Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [hreg] Re: BP Solar did you read & ethanol

Expand Messages
  • Charles L. Seaman
    That is the problem with ethanol and hydrogen. It takes more energy to produce the ethanol than the ethanol produces, which is also the case for hydrogen.
    Message 1 of 8 , Dec 3, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      That is the problem with ethanol and hydrogen. It takes more energy to
      produce the ethanol than the ethanol produces, which is also the case for
      hydrogen.
      Depends on the process!
      ----------
      >From: Robert Bruce Warburton <warbur2@...>
      >To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
      >Subject: Re: [hreg] Re: BP Solar did you read & ethanol
      >Date: Tue, Dec 3, 2002, 2:18 PM
      >

      > That is the problem with ethanol and hydrogen. It takes more energy to
      > produce the ethanol than the ethanol produces, which is also the case
      > for hydrogen. However, biodiesel made from used vegetable oil could
      > supplement a significant percentage of diesel fuel use. Since used
      > vegetable oil has been a waste product and not a beginning product, land
      > would not be devoted to biodiesel production like ethanol would. Farmers
      > want ethanol, but if there is no net energy gain then it would increase
      > energy consumption. I am reading a book called Energy and Social Change.
      > It was written by James O'Toole and the University of Southern
      > California Center for Futures Research. They discuss how we are actually
      > consuming more energy in producing the foods we consume than we get from
      > those foods. I would like to know are there certain crops meant for
      > direct human nutrition consumption that don't require more energy to
      > produce than they provide us?
      >
      > "Kevin L. Conlin" wrote:
      >
      >> The main problem with BP's thin film technology is that it, like all
      >> other thin film technologies, has not lived up to it's main promise of
      >> lower costs. Very few thin film manufacturers are profitable, and BP
      >> is simply trying to cut it's losses. The current PV market is being
      >> driven by large grid tied markets, especially in California, and the
      >> thin film products do not fit this scheme due to their larger size,
      >> and hence, higher installation costs per watt.
      >>
      >> ----- Original Message -----
      >> From: Roxanne Boyer
      >> To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
      >> Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 10:02 PM
      >> Subject: [hreg] Re: BP Solar did you read & ethanol
      >> Dear HREG, What is wrong with BP's thin film technology? I
      >> thought it was less cost per watt. Does another company,
      >> like Unisolar, already have the upper hand on thin film
      >> solar cells? Another question... if ethanol becomes a
      >> popular fuel, what percentage of our farmable land should we
      >> contribute to fuels. Here are some facts (I think they are
      >> facts) to ponder: There are about 500 million acres of farm
      >> land in the US (not including livestock rangeland). An acre
      >> of land can grow about 100 bushes of corn per year. A
      >> bushel of corn can produce about 2.5 gallons of ethanol. A
      >> gallon of ethanol has a little more than half the energy
      >> content as a gallon of gasoline. The US consumes about 200
      >> trillion (2x10^11) gallons of petroleum per year for
      >> transportation. This means to completely convert to ethanol
      >> would require more than 2x10^11 /2.5 /100 /0.6 = 1.3 billion
      >> acres of land dedicated to growing corn. What if we scale
      >> back and add 5% ethanol to the gasoline pool as an oxygenate
      >> (replace MTBE)? Then, that would require 133 million acres
      >> of land. Is that reasonable? What do you think? What
      >> would you tell your congressman? Please reply,Chris
      >>
      >> ----- Original Message -----
      >> From: Robert Bruce Warburton
      >> To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
      >> Sent: Thursday, November 28, 2002 4:34 PM
      >> Subject: [hreg] Re: BP Solar did you read
      >> Did you read in the Houston Chronicle on the 26th
      >> that BP Solar will cut as many as 260 jobs in the
      >> U.S. in an effort to keep its solar panel sales
      >> growing at an annual rate of 30%. They will no
      >> longer make thin film solar cells. They will now
      >> concentrate on crystalline silicon cells, which
      >> already account for 85% of its solar cell
      >> production.
      >>
      >> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
      >> Service.
      >>
      >>
      >> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
      > ADVERTISEMENT
      >
      >
      >>
      >> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
      >
    • Robert Bruce Warburton
      Check out the webmaster@colemanpowermate.com site. If this is true, I am wondering what would prevent someone developing a device that works sort of like an
      Message 2 of 8 , Dec 4, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        Check out the webmaster@... site. If this is true, I am wondering what would prevent someone developing a device that works sort of like an oxygen concentrator except instead of taking in air it would take in exhaust fumes from a vehicle, and instead of trapping the free nitrogen it traps hydrocarbons and allows the other emissions to go through the exhaust pipe. If the hydrocarbons were trapped over a long enough period, they could in combination with air produce electricity.

        "Kevin L. Conlin" wrote:

        The main problem with BP's thin film technology is that it, like all other thin film technologies, has not lived up to it's main promise of lower costs.  Very few thin film manufacturers are profitable, and BP is simply trying to cut it's losses.  The current PV market is being driven by large grid tied markets, especially in California, and the thin film products do not fit this scheme due to their larger size, and hence, higher installation costs per watt.
        ----- Original Message -----
        Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 10:02 PM
        Subject: [hreg] Re: BP Solar did you read & ethanol
         Dear HREG, What is wrong with BP's thin film technology?  I thought it was less cost per watt. Does another company, like Unisolar, already have the upper hand on thin film solar cells? Another question... if ethanol becomes a popular fuel, what percentage of our farmable land should we contribute to fuels.  Here are some facts (I think they are facts) to ponder:  There are about 500 million acres of farm land in the US (not including livestock rangeland).  An acre of land can grow about 100 bushes of corn per year.  A bushel of corn can produce about 2.5 gallons of ethanol.  A gallon of ethanol has a little more than half the energy content as a gallon of gasoline.  The US consumes about 200 trillion (2x10^11) gallons of petroleum per year for transportation.  This means to completely convert to ethanol would require more than 2x10^11 /2.5 /100 /0.6 = 1.3 billion acres of land dedicated to growing corn.  What if we scale back and add 5% ethanol to the gasoline pool as an oxygenate (replace MTBE)?  Then, that would require 133 million acres of land.  Is that reasonable?  What do you think?  What would you tell your congressman? Please reply,Chris 
        ----- Original Message -----
        Sent: Thursday, November 28, 2002 4:34 PM
        Subject: [hreg] Re: BP Solar did you read
         Did you read in the Houston Chronicle on the 26th that BP Solar will cut as many as 260 jobs in the U.S. in an effort to keep its solar panel sales growing at an annual rate of 30%. They will no longer make thin film solar cells. They will now concentrate on crystalline silicon cells, which already account for 85% of its solar cell production.

        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.