From Wonka To Timbuktu - Running on Chocolate Biodiesel

[stsparky]

From Wonka To Timbuktu - Running on Chocolate Biodiesel (http://www.practicalenvironmentalist.com/alternative-energy/from-wonka-to-timbuktu-chocolate-biodiesel.htm)

http://www.practicalenvironmentalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/ecotec.jpg

While this may sound like something out of a Homer Simpson fantasy sequence a group (http://www.biotruck.co.uk/index.php?men=press) in the UK just made a journey from the UK to Timbuktu in a truck powered entirely by biodiesel made from chocolate; or rather the waste chocolate from a manufacturer.

“The expedition will be delivering a biodiesel processing unit to MFC, a Malian charity, which will allow biodiesel to be produced locally form sustainable sources, and the carbon savings from the Malian fuel will help to make this expedition Carbon-Negative, a world first! saving 15 tonnes of carbon emissions in the first year alone.

The expedition left the UK on November 26th and arrived in Timbuktu in Mali, West Africa one month later.

In addition to raising awareness to the benefits of bio-fuels to people in the UK (and elsewhere) Ecotec donated one of their biodiesel production units so that the local women in Mali can use it to re-cycle their used cooking oil into biofuel.

In addition, all the equipment used for this journey was salvaged from scrap yards and will remain in Mali where it will be put to good use. This even includes the chocolate powered truck itself.

[Shuft]

That is one of the neater things about biodiesel. It is easy to make from a wide variety of sources. Your community can make it from whatever cheap oils it has. In Iowa that means soybean oil, and in the UK, I guess it means chocolaty oil.

I bet that truck smells yummy too.

[ninipoo]

that is the koolest thing ever. always knew chocolate wasnt just for eating =Ptheres the proof

[Beowulf]

That is one of the neater things about biodiesel. It is easy to make from a wide variety of sources. Your community can make it from whatever cheap oils it has. In Iowa that means soybean oil, and in the UK, I guess it means chocolaty oil.
That's where the big issue arises though, where do you find enough of these oils, specifically in car heavy countries the US and China?

[Gorlam]

That is one of the neater things about biodiesel. It is easy to make from a wide variety of sources. Your community can make it from whatever cheap oils it has. In Iowa that means soybean oil, and in the UK, I guess it means chocolaty oil.

I bet that truck smells yummy too.


I guess there are also some kinds of grass that can be converted into biofuel.

[Pierrot le Fou]

Biofuel costs more than petroleum, because as Beowulf pointed out, once everyone uses it, there isn't enough, and producing it ain't cheap.

[stsparky]

PLF? Not necessarily so ... There's waste that can be filtered and used as fuel.

[Pierrot le Fou]

Question:
Which is more expensive? Paper or Recycled Paper?

There's a giant scandal now in Japan because companies can't get enough recycled paper, so they're just making paper with virgin trees and calling it recycled.

Tsk tsk.

Biodiesel is the same way. It's not used because it's more expensive than oil.

[Shuft]

Of course it's more expensive. For now. But, if you're the company that researches biodiesel to the point where you can make is slightly cheaper than everybody else, when we hit peak oil (we will hit it eventually, I don't believe it'll be as apocalyptic as internet would like you to think, though) you'll be richer than jesus.

[bakagaijin]

Of course it's more expensive. For now. But, if you're the company that researches biodiesel to the point where you can make is slightly cheaper than everybody else, when we hit peak oil (we will hit it eventually, I don't believe it'll be as apocalyptic as internet would like you to think, though) you'll be richer than jesus.


You're absolutely right!!!! A carpenter's wage at those times... inflation adjusted, would indeed make you wealthy!!!! Wake up mate.

[stsparky]

Food or Fuel? (http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html)

A common objection to biomass energy production is that it could divert agricultural production away from food crops in a hungry world -- even leading to mass starvation in the poor countries.

True or not?

Not true: at best it's an oversimplification of a complex issue. It just doesn't work that way, and neither does hunger.

This is a sound explanation from the Foundation for Alternative Energy (FAE) in Slovakia:

"A major criticism often levelled against biomass, particularly against large-scale fuel production, is that it could divert agricultural production away from food crops, especially in developing countries.

The basic argument is that energy-crop programmes compete with food crops in a number of ways (agricultural, rural investment, infrastructure, water, fertilizers, skilled labour etc.) and thus cause food shortages and price increases.

However, this so-called 'food versus fuel' controversy appears to have been exaggerated in many cases. The subject is far more complex than has generally been presented since agricultural and export policy and the politics of food availability are factors of far greater importance.

The argument should be analysed against the background of the world's (or an individual country's or region's) real food situation of food supply and demand (ever-increasing food surpluses in most industrialized and a number of developing countries), the use of food as animal feed, the under-utilized agricultural production potential, the increased potential for agricultural productivity, and the advantages and disadvantages of producing biofuels.

Fuel alcohol in Brazil

The food shortages and price increases that Brazil suffered a few years ago, were blamed on the ProAlcool programme (fuel ethanol). However, a closer examination does not support the view that bioethanol production has adversely affected food production since Brazil is one of the world's largest exporters of agricultural commodities and agricultural production has kept ahead of population growth: in 1976 the production of cereals was 416 kg per capita, and in 1987 -- 418 kg per capita. Of the 55 million ha of land area devoted to primary food crops, only 4.1 million ha (7.5 per cent) was used for sugarcane, which represents only 0.6 per cent of the total area registered for economic use (or 0.3 per cent of Brazil's total area). Of this, only 1.7 million ha was used for ethanol production, so competition between food and crops is not significant.

Furthermore, crop rotation in sugarcane areas has led to an increase in certain food crops, while some byproducts such as hydrolyzed bagasse and dry yeast are used as animal feed. Some experts (Goldemberg,1992) believe that 'In fact, the potential for producing food in conjunction with sugarcane appears to be larger than expected and should be explored further'.

Food shortages and price increases in Brazil have resulted from a combination of policies which were biased towards commodity export crops and large acreage increases of such crops, hyper-inflation, currency devaluation, price control of domestic foodstuffs etc. Within this reality, any negative effects that bioethanol production might have had should be considered as part of the overall problem, not the problem.

It is important to mention that developing countries are facing both food and fuel problems. Adoption of agricultural practices should, therefore, take into account this reality and evolve efficient methods of utilising available land and other resources to meet both food and fuel needs (besides other products), e.g., from agroforestry systems."

-- From "Renewable Energy", by Emil Bedi, FAE-SZOPK, Bratislava, Slovakia -- the Foundation for Alternative Energy (FAE) is a Slovak non-governmental organisation committed to environmental protection through the promotion of sustainable energy development: Biomass -- See "FOOD OR FUEL?"
http://www.seps.sk/zp/fond/dieret/biomass.html
For more of Emil Bedi's excellent work, see "Energy today basics" at Hakan Falk's Energy Saving Now website:
http://energy.saving.nu/energytoday/basics.shtml

See also "Fuel Ethanol and Food Supply", Canadian Renewable Fuels Association:
http://www.greenfuels.org/ethafood.html

Starvation?

It is also often said that increased bioenergy use in the developed countries, particularly in the US, would cut US food exports and lead to starvation in the Third World.

Aside from lacking the essential analysis of food supply and demand outlined above, this argument leaves out the potential of set-aside land and marginal land, it ignores the large amounts of biomass currently wasted in various ways in the developed countries (from agricultural and forestry residues to commercial food-processing by-products to the huge amounts of waste cooking oil dumped in sewers and landfills, etc), and it relies on a mythical view of the developed nations' role in feeding the world.

These are typical objections to biomass energy production:

"Any attempt to grow fuel for general use would require a massive increase in crop yields at a time when we are unlikely to be able to grow enough food to feed everyone without affecting other species. To go 'green' in developed countries at the expense of food production may well result in effective genocide in other, less developed countries, even our own poor would not be exempt."
"Present food shortages throughout the world call attention to the importance of continuing US exports of corn and other grains for human food to reduce malnutrition and starvation. Expanding ethanol production could entail diverting essential cropland from producing corn needed to sustain human life to producing corn for ethanol factories."
There is no food shortage

The world already grows more than enough food to feed everyone. About a billion people now don't have enough food to meet basic daily needs, but that's NOT because there's not enough food. There's more food per capita now than there's ever been before -- enough to make everyone fat. There's enough to provide at least 4.3 pounds of food per person a day: two and a half pounds of grain, beans and nuts, about a pound of fruits and vegetables, and nearly another pound of meat, milk and eggs.

People starve because they're victims of an inequitable economic system, not because they're victims of scarcity and overpopulation.

It's a myth that most of the food is grown in the rich countries. The US, for instance, is the world's biggest-ever food IMPORTER. "US exports of corn and other grains for human food to reduce malnutrition and starvation" is another myth. Most US grain exports go to feed livestock, not humans. Much of it is also used as feedstock for industry. It can also undercut local food production, leading to less local food security, not more.

Facts

The US and the other industrialised countries are the world's major food importers, importing 71% of the total value of food items in world trade (Handbook of International Trade and Development Statistics 1994 (New York and Geneva: United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, 1995), table 3.2).
The US imports about $1.5 billion worth of beef a year (Food and Agriculture Organisation, FAO Trade Yearbook 1995, vol. 49 (Rome: FAO, 1996), 160, table 12).
The US imports 54% more in farm commodities than it exports (FAO Trade Yearbook 1995, table 6), much of it from countries where the majority lack a healthy diet. The US is in fact the biggest food importer the world has ever seen.
See:
The Myth of Scarcity
http://www.foodfirst.org/pubs/backgrdrs/1998/w98v5n1.html
12 Myths About Hunger
http://www.foodfirst.org/pubs/backgrdrs/1998/s98v5n3.html

US grain exports

There are many different fuel crops and many different ways of growing them, from the eco-unfriendly, chemical- and energy-intensive industrial farming methods to sustainable methods which conserve or even improve the environment, with equal or higher yields.

In the US, the main fuel crops are corn (maize), for ethanol, and soybeans producing soy oil for biodiesel. These are the crops which it's alleged should not be diverted from "human food to reduce malnutrition and starvation".

"We have the ability in the United States to grow the grain to feed the world" -- Allen Anderson, Chairman of the MARC 2000 coalition of agribusiness and transportation interests, testimony before the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee, April 30, 1998

"Our mission is to feed and nourish a growing world population" -- Archer Daniels Midland, multinational grain trading company, November 22, 1999

"Helping farmers grow a wide variety of goods to feed a growing world" -- Cargill, Inc, multinational grain trading company, November 22, 1999

But research by Mark Muller and Richard Levins of the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy reveals a rather different picture:

For every one ton of US corn exported in 1996 to one of the 25 countries with the world's most serious malnutrition problems (Category 5 countries, with at least 35 percent of the population undernourished), 260 tons were exported to a wealthy Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) country.
20 percent of the total US corn crop is exported; two-thirds of these exports go directly to the 28 industrial OECD countries, where it is mostly used for feeding animals.
76 percent of the corn used in the US is used for animal feed.
Less than three-tenths of one percent of total US corn exports went to the poor Category 5 countries in 1996.
Less than three percent of total US corn exports in 1996 went to the 24 Category 4 countries (where undernourishment affects at least 20 percent of the population).
More US corn goes to make alcoholic beverages in the US than is exported to feed the hungry in the world's 25 most undernourished countries combined.
About one-third of the total US soybean crop is exported; 70 percent of US soybean exports went to 28 industrial OECD countries in 1996.
No soybeans were exported to Category 5 countries in 1996, while 17.8 million metric tons went to OECD countries.
In 1998, a year of record-low soybean prices, the 25 most undernourished countries received less than 0.027 percent of total US soybean exports.
See "Feeding the World?" (pdf)
http://www.iatp.org/iatp/publications.cfm?accountID=258&refID=36106

"The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates that more than a billion bushels of corn went unused last year [2000]." -- University of Wisconsin
http://www.news.wisc.edu/view.html?get=6810

Fuel Ethanol and Food Supply, Canadian Renewable Fuels Association -- Extensive production of ethanol from grain will not detract from Canada’s ability to feed its own citizens and supply large quantities of high-quality grains to export markets.
http://www.greenfuels.org/ethafood.html

Half of US food goes to waste, 25/11/2004 -- As the US celebrates Thanksgiving, a new study reveals that almost half the food in the country goes to waste... The new study, from the University of Arizona (UA) in Tucson, indicates that a shocking forty to fifty per cent of all food ready for harvest never gets eaten... Not only is edible food discarded that could feed people who need it, but the rate of loss, even partially corrected, could save US consumers and manufacturers tens of billions of dollars each year.
http://foodproductiondaily.com/news/
ng.asp?id=56340&n=dh330&c=tzlvsrxywshqwyj

The real causes of hunger

The United Nations Development Programme says the effects of globalisation and increasing economic integration have led to the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer in nearly every way.

UN statistics provide evidence of the widening gap between rich and poor: In nine years, the income ratio between the top 20% and the bottom 20% has increased from 60:1 to 74:1. Eighty countries have less revenue than they did a decade ago. The assets of the 200 richest people exceed the combined income of 41% of the world's total population. The assets of the top three billionaires are more than the combined GNP of all least developed countries and their 600 million people. The overall consumption of the richest fifth of the world's people is 16 times that of the poorest fifth. About 840 million people are malnourished. Nearly 340 million women are not expected to survive to age 40. Nearly 160 million children are malnourished. More than 250 million children are working as child labourers.
Human Development Report 1999
http://www.undp.org/hdro/report.html
UN Human Development Report finds social inequality and poverty increasing worldwide
http://www.wsws.org/articles/1999/aug1999/un-a06.shtml

Of the world's 6 billion people, 2.8 billion live on less than $2 a day, and 1.2 billion on less than $1 a day.
Global Poverty Report: Genoa G8 Summit July 2001
http://www.worldbank.org/poverty/library/G8_2001.htm
World Development Report 2000/2001: Attacking Poverty
http://www.worldbank.org/poverty/wdrpoverty/index.htm

The true picture may even be worse -- both the World Bank and the United Nations Development Programme, which produces the annual Human Development Report, have been accused of massaging the numbers on poverty.

"Global Falsehoods: How the World Bank and the UNDP Distort the Figures on Global Poverty" by Michel Chossudovsky, Professor of Economics, University of Ottawa
http://www.transnational.org/features/chossu_worldbank.html

"World Bank dilutes report -- Agencies claim poverty document was censored" Guardian (London) September 13, 2000
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4063044,00.html

"World Bank cooks poverty statistics" by Chakravarthi Raghavan, Chief Editor of SUNS (South-North Development Monitor), Third World Network Features, August 2000
http://csf.colorado.edu/mail/homeless/2001/msg00289.html

Economic growth is projected as the road to overcome global poverty. With economic growth of $100 the rich 20% of the world population pocket $83 and the poorest 20% get $1.40. Global economic growth is therefore a highly inefficient way to help the global poor.

In probably the most comprehensive study to date, Mark Weisbrot, Dean Baker and other researchers at the Center for Economic and Policy Research found that economic growth and rates of improvement in life expectancy, child mortality, education levels and literacy all declined in the era of global corporatization (1980-2000) compared to 1960-1980. "For economic growth and almost all of the other indicators, the last 20 years have shown a very clear decline in progress as compared with the previous two decades... The poorest group went from a per capita GDP growth rate of 1.9 percent annually in 1960-80, to a decline of 0.5 percent per year (1980-2000). By almost every measure, the progress achieved in the two decades of globalization has been considerably less than the progress in the period from 1960 to 1980", especially in the low and middle-income countries. Millions of people who could have escaped a lifetime of poverty under the former rules of market economics under democratic limits were unable to do so under the new rules of global corporate governance. -- The Scorecard on Globalization 1980-2000 - Twenty Years of Diminished Progress, by Mark Weisbrot, Dean Baker, Egor Kraev and Judy Chen July 11, 2001
http://www.cepr.net/globalization/scorecard_on_globalization.htm

Wealth extraction causes poverty, and poverty causes hunger.

See Poverty and hunger -- The causes of poverty, The myth of scarcity

Fuel AND food

In any event, with most biofuels you remove the energy and are still left with the food -- or "feed" more often (for livestock). With ethanol the feed value is enhanced: the distillers dried grains by-product is more nutritious than the original unprocessed grain (because of the yeast). With biodiesel you're left with the oilseed cake after the oil has been pressed out -- again, depending on what seed is used, this is usually a highly nutritious, high-protein livestock feed.

With biofuels you CAN have your cake and eat it.

As for poor countries, local production of biofuels from locally grown crops, where appropriate, can cut dependence and cash expenditure on imported fuels, increase community self-reliance, and provide a spur for local job creation and growth. It can also cut dependence on fuel wood, which is often scarce and causes immense health problems through indoor air-pollution. And, as we've seen above, growing biofuels crops can encourage food-crop production rather than reducing it.

On a related issue, or rather non-issue, see Is ethanol energy-efficient?

[Beowulf]

Why the fuck are we even bothering with biodiesel when we can build electric cars that can get 350 miles to the charge?


On a related issue, or rather non-issue, see Is ethanol energy-efficient?
Actually no, and they produce more greenhouse gases then gasoline...

[Shuft]

Why the fuck are we even bothering with biodiesel when we can build electric cars that can get 350 miles to the charge?...Link?
You're absolutely right!!!! A carpenter's wage at those times... inflation adjusted, would indeed make you wealthy!!!! Wake up mate.Don't be silly. That was just his day job. Let's look at all the other ways he get his bling.

1. Started his own religion. This is a major one. Scientology, Catholic church (middle ages), Hannah Montana, etc, are all good examples of how much you can make with your own religion. Also, no taxes ftw.

2. Wrote the best-selling book of all time. I don't have any stats on this, but it has sold a ton. Who cares if it was ghost-written (I don't apologize for that pun). J. K. Rowling got nothing on J. Chizzle.

3. He could turn water in to wine. Even if it was Boone's Farm quality, that is a solid cash cow.

4. He healed the sick. I don't think I have to tell you how much doctors pull in. This was also before he had to worry about malpractice insurance.

5. Magic. David Blaine, David Copperfield, Uri Geller, Chris Angel, etc, are hacks. Jesus also kept it classy. He never sold out and did a "behind the scenes" of the old loaves and fishes routine.

6. He spun a good yarn (they called them parables back in the day). This one might not get him a new grill every week like the others, but it is always something to fall back on if he runs in to some trouble.

[stsparky]

Problem being biodiesel is more real than Baby J.

We talked of this earlier. And some smart folks were plotting to use ammonia as a fuel to run everything.

[Y.T.]

Why the fuck are we even bothering with biodiesel when we can build electric cars that can get 350 miles to the charge?


Good Question.

Answer:

1. US uses roughly 20 million barrels of oil per day. That's 20 x 10^6 x 1.7 megawatthours of energy. 12 410 000 gigawatt hours per year.


Assuming that electric cars are twice as effective as internal combustion driven cars .. you would need new (nuclear - nothing else can make that much energy) power plants.

~1500 Gigawatt of new power generating capacity, If my rough calculations are correct.

These days, good sized power plants produce 3 Gigawatts. That's 500 new plants. 10 in each state.

.. and then, if there were enough lithium-ion batteries to store the energy in cars, US would be truly energy independent. Since all those plants would have to use some kind of breeder reactors. There isn't that much uranium. .

Let's see.

[Beowulf]

Link?
http://www.ecocinema.org.il/images/movies/large/who%20killed%20the%20electric%20car.jpg

[Y.T.]

Hey..

In this world, EV-1 never got 350 miles to a charge.

We can build such cars these days, but they are still quite expensive.

Besides, batteries in them don't last forever.
And, can you imagine how are the roadkill statisics gonna look like after electric cars become widespread? Silent death they will be.

[Beowulf]

Hey..

In this world, EV-1 never got 350 miles to a charge.

We can build such cars these days, but they are still quite expensive.

Perhaps you should try actually try watching the movie...

Besides, batteries in them don't last forever.
So? We can just recycle them you know...

And, can you imagine how are the roadkill statisics gonna look like after electric cars become widespread? Silent death they will be.
What?

[Trump]

So after you drive 350 miles, how long does it take to charge? It isn't like you just plug it in for a couple minutes and drive another 350 miles. Talk about making a road trip worse... "sorry kids, we have to pull over for a few hours while we let the car recharge, we'll get to Disney World tomorrow."

[Beowulf]

So after you drive 350 miles, how long does it take to charge? It isn't like you just plug it in for a couple minutes and drive another 350 miles. Talk about making a road trip worse... "sorry kids, we have to pull over for a few hours while we let the car recharge, we'll get to Disney World tomorrow."
I'm assuming that you could pull over for a couple of hours. I've never driven 350 miles non-stop anyway, you always want to stop and get food, bathroom breaks, whatever.

[stsparky]

So after you drive 350 miles, how long does it take to charge? It isn't like you just plug it in for a couple minutes and drive another 350 miles. Talk about making a road trip worse... "sorry kids, we have to pull over for a few hours while we let the car recharge, we'll get to Disney World tomorrow."
Hybrid? Take Mass transit?

[Y.T.]

I'm assuming that you could pull over for a couple of hours. I've never driven 350 miles non-stop anyway, you always want to stop and get food, bathroom breaks, whatever.


I am no detractor of electric cars.. However, charging a huge, car-sized battery takes several hours at least. As in, more than three.

Indeed so much that the new electric car project in Israel about which you most likely know nothing (even though it got as far as BBC news) intends to exchange batteries on charging stations. (in addition to charging).

Not sure about the US, but people here sometimes need to drive 1000-1300 km in a day.
Especially on business trips.
Only way you could do that in a electric car would be if you changed batteries three times.

Israel is a very good place to electrify, you never have to drive further than 150 miles or so, lots of sun for solar power, etc.

Silent death they will be.

Srsly. Cars are already plenty dangerous, and they are noisy. Electromobiles are heavier than cars (more kinetic energy - more killing power) plus, they are silent, thus less noticeable.

[stsparky]

Loremo: The 'Low Resistance Mobile' (http://editorial.autos.msn.com/article.aspx?cp-documentid=457882)
At 150-miles-per-gallon, the Loremo wants to show how far a diesel can go.
By Jacob Gordon of TreeHugger.com

http://fp.images.autos.msn.com/media/425x255/a9/a99193dde1f14702a74fccb00d0880b9.jpg
Loremo, which stands for "low resistance mobile," combines an efficient diesel engine with low weight and minimal drag to get upwards of 150 mpg.

The idea is deceptively simple. Forget about fancy batteries, regenerative braking, and alternative fuels. Instead, make a car that's elegant in its minimalism and efficiency. The Loremo's German designers revisited the basics — engine efficiency, low weight, and minimal drag — to create a car that offers fuel-efficiency in the neighborhood of 130 to 150 miles per gallon. The Loremo is likely to dazzle drivers not with its acceleration, but with its ability to drive from New York to L.A. with only three stops at the pump.

Loremo stands for low resistance mobile, and its engineers have stuck obsessively to this idea. By building the car around a 2-cylinder turbodiesel engine, and cutting back on weight, drag, and other excess fat such as side-opening doors, the Loremo puffs out a mere 50 grams of carbon dioxide per kilometer. This is about 40 grams less per kilometer than the tiny diesel smart. According to its creators, this will make the Loremo the most efficient production car ever sold.

If the Loremo showed up as a concept on an auto show pedestal, it would certainly garner some attention. But the Loremo is not a car for dreamers; not only will it enter mass production next year, it will sport a base price attainable by mortal motorists: 15,000 euros (about U.S. $22,000).

Discuss: Will the Loremo catch on if it comes to the U.S.?

After its 2009 release in Europe, the Loremo will be redesigned to reach the North American market the following year. A $30,000, 3-cylinder GT model will also become available, offering better acceleration (0-60 in roughly 10 seconds, vs. 16 for the base model). Both hybrid and fully electric versions are also in the works.

Driving Simplicity
While the Loremo goes back to basics to come up with triple-digit fuel economy, it took some outside-the-box thinking to get there. The most striking difference is the way passengers enter, with the car's front end yawning forward — hood, windshield, and steering column included. Upon settling in, the front end closes, swinging the dashboard, touch-screen display, and steering wheel back into position. The driver is then surrounded by a minimalist design aesthetic not unlike the ultra-efficient Aptera, but with a bit more Germanic twist.

Read: Aptera: The Wingless Bird

Opening the trunk hatch reveals two rear-facing "youth" seats, both of which are removable to free up storage space. Seating in front is also snug, with the driver and front passenger nearly shoulder to shoulder.

If it sounds like the Loremo boasts all the disadvantages of a sports car (tight squeeze, low headroom, awkward entry) sans the adrenaline rush, its winning traits may be undeniable efficiency and modest cost. And validation could be on the horizon. The Loremo was one of the first cars entered in the Automotive X PRIZE, a high-profile contest offering a purse of $10 million or more for a vehicle that can prove 100-mile-per-gallon performance as well as economic viability. Luckily for the Loremo, it's not a drag race.

Read: Automotive X PRIZE: $10 million for a 100-mpg car

Gerhard Heilmaier, CEO of the Munich-based Loremo AG, says that a car's weight is the key factor in making it green, no matter what the fuel: "Cars need to be downsized. Why do we need two tons of steel to bring a 180-pound human from one place to another? That must change."

Running the Loremo on biodiesel (a vegetable-based diesel substitute) is an attractive option, but Heilmaier insists that efficiency comes before all else. "The first step must be to reduce the amount of energy you need. The second step is to choose which energy it is. Even electric vehicles are not zero emission. Think of where the electricity is coming from."

The Diesel Returns
While American carmakers have greened their vehicles mostly with hybrid-electric drives and ethanol fuel, Europe has been refining the rugged diesel engine and accentuating its high fuel-efficiency to cut greenhouse gasses and stanch oil consumption. Now it seems that American interest in diesel cars and SUVs is on the rise, with companies such as Audi, Mercedes-Benz, Volkswagen, BMW, and even Honda (the hybrid runner-up) bringing their diesel offerings to U.S. drivers. "The European diesels are really very civilized," says David Cole, chairman of the Center for Automotive Research, "and they have excellent engines."

At this year's North American International Auto Show in Detroit, Audi chairman Rupert Stadler unveiled the R8 V12 diesel sports car, telling his American audience that Audi is now "challenging the final piece of conventional wisdom" about diesel-powered cars. BMW also took the opportunity to foreshadow the arrival of more diesel cars and SUVs.

As gas prices rise and fuel economy laws stiffen, Americans continue to jump into hybrids with green stars in their eyes (in 2007, the Prius outsold the Ford Explorer). But even if the Loremo isn't exactly what American drivers are looking for, this staggeringly efficient car could serve as a powerful symbol of how far the diesel engine can go, and help break through some of that smoggy "conventional wisdom."

Jacob Gordon is a freelance writer, a blogger for TreeHugger.com, and producer of TreeHugger Radio. He can be reached at jacob@treehugger.com.

[stsparky]

Revealed: Volkswagen's 69.9 MPG Diesel Hybrid (http://blog.wired.com/cars/2008/03/revealed-volksw.html)
By Chuck Squatriglia EmailMarch 03, 2008 | 1:02:13 PMCategories: Geneva Motor Show, Hybrids

http://blog.wired.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/03/03/golf_hybrid_01_3.jpg
We've got more info -- and pictures! -- about the diesel hybrid Golf we've already told you Volkswagen is rolling out at the Geneva Motor Show, and it looks impressive.

According to a Google translation of Germany's Auto Bild, the potential Prius killer sports a 74-horsepower three-cylinder TDI engine -- Autoblog speculates it's the 1.4 liter used in the Polo BlueMotion -- mated to a 27-horsepower electric motor and a seven-speed double-clutch DSG transmission. There's a nickel-metal hydride battery in the trunk; a regenerative braking system helps keep it charged. The car has stop/start capability and a full-electric mode at low speed. An "energy monitor" display on the dashboard keeps tabs on what the powertrain is doing.

According to Auto Bild, the hybrid Golf will get 69.9 mpg and emit 90 g/km of carbon dioxide. An earlier report by Britain's Auto Express said 89 g/km, but either way that's less than the 104 g/km emitted by the Prius and 116 emitted by the Honda Civic Hybrid.

So -- is Volkswagen going to build it? VW says it's just a concept at this point, but Auto Bild says it is "more than a concept car" and Auto Express flat-out says "the first hybrid Golfs are expected here (meaning Britain) late next year."

We'll keep you posted.

Look! More pics!

The Golf TDI Hybrid gets a narrower grille, lowered suspension and lower-resistance tires to improve fuel economy. VW calls the color Vivid Blue.
http://blog.wired.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/03/03/golf_hybrid_02_2.jpg

A graphic display shows where the power is coming from and how much is consumed.

http://blog.wired.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/03/03/golf_hybrid_03.jpg

http://blog.wired.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/03/03/golf_hybrid_04.jpg

Images from Volkswagen via Auto Bild.
====

And something us Americans did that seems off the public's radar.

Burn's Biodiesel Sexpot (http://www.evworld.com/article.cfm?storyid=813)
By Bill Moore

http://www.evworld.com/images/L3_teamandcar.jpg
SDSU team with L3 diesel-hybrid electric sports car
PHOTO CAPTION: Dr. Jim Burns, seated in L3 Enigma, with San Diego State University team members. The L3 is powered by a 200 HP AC Propulsion electric drive and VW 1.2L TDi diesel engine burning 100% soybeam oil. It can do zero-to-sixty in under five seconds and has a 20 mile electric only range. Burn's goal is to drive the car coast-to-coast on just 33 gallons of B100 fuel.


What do you get when you add a 1.2L TDi diesel to a 200 HP electric drive and 100% soybean oil? You get the world's sexiest diesel-hybrid sports car.

Open Access Article Originally Published: February 21, 2005

My interview with Jim Burns, the San Diego State University professor who has championed the cause of sustainable mobility for years, almost didn't happen.

Ironically, he was stuck in one of those notorious Southern California traffic jams; this one caused by an jackknifed fuel tanker, which fortunately appeared to him, at least, to be empty, though HazMat crews were on hand to deal with any potential spill.

It is about the more efficient use of fuel in general, and biodiesel in particular, that was the reason for my call. Burns and his engineering students are organizing the "Spirit of LIndbergh Freedom Drive" to publicly demonstrate that it's possible to get dramatic improvements in energy efficiency in a high-powered vehicle while burning a 100 percent renewable fuel; biodiesel in this case.

"Most of the (hybrid vehicle) offerings out there, except for a few coming out from European manufacturers of small SUVs, are typically in a power range that doesn't excite or motivate mainstream drivers who want to have them in their larger vehicles," Burns told me. He explained that he and his students are planning to demonstrate this with their L3 Enigma, a 260 hp, plug-in diesel-hybrid sports car, which sports a single 34 gallon fuel tank.

I first saw the L3 when Burns and a fellow faculty member showed up at the California Fuel Cell Partnership facility in West Sacramento back in the fall of 2001. The event, which was part of the then-EVAA's annual conference, was meant to showcase hydrogen fuel cell vehicle technology. As you might expect, a biodiesel hybrid making an unannounced or approved visit to the Ride & Drive event wasn't particularly appreciated, but that didn't stop Burns from taking me aside and explaining to me his vehicle, which is a mid-engine, carbon-fiber sports car mounted on a tubural steel frame.

"We showed up at this signature event for fuel cells," he explained, "because, frankly I felt and many other people out there feel as well, that hybrid technology is getting very short changed in the marketplace, except for some of the Japanese automakers. So, we wanted to come out and make a presence there in a way that was utterly unique and different and get people to notice that there are solutions out there that may be a lot nearer term and more practical for implementation in American society than hydrogen is right now".

The car is a parallel hybrid similar in concept to Toyota's Synergy Hybrid Drive, but with dramatically more electrically-produced horsepower from the car's 200 hp AC Propulsion drive system, which is much more than is delivered by the small, 3-cylinder, 1.2 liter VW TDi diesel engine rated at 61 bhp.

But the L3 also has a couple added "wrinkles".

"We've added a couple of unique twists", Burns told me. "We have a lot more energy storage on board in the form of electrochemical battery storage than any of the commercial hybrids. Scientific studies show that increasing the energy storage in terms of electric batteries greatly enhances fuel economy".

The combination of lots of electrochemical storage and high power electric drive translates into blistering performance. Burns calculates the L3 is approaching 4 second, zero-to-sixty acceleration. It's already under 5 seconds, despite weighing 2,900 pounds with its full complement of lead-acid batteries.

All that battery capacity isn't just for the drag strip. The L3 is one of a tiny handful of plug-in hybrids, meaning that it can operate for twenty miles at highway speeds on battery power only; the diesel engine doesn't fire up until the car's batteries reach a predetermined state of charge. And unlike some battery electric cars of the late 1990s, the L3 has its charger built in, meaning it can be plugged in anywhere without need for specialized charging equipment. If a grid connection isn't available, the diesel engine will recharge the battery pack automatically.

The L3 team, made up of scores of SDSU engineering students over the last three years, have made significant modifications to the original AC Propulsion drive, converting it from a single drive shaft to the through saft, which allows for different drivetrain configurations. They also improved the electric drive cooling system, which translates into higher peak power output and improved efficiency. Burns sees the spin-off of this effort as not only making the coast-to-coast-on-a-tank-of-fuel drive possible, it also means that the technology can be applied to larger, heavier vehicles. SDSU students have a "Humvee" design being developed on their automotive CAD system. There are also plans afoot to build a 200 mph super car hybrid.

Like most high-performance sports cars, the drive system, both the electric and diesel, are mounted in a "mid-engine" configuration with the rear-wheels being driven. Burns acknowledged that the tubural steel frame and graphite body technology utilized in the L3 isn't particularly well-suited for stamped steel, unibody mass-production, something carmakers are very good at doing. But the L3s approach lets it carry more batteries, which are the heart of the design. Specifics on the layout of the design can be found at www.l3research.com.

Burns pointed out to me that, "we have an aerospace-grade center section of the vehicle that forms a wonderful torque structure, much like a Formula One car, and that section contains the fuel and high-voltage energy sources -- in this case, biofuel, which is very safe anyway -- and also the high-power electronic components are located there under normal operations. That whole section drops out and rolls away for maintainability, but also give the vehicle incredible torsional stiffness for handling. In addition, there's a tubural chassis construction in the back to house the actual propulsion unit".

From Virtual World to the Real
Pro Engineer,a leading CAD software firm chose SDSU to beta test its software several years ago, and the school has gone on to win several awards for its designs. It is this software that enables Burns and his class to fine-tune their designs before ever welding a piece of metal or molding a piece of plastic. He estimates that between 150-200 students have had their lives touched by this project over the last few years, and as many as thirty have gotten what he likes to call, a "high-grade" engineering experience with cutting edge technology.

Translating these virtual designs into the "real" world isn't as easy as it is in the virtual world, Burns admits when I asked him what would happen if carmakers adapted his approach to building a high-performance, high-efficiency vehicle. His answer was that many of the relatively costly, off-the-shelf components that go into the L3 Enigma simply are not "commoditized" enough to make it practical for a mass manufacturer to replicate in quantities need to make a profit; it's the inevitable "chicken 'n egg" conundrum new technology always faces.

"So, we've adjusted our sights", he told me, explaining that some spin-off business opportunities are developing in the 500 +/- vehicle category. He estimates that comparable technology as that found in the L3 would add at least a $12-15,000 premium to the price of a new car, significantly narrowing the market to wealthy, performance-oriented, but, hopefully, also environmental conscious individuals, of which Hollywood seems to have its share.

This situation is likely to chance with the introduction of affordable, high-performance lithium chemistry-based batteries that will be far more amenable to integration into conventional car technology. Where the L3 had to rely on its buttress of welded steel tubing in order to find room for and support the weight of heavy lead-acid batteries, lithium batteries promise the ability to reduce the volume and weight of the battery pack while offering superior energy storage capability that can -- theoretically -- be squeezed into all sorts of nooks and crannies in the car.

Burns also sees utlracapacitors as a potentially promising pathway to volumetrically fitting more energy storage on-board the future cars and trucks.

The Spirit of Lindberg Freedom Drive is planning to schedule the event in conjunction with the July 4, 2005 Independence Day holiday here in America, though much depends on the amount of funding and in-kind support they receive between now and April. The route of travel will take the car, and its support team from San Diego across the southern United States to Jacksonville, Florida, a distance of over 2,400 miles. Burns hopes to have enough fuel on board to then make a couple runs at the Daytona Beach speedway. With a 33 gallon tank, the car will have to turn in 74.24 miles per gallon, a figure Burns seems confident he can achieve using B100, which is straight, 100 percent soybean oil with some minor flow additives mixed in.

While diesels in general are about 30% more efficient than gasoline engines, they do have higher particulate and nitrogen oxide emissions, which has caused the state of California to take a very tough regulatory stance against them. While B100 burns very cleanly compared to petroleum diesel, it does generate slightly higher NOx emissions than straight diesel. Burns said to me that he's looking at a couple of European technologies, one developed by a company called Rhodia EC, to help reduce the NOx problem. As he understands it and as he explained it to me, the company uses a fuel-borne catalyst that cleans out the particulate trap. This enables the engine to run at a slightly richer, cooler fuel-air mixture that produces less NOx.

Burns emphasized that in addition to looking for financial contributions to help fund the drive -- he figures he has just 25 percent of the funds he need -- he is also interested in 'Big Name' sponsorship by firms like Rhodia and Johnson Controls, the latter of whom is supplying him with a newly developed, spiral-wound lead-acid battery that is lighter and more compact than the current set found in the L3. The car will then be in the 400 volt power range with 28 Amp Hours of storage capacity at a C3 rating.

"This is a significantly large, powerful and relatively energy dense battery pack". He estimates it'll weigh between 500-525 pounds.

Besides the engineering challenges of a cross-country excursion in an experimental car, Burns is also wrestling with the logistics and funding. He said that not only does he need funds to pay the expenses of his team on the Freedom Drive from California to Florida.. and back, obviously, he also needs financial help for public relations events at both ends of the trip, as well as along the way. Unlike DaimlerChrysler which kept a very low media profile when it drove its methanol fuel cell NECAR 5 from San Francisco to Washington, D.C., Burns wants to get out the word before, during and after the event, which really puts on the pressure.

Another challenge confronting the Drive is finding an appropriate sanctioning body to oversee the event, to assure it's on the up-and-up and gets into the right record book. So far, Burn's search for that group hasn't gotten much traction, in part, he believes, because the attempt simply don't fit the purview of the group's he's talked to.

"There are plenty of sanctioning bodies and regulatory bodies for all sorts of other motor sport activities, but this is an odd enough activity [that] it's hard to find anyone that wants to be there". Burns urged any EV World listeners/readers who could suggest an appropriate sanctioning or certification group to contact him.

Why No Fuel Cell Enigma?
I asked Burns why he's focused on internal combustion engine hybrids and not fuel cells, especially living in California with its strong commitment to a hydrogen highway?

He immediately replied that, "Hydrogen is not a fuel. Hydrogen is an energy storage medium. There is no free hydrogen floating around out there that you can pull out of the ground or condense out of the air". From his perspective, he believes that business and regulators are ignoring this reality. Hydrogen is best made on site or near the vehicle, he told me, "or you're going to have to have some surrogate, 'real fuel' that's converted to hydrogen on-board your vehicle and deal with the subsequent creation of carbon dioxide, a well-known greenhouse gas and something the rest of the world pays very great attention to to reduce the effect of industrialization".

Somewhat tongue-in-check, he envisioned people driving fuel cell cars in the future having to deposit their carbon dioxide at the local auto parts story, the way they do their waste motor oil.

"There are some practical issues, at present, not solved by hydrogen. There are some very good people working on that", he continued. "My thoughts and feelings are, we certainly entertain hydrogen where its appropriate and fuel cell technology where its appropriate, but that hybrids are going to be here to stay for a while, and high-power hybrids are the things that make Americans in their thirst for America dream, vision of what car is in their lifestyle, are going to want. I don't think hydrogen can supply the power or the convenience the foreseeable next ten or fifteen years".

Looking beyond the L3 and the Freedom Drive, Burns has plans high-powered hybrids with even more 'Wow' factor including a 400 hp biodiesel version and a 500 hp E-85 ethanol version, what will grab the attention of young buyers and get them to respect and... yes, covet ... hybrid technology.

But Will Americans Get It?
Burns told me that he was ready to do the Freedom Drive last summer, but the funds and support never materialized. And while he's determined to make it happen, he's also prepared to do it only when the necessary resources are in hand. Since last year, he's widened his network of contacts to include the national biodiesel board president, biodiesel companies in California, actress and alternative fuel advocate Daryl Hannah, and he hoping to talk with Willie Nelson, another high-profile biodiesel supporter.

He believes that he can provide the biodiesel fuel movement with the "sexy" image the fuel by itself simply doesn't have. He can offer a high-performance, high-efficiency, low-pollution sports car that can make records and break records. "Face it, fuels in of of themselves, they're not really interesting or sexy to the public. They sit in a bucket and don't do much. But vehicles that can bring out the best attributes of these fuels, that's something new. We feel we have the platform that can help that".

Assuming he gets all the support and funding he needs to make the kind of high profile splash he thinks is needed, his biggest fear is that even then, "people won't get it".

"They still won't understand that the technology has been around for a long time; the will to do it is now there and we demonstrate it...[but] it won't be accepted or adopted by the American public. That's what I most fear."

[I]If you wish to contribute or can suggest potential sponsors for the Freedom Drive, you can contact Dr. Burns directly. His cellphone number is:[ 619] 933 6058. Dan Wolfson contributed to this article.

[qwert]

From Wonka To Timbuktu - Running on Chocolate Biodiesel (http://www.practicalenvironmentalist.com/alternative-energy/from-wonka-to-timbuktu-chocolate-biodiesel.htm)

http://www.practicalenvironmentalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/ecotec.jpg

While this may sound like something out of a Homer Simpson fantasy sequence a group (http://www.biotruck.co.uk/index.php?men=press) in the UK just made a journey from the UK to Timbuktu in a truck powered entirely by biodiesel made from chocolate; or rather the waste chocolate from a manufacturer.

“The expedition will be delivering a biodiesel processing unit to MFC, a Malian charity, which will allow biodiesel to be produced locally form sustainable sources, and the carbon savings from the Malian fuel will help to make this expedition Carbon-Negative, a world first! saving 15 tonnes of carbon emissions in the first year alone.

The expedition left the UK on November 26th and arrived in Timbuktu in Mali, West Africa one month later.

In addition to raising awareness to the benefits of bio-fuels to people in the UK (and elsewhere) Ecotec donated one of their biodiesel production units so that the local women in Mali can use it to re-cycle their used cooking oil into biofuel.

In addition, all the equipment used for this journey was salvaged from scrap yards and will remain in Mali where it will be put to good use. This even includes the chocolate powered truck itself.

Are you a slashdot reader?

[stsparky]

Are you a slashdot reader?
BoingBoing