDela på DeliciousDela på TechnoratiDela på TumblrDela på Google+
Upp
 Profil  
 
 Inläggsrubrik:
InläggPostat: sön 09-03-01 03:08 
Offline
Forummoderator

Blev medlem: mån 07-01-01 20:57
Inlägg: 6015
Ort: Hindås
En bra sammanfattning av vad mannen påstår finns här:
http://www.agrinergy.ecologic.eu/downlo ... ummary.pdf

Citat:
3.2 Technological Pathways
The aim of the workshop was to get a more comprehensive view on the different technological pathways for
bioenergy production. Three presentations were given, followed by discussion. The first presentation was by
Robert Edwards of the Joint Research Centre. His main message was that second generation biofuels are
very unlikely to become competitive with first generation biofuels in the foreseeable future, while biomass in
the EU is better used for heat and electricity instead of biofuels. Second generation biofuels in Europe will
become competitive at a price of about $220 per barrel crude oil, while European biodiesel will be
competitive with crude oil at a crude oil price of about $160 per barrel.
The opportunities for using agricultural
waste are highly overestimated, because most of the commercially usable waste products are already used
A specific support action (SSP) under the
6th EU Framework Research Programme
May 2007 to November 2009
SSPE-CT-2007-44437
for non-energy purposes, while the other part has too high costs in collecting and transporting or is required
to maintain the soil quality. That is why, it is much more efficient to import biofuels from tropical countries,
even if it is jus exporting the problem of food conflicts and soil carbon stock out of EU boarders.
The existing process to transform lingo-cellulosic biomass into biofuels is the same that the one to transform
coal into liquid: plants are easy to cost and there are restricted possibilities of improvement. With this figures,
and prices of wood imported from tropical countries, the minimum size for production plants is 1 GW to make
economies of scale: investment amount is extremely high and only few places are available to implement
such structures.
The second presentation was by Herwig Ragossing from the European Biomass Association (AEBIOM)
about the outlook on biopower technologicy developments. He gave an overview of different technologies to
produce electricity, gas and heat from biomass. Currently almost all bio-electricity is produced with steam
turbines, having a low efficiency. A number of technologies seem to be promising. Examples are the Sterling
engine (with low efficiencies between 15% and 30%), gasification, especially in combination with carbon
capture and storage, and pyrolysis. Combined heat and power generation requires a demand for heat.
Finally, anaerobic digestion towards biogass is efficient from the point of view of production per hectare (6
toe/ha in contrast with 1 toe/ha for first generation biofuels), but remains relatively expensive. According to
Ragossing, optimal biomass project are integrated and decentralized projects with secure fuel supply and a
need for heat and electricity.


Vad finns egentligen för stöd för påståendena om beräknade kostnader?

_________________
http://direktdemokraterna.se
Myndigförklara dig själv.


Upp
 Profil  
 
 Inläggsrubrik:
InläggPostat: mån 09-03-02 00:10 
Offline
Forummoderator

Blev medlem: mån 07-01-01 20:57
Inlägg: 6015
Ort: Hindås
Har hittat lite kritik emot JRC..:
http://news.mongabay.com/bioenergy/2008 ... urope.html

Timing är allt i lobbismens värld...:
Citat:
In what could be the forced start of the implementation of a 'Biopact', the European Commission's own scientific institute, the Joint Research Centre, writes in an unpublished and unreviewed report that circulated last year in the Commission, that the costs of biofuels could outweigh the benefits. According to the report, 'leaked' by Greenpeace (and sent to the Financial Times) at a strategic time - just before the publication of the new directive on renewables -, biofuels as currently produced in Europe might not be contributing to the fight against climate change.



Citat:
The only liquid biofuels the JCR sees as viable are highly efficient fuels like sugarcane ethanol.

Tack för det iaf...

Citat:
Rob Vierhout, secretary general of the European Bioethanol Fuel Association (eBIO), also stressed that the report, as it stands, means nothing as it has not yet been reviewed. "I am not surprised by the report as it has always been the agenda of the JRC to discredit biofuels ever since they started their Well-to-Wheel project with the oil and car industry," he told EurActiv.

Vierhout added: "We have long asked to be a partner in this study but so far we have been completely left out. This is not the way democracy should function." According to him, "the fact that the study is being leaked now – one week ahead of the Commission legislation on biofuels – is a deliberate attempt by the oil industry to kill off the EU's biofuels policy."

He further questioned NGOs' positioning in the debate, saying: "If we want to reduce emissions from fossil fuels, we have only biofuels. Carmakers are certainly opposed to making more fuel-efficient vehicles, and they are getting their way as we saw in Parliament this week. Do NGOs have some sort of unholy alliance with oil companies?"


Inte kan det väl vara korruption i JRC??

_________________
http://direktdemokraterna.se
Myndigförklara dig själv.


Upp
 Profil  
 
Visa inlägg nyare än:  Sortera efter  
Ny tråd Svara på tråd  [ 3 inlägg ] 

Alla tidsangivelser är UTC + 1 timme


Vilka är online

Användare som besöker denna kategori: Inga registrerade användare och 10 gäster


Du kan inte skapa nya trådar i denna kategori
Du kan inte svara på trådar i denna kategori
Du kan inte redigera dina inlägg i denna kategori
Du kan inte ta bort dina inlägg i denna kategori
Du kan inte bifoga filer i denna kategori

Sök efter:
Hoppa till:  
cron
POWERED_BY
Swedish translation by Peetra & phpBB Sweden © 2006-2011