Re: Using nuclear power to make renewables and a hydrogen economy cost effective

From: Dan Bloomquist (EXTRApublic21_at_lakeweb.com)
Date: 10/28/04 

Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 23:17:12 GMT

Ian St. John wrote:
> Dan Bloomquist wrote:
>
>>Ian St. John wrote:
>>
>>>Dan Bloomquist wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Ian St. John wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I have seen figures that show that the land area required would be
>>>>>impossibly small. The key to these separate agendas is that it
>>>>>depends on your assumptions. I actually worked it out myself.
>>>>>Assume the Sonoran desert ( no competition for farm output and
>>>>>high steady sunlight suitable for the most energy producing crops
>>>>>) with desalinated water from the nearby coast. Take the output
>>>>>from oil palm or Jojoba as they have the highest yields.
>>>>>
>>>>>http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_yield.html
>>>>>
>>>>>Work it out yourself.
>>>>
>>>>All the vegetable oil produced world wide a year would provide an
>>>>equivalent of 8 days of crude production.
>>>
>>>
>>>And in 1909, all of the gasoline produced worldwide over a year
>>>would not supply a single days use.
>>>
>>>Do you have a point or just more ignorance of the 'it hasn't been
>>>done, therefore it can't be done' variety?
>>
>>If the net is half the gross
>
> If pigeons had fins..

You don't have numbers?

>> we would have to _double world crop oil
>>production_ just to meet _one percent_ of current crude demand.
>
> Obviously we need to put more effort into the production of biodiesel. Say,
> about as much as goes into the production of fossil fuels! I realise that
> this is a couple of orders of magnitude larger than the efforts needed to
> produce good oils, but then you save all that effort in producing the fossil
> fuels. You really have to make comparisons 'per unit' to make a reasonable
> comparisons between producing X quads of energy from biodiesel and producing
> the same amount of energy from fossil fuels.

Oil pumps from most reserves at between $2 to $5 a barrel. Most on the
lower end. That is the 'real' cost in resources for the _net_ output.

>> I thought the point was pretty obvious.
>
> Point? What point????

Sorry you missed it. Where are you going to cultivate a net output of 30
billion barrels? How about 1 billion barrels, which would account for
maybe a year's growth in demand. Think about it.

>>>>This is gross. Inputs of
>>>>cultivation, fertilizer, harvesting, transportation, and processing
>>>>not included.
>>>
>>>There is plenty of *** for fertiliser and since the plants are not
>>>being harvested for food, bacterial contamination is not an issue.
>>>Could help reduce waste disposal problems as well as produce fuel.
>>
>>You are waving your arms about. Put some real numbers to the claim.
>
> I have. My points here are just that most of the claimed 'barriers' you cite
> are crap.

I'm showing numbers, where are yours?

>>> and have you ever accounted for the cost of
>>>fuel to 'produce' fossil fuels???
>>
>>What's that got to do with this?
>
> If you are going to account for the 'cost of production of bio fuels' you
> have to compare them to the 'cost of production' of fossil fuels. Really you
> should also add in the cost of disposal or pollution to get a true
> accounting but I was trying to be nice.

$3 a barrel for crude.

>>>>Last I saw, desalinated water, (RO), was running some
>>>>$800/acre-foot.
>>>
>>>Depends on whether it is coming from sea water or brackish marine
>>>water,but even taking this, the cost of Colorado river water ( Socal
>>>MWP ) is about $450/acre foot so the difference is immaterial or
>>>soon will be. New technologies may even make it cheaper to
>>>desalinate than to fight over limited rivers.
>>
>>What do you figure? 2, 3, 5 million acre-feet/quad. So one quad is
>>half the total flow of the river? All the water that flows in the
>>All-American Canal for one quad?
>
> Why are you so convinced that irrigation is necessary to grow a desert plant
> in the desert??? It will probably help growth in intensive cultivation but
> the amount?
>
> And a cover system of plastic to reduce evaporation of the soils would
> seriously reduce the evaporation rate and thus water requirements. The plant
> itself has a waxy coating and is very conserving of water. A survival trait
> for desert plants..
>
>
>
>>>>Yet another input that must be accounted for.
>>>
>>>If you had done some calculations on water per unit of oil
>>>produced.. but that would take actual though. You are obviously not
>>>good at that part.
>>
>>Really! In the Sonoran Desert I don't know how you would get away with
>>less than an acre-foot per acre a season.
>
>
> Actually Jojoba produces better with limited water ( produces about three to
> four times the oil in moderately water stressed conditions ).
> http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/proceedings1993/v2-360.html
>
> The actual optimal water use is 460 mm (1.5' or 18" ) in tests. That
> assumes no natural rainfall or other sources of water, of course... "The
> Sonoran desert is one of the wettest deserts in North America and averages
> from 3 to 16 inches of rain a year", so some years would provide pretty much
> all the water needed.

I live in the White Mountains, my son in Phoenix. You must have no idea
how seasonal and erratic the nature of that rain. There is no rain until
August. By then, it has been over a hundred degrees for four to five
months. A good deal of that rain comes in the winter. It does make the
desert beautiful in the spring.

> http://www.blueplanetbiomes.org/sonoran_desert_climate.htm
>
> By contrast, oil palms are 'water hogs'
> http://www.sabah.gov.my/tani/english/crop_oil_palm.htm
> "Oil palm requires an average annual rainfall of 2000 mm or more distributed
> evenly throughout the year. Rainfall less than 100 mm for a period of more
> than three months is not suitable for oil palm cultivation. "

So that's out unless you irrigate, a lot.

>>Using that very rosy number
>>from your link and oil palm, that puts the cost of water at a buck a
>>gallon of fuel. Desalination and infrastructure would make it
>>$2/gallon, _just for the water_. What did you have in mind?
>
> What do you mean 'just for water'? What do you think the primary cost is
> going to be to grow plants in a desert? Have you costed out the value of
> vegetables grown in deserts in Israel, California, etc?

Numbers, that is all you have to provide. You've just said palm requires
6 feet of water a year. That's a least $10 of water per gallon of fuel
in the Sonoran Desert.

>>>Jojoba is, for example, a desert plant and it's water needs are very
>>>low. Using buried drip irrigation the actual amount of water
>>>necessary is small compared to the value of the oils.
>>
>>Using the rosy 200 gallons/acre from your link, 4.3 barrels/acre,
>>1.7E8 barrels/quad, you need 4E7 acres a quad. An area 250 miles on a
>>side. And that is the _gross_ yield, one quad You are going to drip
>>62,000 square miles for one quad.
>
> There is an amazing amount of desert land available, and there is room for a
> lot of biodiesel development.

Did you miss it? 250 miles on a side for just one quad of the most
optimum Jojoba numbers. 62,000 square miles of drip.

> But for comparisons, you need to recognise the enormous amount of effort
> that goes into producing and processing crude oil and then compare.

Yea. $3 a barrel to pump it. If you want to claim a comparison, you have
to show what goes into the _net_ production of crop fuels. Consider what
it will take to plant, drip, care, harvest, and process an area half the
size of Arizona for just one quad. Keep in mind that we import 25 quad a
year. Boggle.

Best, dan. 

-- 
http://lakeweb.net
http://ReserveAnalyst.com
No EXTRA stuff for email.
What can you see if you can't see it all...
Quantcast