Post #202,403
4/8/05 1:44:51 AM
|
I'm not convinced
I've seen plenty of estimates that bioenergy is doable at a price-point not too much higher than oil is today. Sure, he says that those estimates are based on the availability of fertilizer and pesticides, but I don't see that algae is so sensitive to pesticides, and fertilizer can be manufactured using biofuel. (It isn't a complete waste to do so - it is merely a chemical-based solar energy cell on a large scale.)
However should those projections fall through, then things will be ugly.
Well, they will be anyways for us, but for reasons that differ from the kind of global calamity that he's discussing.
Cheers,
Ben
I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
|
Post #202,405
4/8/05 1:50:24 AM
|
I think I'm glad my folks live in rural WA
Now about that inheritance, Dad...
|
Post #202,465
4/8/05 12:46:19 PM
|
Agree on the agriculture angle
How much oil does agriculture require? You have to run tractors and farm equipment. Fertilizer problem can be solved by crop rotation and cultivation of nitrogen fixers. Farms I think can become totally self sustaining by dedicating 1/n farms to production of bio-diesel specifically for ag use.
This implies farming gets less efficient but will still beat 40 acres and a mule per family levels.
Transportation is the big worry. I think we will no longer be able to transport crops long distances like we do now. This goes to the point about suburban sprawl being the clinging vine that chokes the cities.
"Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain
"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein
"This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
|
Post #202,469
4/8/05 1:08:30 PM
|
Interview on NPR
a farmer say that he can use up to 200 galon/day in season.
--
"Consider a perfectly spherical cow, radiating milk isotropically."
-- [link|http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002008.html|Language Log]
|
Post #202,472
4/8/05 1:15:30 PM
|
Not a particularly useful number
Sure, there's ploughing/planting season - lasts a couple weeks, harvest is busy, but there's a lot of down time too. Fuel use on a farm is spikey. Also interested in how many acres he works.
"Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain
"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein
"This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
|
Post #202,474
4/8/05 1:17:11 PM
|
The farm sounded smallish - a family establishment
Yes, he said that the fuel use is drastically lower off season.
--
"Consider a perfectly spherical cow, radiating milk isotropically."
-- [link|http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002008.html|Language Log]
|
Post #202,475
4/8/05 1:21:32 PM
|
How big's the "farm"?
Today "farmer" tends to be a corporate size entity so 200 gallons may not be that much, and "in season" may be short depending on the crop. For sure though, rising fuel costs will greatly increase the cost of food.
On the plus side, many farms generate huge amounts of organic waste which can be put to much better use than it is today when economics shift.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #202,564
4/8/05 10:50:15 PM
|
Some numbers.
I don't know how reasonable they are. I'm sure it depends on the crops, the fields, etc. [link|http://www.organicconsumers.org/corp/fossil-fuels.cfm|Here]: The Green Revolution increased the energy flow to agriculture by an average of 50 times the energy input of traditional agriculture.5 In the most extreme cases, energy consumption by agriculture has increased 100 fold or more.6
In the United States, 400 gallons of oil equivalents are expended annually to feed each American (as of data provided in 1994).7 Agricultural energy consumption is broken down as follows:
\ufffd 31% for the manufacture of inorganic fertilizer
\ufffd 19% for the operation of field machinery
\ufffd 16% for transportation
\ufffd 13% for irrigation
\ufffd 08% for raising livestock (not including livestock feed)
\ufffd 05% for crop drying
\ufffd 05% for pesticide production
\ufffd 08% miscellaneous8
Energy costs for packaging, refrigeration, transportation to retail outlets, and household cooking are not considered in these figures.
To give the reader an idea of the energy intensiveness of modern agriculture, production of one kilogram of nitrogen for fertilizer requires the energy equivalent of from 1.4 to 1.8 liters of diesel fuel. This is not considering the natural gas feedstock.9 According to The Fertilizer Institute ([link|http://www.tfi.org|http://www.tfi.org]), in the year from June 30 2001 until June 30 2002 the United States used 12,009,300 short tons of nitrogen fertilizer.10 Using the low figure of 1.4 liters diesel equivalent per kilogram of nitrogen, this equates to the energy content of 15.3 billion liters of diesel fuel, or 96.2 million barrels. There are huge advantages to using nitrogen fertilizers, especially for corn. The [link|http://www.calciumproducts.com/record_yield.htm|record] for non-irrigated fields is 442 bushels/acre. (Typical averages for the US are about 130 bushels/acre.) The [link|http://www.gocorn.net/mag_Fertilizer6.htm|usual recommendation] is about a pound of nitrogen per bushel so Francis Childs is using a lot of fertilizer. Cheers, Scott.
|
