Agro-Biofuels: Overall Performance

[Elec]

This thread (continuation of the discussion started here) aims to establish an overall balance of thermal cars to agro-biofuels in terms of energy, environment and health:

1 - Energy efficiency
2 - Surface yield
3 - Biodiversity impact (+ impact on soils)
4 - Water Consumption
5 - Chemical pollution (fertilizers, pesticides)
5 - Impact CO2 and other GHGs (climate)
6 - Health and Mortality (Air Pollution)
7 - Global multi-criteria report

NB - Christophe, the conf on ethanol CNAM IFP gentleman that you quote in the other thread has a very limited interest: the presentation, is really superficial, banalities, no in-depth analysis. Nothing about the conversion efficiency solar energy / chemical energy by plants. Nothing about chemical pollution fertilizers + pesticides. Nothing about water consumption. And nothing about the health impact of ethanol (combustion, evaporation). Very disappointing.

Ditto for the following conf on biodiesel (I'm listening to it right now).

[Elec]

I propose that we start with the health check.

Effects of Ethanol (E85) Versus Gasoline Vehicles on Cancer
and Mortality in the United States
http://www.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jaco ... ST0207.pdf


Upstream lifecycle emissions of several individual pollutants from corn-E90 and cellulosic-E90 relative to reformulated gasoline (RFG).

Popularization in French:
Health: Ethanol more polluting than oil
http://environnement.branchez-vous.com/ ... nt_qu.html

Keywords:
Combustion, evaporation
Formaldehyde, Acetaldehyde, 1,3-butadiene, Benzene, Ethanol

[Christophe]

It's good you start by shooting the worst: ethanol ...

Conf. CNAM IFP aims to put some bases and give some ideas on eco-balance and for this I think it fulfills its role, I remind 2 links for those who have not seen it yet:

a) The video: https://www.econologie.com/biocarburants ... -2991.html

b) The presentation .pdf: https://www.econologie.com/valorisation- ... -2985.html

For the rest: do not condemn too quickly the very principle of biofuels because it is a solution to store solar energy interesting.

I remind the reader of a document that you yourself, Elec, wrote in 2005, to read here: https://www.econologie.com/les-micro-alg ... -1860.html
or there: https://www.econologie.com/des-micro-alg ... -3366.html

Just a little "reminder": the Ford T between 1903 and 1927 were sold new to run on ethanol. So ethanol, the fuel of the future ... hum hum ...

The growth of ethanol E85 in France is especially strongly related to the corporatism of large French grain ... their plants will close as soon as the tax exemption will fall ... We bet?

[Elec]

Conf. CNAM IFP aims to put some bases and give some ideas on eco-balance and for this I think it fulfills its role

These superficial confessions of superficialization do not allow the neophyte to forge a point of view based on solid.
I quote the gentleman who gives the conf on biodiesel: "we have no other choice today than biofuels because electric cars and hybrids, it will not be before 15 years". This gentleman (who comes from the biodiesel industry and who tries to defend his bread) is completely wrong. And his analysis is completely superficial.

For the rest: do not condemn too quickly the very principle of biofuels because it is a solution to store solar energy interesting.

I propose that we focus initially on the health assessment. the other balance sheets (energy, surface etc.) will come after.

I remind the reader of a document that you yourself, Elec, wrote in 2005, to read here: https://www.econologie.com/les-micro-alg ... -1860.html
or there: https://www.econologie.com/des-micro-alg ... -3366.html

It is a very superficial document (no analysis at the level of consumption of water, fertilizers, antibiotics, nothing about chemical pollution, nothing about the health impact, the risk of genetic contamination with GMOs microalgaux etc. - and nothing serious about production costs). To read while being aware of this.

[C moa]

Personally I voted "dead end" because you speak of Agro-fuels in the question.

On the other hand, I find it unfortunate that you use the term

agro-biofuel

Indeed, for me agro and bio are two very distinct things (already discussed on the forum for that matter).
If for me the first is an impasse, the second can be a way forward. To be clear, for me biofuel does not mean bio-fuel bio (ie without pesticides, fertilizers and all the toutim) but a technology that allows the use of organic materials non-competing food, which do not ask to clear hectares of forests, which does not dry our rivers ....

For it to be truly "organic", this technology must of course have a process with minimal impact on the environment.

If the debate revolves around the E85, I think that quickly turn short because we all agree that it is a very bad solution on all the points you mentioned.

[Elec]

On the other hand I find it unfortunate that you use the term, agro-biofuels

I will explain later in this thread why.

NB - History of the word "agrofuel":
http://www.electron-economy.org/article-17169318-6.html

[Elec]

Well, I see that everyone seems to agree that the ethanol generation 1 and 2 (cellulosic) are a total impasse in health.

Let's move on to the health impact of the biodiesel and HVP sectors.

[Ibis.]

On the other hand, I find it unfortunate that you use the term

agro-biofuel

In fact, the term bio-fuel is well suited. It is derived Biographymass, and has nothing to do with the bio.

The reservation of the term bio for organic farming alone is excessive, this prefix signifying life: biometrics, biology, biopsy etc ...

[Christophe]

On February 29, 2008, 228 results were obtained by carrying out a search on Google.fr with the word agrofuels (and 000 with the word "biofuels", at the end of February 769 - The ratio is therefore 000% / 2008 %, which is considerable for a word that is 22,8 and a half years old)

Funny google fight has now reversed: http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?la ... carburants

I have another definition of the word AGROcarburant that seems to be shared by many members of forums: https://www.econologie.com/agrocarburant ... -3575.html

ps: IBIS, in English BIO has another definition than French BIO or BIO in your context is "organic" ... and biofuels is the literal translation of biofuels ...

[Elec]

Health impact of the biodiesel and HVP sectors:

Impact of Biodiesel Fuels on Air Quality and Human Health
http://www.nrel.gov/vehiclesandfuels/np ... /33795.pdf


Allergen (...) Compared to diesel exhaust biodiesel reduces the potential of cancer causing compounds polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon emissions (PAH) and nitrites (nPAH). These reductions are principally due to the fact that biodiesel fuel contains no aromatic compounds.
http://www.arfuels.com.au/files/Fact%20 ... 0Nov06.pdf

Acrolein: problem
NOx: only 5% less compared to fossil diesel
CO: - 50%

Conclusion: it's really not happiness in terms of health.

NB - I am listening to the 3ème conf CNAM: no interest. It is a promoter of cellulosic ethanol that has a completely narrow vision of the problem.