Biodiesel from Hemp / General Biodiesel Information

To find biodiesel retail stores near you, see the map at: http://biodiesel.org/buyingbiodiesel/retailfuelingsites/default.shtm
ALGAE is the richest producing source
of biodiesel on the planet - the world could
produce all the fuel it needs by growing algae, and converting it into fuel. Algae could be grown on giant barges, floating on the ocean.
Elephant grass is also a great source for biofuel; in fact it may be a richer producing source for biofuel than hemp.
Join the YouTube Biodiesel Group at http://www.youtube.com/group/biofuels
Feel free to leave comments here, on our future of replacing petro-fuel with biodiesel!
Ethanol is NOT the way to go, because it is mixed with petroleum fuel, which we must stop using as soon as possible, to reduce global warming.
Let's give petro oil related companies huge monetary incentive to change over to bio-fuels. Instead of drilling for rare fossil fuel, the petroleum companies could switch over, grow algae on huge barges on the ocean and convert to fuel. Let's grow algae local to the fuel use, so it does not need to be transported internationally, and spilled into the ocean. Cities can grow algae in their city waste water systems. We need to convert to carbon-neutral biodiesel / biofuels as soon as possible. We need to use cleaner fuels to make a healthier environment. Man-made global warming is a scam though - see my fuel from algae video for explanation. Thanks.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• biodiesel
• diesel
• gas
• cost
• fuel
• industrial
• hemp
• politics
• barrel
• oil
• biofuel
• corn
• ethanol
• renewable
• energy
• Iraq
• Iran
• war

[ALITL8]

"Let's give petro oil related companies huge monetary incentive to change over to bio-fuels."

screw the oil companies!!! you dont think they've known the potential of biofuels? you dont think John D. Rockefeller (Standard Oil) had ulterior motives when he was providing financial support to the "alcohol" prohibition movement?

remember, there was a time not so long ago when there wasn't a service station on every corner but there was a still on every farm ;o)

[SeattleGuy1968]

@ALITL8 That's a nice thought, but good luck overcoming the political / economic power of the petro companies. It's not that I love petro companies - it's just that I know that common sense does not over-power political power.

[flymusicbikealot]

i agree, hemp and biodiesel all the way.  but i read that hemp actually doesnt yield as much oil per acre than canola and sunflower. do other sources agree with your statement?

[SeattleGuy1968]

hi flymusic,

probably true that some crops yield more than hemp.  However, remember the speaker is talking about feral (wild) hemp, which produces tons of more seeds to be converted into oil. The word feral is the magic key.

[Xgames13]

If we started using hemp for fuel, we wouldn't have to pay another cent for fuel. This stuff should be grown on a grand scale. #1 Clothing, #1 Paper source, #1 fuel, #1 Medicine, #1 EVERYTHING. We need a hemp-based economy, this world is doomed if we don't start using this gift from nature.

[TOMHBOMB1963]

i think its time to stuff the corporartes who runs the goovernments. Givernment for the people buy the people only comes from your real vote. That vote is for you to think how and with who you spend your next dollar.

Hemp shows how how corporate interest have diverted governements and the public from our gice from the univers , a plant that can help us keep transport moinvg , clothe us, make paper, house us and even feed us.

I want a real world not the crap being presented to us.

[52111centrumcz]

@Keinlicht

Yes I agree, central generation is more efficient due to economy of scale and lower heat losses from the source and higher efficiencies due to a hotter source possible.

Yes, I also remember somewhere reading that an electric vehicle conversion would mean lower total emissions. I would think that using central signalling to chargers on vehicles would result in a flatter profile of power demand, allowing maximum efficiency of all deployed plants, resulting in lower net pollution

[Keinlicht]

@52111centrumcz True enough, I wonder how the numbers would truly stack up when compared.. Although I do remember some study that noted a 100% conversion to electric even using coal would release fewer emissions than currently are produced, though I could be misremembering.

Either way, mass production of energy will necessarily result in higher net yield, by virtue of sheer scale. I think that centralized energy generation will be a must regardless of how its done.

[52111centrumcz]

@Keinlicht

You did not mention the entire chain though > Primary Energy Souce > inefficiency of power generation > inefficiency of transmission > inefficiency of converting to DC. That gives high numbers.

[Keinlicht]

@52111centrumcz Even taking a standard lead-acid battery will usually give you back 75% of its charge, and the remaining 25% isn't lost. It just can't be used without damaging the battery.

While there is some net energy loss in charging/discharging, its trivial to the inefficiency of an internal combustion engine, which only creates 250j of useful energy per kJ of fuel burned. Its the engine that's the main problem, not the fuel.

[52111centrumcz]

@52111centrumcz

only then is used to power the motor, which is also not 100% efficient. The only positives of using battery powered cars connected to the grid that I can percieve is if you use a lot of unstable low energy density sources of electricity like wind and/or solar. That way you can use the batteries when commanded by a voltage regulator to prevent voltage spikes in the power grid, and store charge when there is too much production and too little demand in the grid.

[52111centrumcz]

@Keinlicht

I agree. More use of urban mass transit that would be acceptable to all is a better way forward. But the problem I am trying to point out that electricity has to be generated (loss of energy), and that has to be generated from some source. This source, usually then has to transfer this energy over long distances (further loss) etc. and this has to charge a battery (loss also). Batteries do not give back 100% of energy used to charge, which then goes to an power regulator (loss) which

[Keinlicht]

@52111centrumcz Doesn't matter. The key is efficiency. Electric engines are vastly more efficient at turning 1kj of energy into motion than internal combustion engines.

I realize relying on coal isn't a good idea, but frankly the suburban lifestyle of 2 cars per family isn't sustainable no matter what drives it. THAT is the main issue that really makes 'alternative' energy meaningless to discuss.

[52111centrumcz]

@Keinlicht

You do realize you are only kicking the can down the line? That electric power world wide comes mostly from coal, and small amounts from hydro or nuclear? Solar and wind are negligible, they are less than 2% worldwide total.

And if you make a sustainable crop rotation without a need for fertilizer (possible with clover in crop rotation) then you will have sustainable biodiesel you don't need to switch.

[Keinlicht]

@52111centrumcz Don't you grasp the fact that any combustion process gives off emissions?

Electrically powered cars have been a viable commuter option for decades, and if they ever catch favor with car companies it seems only natural that most personal transport could be converted. Why switch to biodiesel, when we're just going to have to switch again anyways?