tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21297199.post1362996586536871608..comments2024-03-28T06:32:24.557-04:00Comments on The Elephant Bar: Low Level Socialist Agitator, Barack Hussein ObamaDeuce ☂http://www.blogger.com/profile/13472858446242700869noreply@blogger.comBlogger80125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21297199.post-80869660968153576522011-04-24T10:39:07.586-04:002011-04-24T10:39:07.586-04:00.
No, if the product's not there, they just l....<br /><br /><i>No, if the product's not there, they just lower the mandate like they did this year.<br /><br />You Have to have the Mandates, Q. The oil companies Will, absolutely, Not use the product, otherwise...</i><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />You don't see a conflict between these two statements?<br /><br />Usually, a mandate is "mandatory". Otherwise, what is the point?<br /><br />If it's not to be enforced, it's usually called a target or a suggestion.<br /><br /><br />.Quirkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00272168240606512672noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21297199.post-85916208895949961032011-04-24T09:06:05.085-04:002011-04-24T09:06:05.085-04:00.
No, if the product's not there, they just l....<br /><br /><i>No, if the product's not there, they just lower the mandate like they did this year.</i><br /><br />The EPA has aleady lowered it from the 100 million gallons dictated by Congress in 2005 to 5 million gallons for 2010.<br /><br />Even given the 5 million galon 'potential' available for 2010 some have estimated that there was only 1 million gallons of the cellulosic produced. At any rate, well below the 5 million mandated.<br /><br />For 2011, the 250 million gallons that were initially mandated were lowered to 6.6 million gallons by EPA.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.eenews.net/public/climatewire/2011/01/11/1" rel="nofollow">Cellulosic Mandate</a><br /><br />Others argue that the blenders will work around the EPA penalties by importing qualifying feedstocks leaving Brazil the beneficiary.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2010/12/epa-confirms-tiny-cellulosic-biofuels-mandate-for-2011" rel="nofollow">Brazil Wins With EPA Rules?</a><br /><br />Any way you cut it it's the US taxpayer who wil ultimately take it in the ass.<br /><br />.Quirkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00272168240606512672noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21297199.post-34246357623661600262011-04-24T08:41:32.507-04:002011-04-24T08:41:32.507-04:00ThnxThnxDoughttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16770268554450465514noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21297199.post-12551172485703881712011-04-24T07:13:45.501-04:002011-04-24T07:13:45.501-04:00Happy EasterHappy EasterMeLoDyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04658982778792168451noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21297199.post-39692396444604531952011-04-24T02:30:27.492-04:002011-04-24T02:30:27.492-04:00That 6.8% number is probably a little bit high. T...That 6.8% number is probably a little bit high. That's using the World Bank numbers for 2009, and I believe they're a bit low. But, I've seen other "scholarly" sources that put it around 5%, or just a touch less. It's a difference w/o a distinction.Rufus IIhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05297231055991566183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21297199.post-83514006911782711222011-04-24T02:14:19.858-04:002011-04-24T02:14:19.858-04:00From 2009 to 2010 World GDP Grew by 6.8%
That wo...From 2009 to 2010 <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)" rel="nofollow">World GDP Grew by 6.8%</a><br /><br /><br />That would probably extrapolate out to about a 2.5 to 3 million bpd increase in demand for oil (somewhere between 3 and 4% growth in energy demand)<br /><br />There's no reason to think that growth is going to slow down. Remember, the Non-OECD Countries were still booming during this last recession while the OECD countries were gasping for air.Rufus IIhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05297231055991566183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21297199.post-35922659506387180852011-04-24T01:48:25.456-04:002011-04-24T01:48:25.456-04:00No, if the product's not there, they just lowe...No, if the product's not there, they just lower the mandate like they did this year.<br /><br />You Have to have the Mandates, Q. The oil companies Will, absolutely, Not use the product, otherwise. I mean, they would be crazy to. You can't honestly believe there's an Oil Co. CEO, or a Saudi Prince that doesn't go to bed every night dreaming that they'll wake up in the morning and the ethanol companies will be gone. <br /><br />To believe otherwise would have to be to deny the very existence of human nature.Rufus IIhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05297231055991566183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21297199.post-70607305102088863462011-04-24T01:43:54.604-04:002011-04-24T01:43:54.604-04:00I was just reading about Turkey. Amazing what'...I was just reading about Turkey. Amazing what's going on there. Gasoline is selling for $10.49/gal the last I've seen. Car sales are setting records every month. Traffic jams, everywhere.<br /><br />People are paying more for a month old VW than the "New" selling price, because they don't want to wait the 4 months for delivery of a new one. This shit's going on all over the world. <br /><br />And, oil production is, basically, what it was in 2005. If you see a chart of "Liquids" production you will see an increase from approx 86 to 88 mbpd, but that two million barrels is Ethanol. <br /><br />Latin American car sales are booming. Asian (not just China, but Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia, Korea, and of course India.<br /><br />Petrol usage is even exploding in the Middle East/Persian Gulf states.Rufus IIhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05297231055991566183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21297199.post-4215199011078217332011-04-24T01:39:06.897-04:002011-04-24T01:39:06.897-04:00.
Here's what's not immediately obvious t....<br /><br /><i>Here's what's not immediately obvious to someone who hasn't studied it pretty closely. We had a lousy corn harvest last year, and China, the second largest producer, had a Disastrous corn harvest.</i><br /><br />Exactly why I have argued against the US mandates. There is no flexibility built into them. They do not take into account poor crops, supply disruptions, the world market. By setting mandates in gallons, the ethanol producers rather than using 15-20% of the crop end up using 35-40% of the crop in a bad year.<br /><br />Likewise for cellulosic. The EPA sets their targets based on "potential" availability of cellulosic production. If the cellulosic is not produced the blenders are taxed for not blendng the required targeted percentage of cellulosic.<br /><br />.Quirkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00272168240606512672noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21297199.post-71811853477629344842011-04-24T01:34:58.766-04:002011-04-24T01:34:58.766-04:00I think Cellulosic will meet the 2022 targets. An...I think Cellulosic will meet the 2022 targets. Any targets before that, not a chance.<br /><br />I'm telling you, Coburn, and the Oil State (mostly) Republicans (mostly) are fighting viciously right now. It's not because of corn ethanol. It's already doing 14 Billion gallons/yr, and it's pretty well entrenched.<br /><br />They're fighting to slow down cellulosic. Any uncertainty they can engender is a win - potentially another year of no funding, no construction. Hell, it's a crazy situation right now; they may even get lucky and win the whole enchilada. <br /><br />If they don't, it won't be for lack of trying.Rufus IIhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05297231055991566183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21297199.post-86885589564515896832011-04-24T01:28:53.986-04:002011-04-24T01:28:53.986-04:00No.
Unless, of course, they drop them down to, I...No. <br /><br />Unless, of course, they drop them down to, I don't know, way low. The only one that "might" be producing in the low millions of gallons is a company called Fiberight (and, I'm a little skeptical of them.) <br /><br />Otherwise, all you have for 2011 is a quarter million gallons from Genera, and some small amount from the Poet pilot plant, and maybe a couple of other (maybe Abengoa) pilot plants.<br /><br />Nah, the first "real" year of production will be 2013, and that will only be, maybe, 75 - 80 Million Gallons.<br /><br />Once those plants start operating the "proof of concept" will be established, and I expect it to look a lot like 2007 when over 175 Large (55 mgy to 110 mgy) Corn Ethanol Plants went into construction at the same time.<br /><br />There's a lot that has to get ironed out, politically.Rufus IIhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05297231055991566183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21297199.post-16082823183673603562011-04-24T01:26:52.631-04:002011-04-24T01:26:52.631-04:00.
...The amount of corn ethanol that is mandated ....<br /><br /><i>...The amount of corn ethanol that is mandated is limited to about 15 million gallons in 2015.</i><br /><br />s/b ...15 billion gallons<br /><br />.Quirkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00272168240606512672noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21297199.post-24792763074824426832011-04-24T01:13:55.755-04:002011-04-24T01:13:55.755-04:00.
I'm not arguing where ethanol is going. I&....<br /><br />I'm not arguing where ethanol is going. I'm arguing how fast and when. And at what cost.<br /><br />As for the hyperbolic, the "bumkins" was my own interpretation; the "snickering" and the "dumbfucks' are in the archive and easily pulled up.<br /><br />As we have discussed the mandates are out there in the US. The amount of corn ethanol that is mandated is limited to about 15 million gallons in 2015. The EPA has set a target of 6.5 million gallons of cellulosic for 2011. <br /><br />Will the industry meet the targets that are out there, short-term or for 2022?<br /><br />You have indicated they can be competitive without subsidies soon. When is soon?<br /><br />I won't even push you on the subsidies issue. I personally don't see the subsidies (or local incentives, or tax breaks, or development grants, etc.) stopping.<br /><br />You have the mandate through 2022 and ethanol is expected to supply 25% of our fuel needs.<br /><br />Just tell me,<br /><br />1. Will the cellulosic ethanol industry meet to 2011 production targets?<br /><br />2. Will they meet those of 2015?<br /><br />3. Will they meet the 2022 targets? <br /><br />.Quirkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00272168240606512672noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21297199.post-13841727419464730292011-04-24T00:13:59.243-04:002011-04-24T00:13:59.243-04:00Here's what's not immediately obvious to s...Here's what's not immediately obvious to someone who hasn't studied it pretty closely. We had a lousy corn harvest last year, and China, the second largest producer, had a Disastrous corn harvest. <br /><br />That, plus strong demand from the emerging markets, has pushed corn up to a very high price (around $7.50 bu.)<br /><br />Barring another very bad weather-year, we should see corn closer to $4.50/bu by the Fall (still, historically, a very good price.) That will put wholesale ethanol down to around $1.80, or thereabouts. <br /><br />That will give you a pump price for E85 less than $2.00/gal. At a time when E10 is selling for well over $4.00/gal.<br /><br />Possibly, along about that time, someone will up and say, "hey, guess what, my 2012 Regal gets the same mileage on E85 as it does E10.<br /><br />Explosion.Rufus IIhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05297231055991566183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21297199.post-63418713074905041252011-04-23T23:43:33.886-04:002011-04-23T23:43:33.886-04:00Q, you can be as non-credulous as you wish. There...Q, you can be as non-credulous as you wish. There are now several good, strong companies with years of experience operating multiple ethanol refineries that are starting to build. <br /><br />They are tweaking the Enzyme process with lessons learned from Genera Energy at Vonore Tn (Dupont/Danisco - Switchgrass,) and Inbicon (Novozymes, and wheat straw.)<br /><br />These companies have spent the last two years working with farmers, and building their feedstock supply systems.<br /><br />Dupont likes the program enough that they paid $5 Billion for their Enzyme maker (Danisco.) <br /><br />I'm telling you man, you can "incredule" to your heart's content, but this is where the show is going.Rufus IIhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05297231055991566183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21297199.post-81882490666253390862011-04-23T23:33:15.036-04:002011-04-23T23:33:15.036-04:00The Range Fuels fiasco is a Big, Old Gasification ...The Range Fuels fiasco is a Big, Old Gasification Process that I've been skeptical on for quite some time. <br /><br />The guys that were familiar with the Fischer Tropse Process warned early that they didn't think you could gasify that much Wood w/o building up tar. <br /><br />The Range guys, and Vinod Khosla always ignored the questions and went into their spiel about "Vision," and the "Future." You couldn't get an "Engineer" on the phone, much less for an interview. <br /><br />Sure enough. Tar started building up, immediately; and that was that. <br /><br />Everybody Truly wanted Big, Huge, Multi-Million Gallon Deals. The thing is, cellulosic works better with small refineries, working with easier to process feedstocks (ie. grasses = easy Wood = hard.)Rufus IIhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05297231055991566183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21297199.post-52861984902592038892011-04-23T23:24:53.083-04:002011-04-23T23:24:53.083-04:00You will not see "unsubsidized" ethanol ...You will not see "unsubsidized" ethanol for a long time (in my opinion.) Just like you won't see "Unsubsidized" Oil for a long time - Okay, actually, Never.<br /><br />As far as "Large Quantities:" I don't know what You would call "large quantities."<br /><br />But, There will be, probably, two or three cellulosic operations putting out approx 20 Million Gallons/Yr by the end of next year, or early 2003. <br /><br />And, I think you're being a little hyperbolic with the "snickering, and bumkins" bit.<br /><br />Q, you're taking a new technology up against a <b>$4 Trillion/Yr Business.</b> A business that is peopled by the Smartest, Ruggedest, Bravest, Meanest, Most Politically Powerful Bunch of entrepreneurs in the World. <br /><br />They Own Politicians, and Promote (successfully) Wars. <br /><br />Will the Bank that lends you a couple of hundred Million to build this plant Demand to see "Subsidies, Grants, and Mandates?" What the freakin' hell do you think?<br /><br />NIMBY'ism doesn't come too much into play with ethanol refineries, Q. These are, for the most part, located in very sparsely populated rural areas that appreciate the jobs, and the higher commodity prices that go with it. <br /><br />Several Corn Ethanol plants have had small groups go up against them, but I don't think the "antis" won in more than 1% of the cases. In the one, or two times (out of 200) that the antis did win, the promoters just moved the planned plant over the hill a couple of miles, and went on with their business.Rufus IIhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05297231055991566183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21297199.post-36883081239383165102011-04-23T23:23:33.248-04:002011-04-23T23:23:33.248-04:00Here
dwr<a href="http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/02/epic_green_failure.html" rel="nofollow">Here</a><br /><br />dwrAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21297199.post-32696663976271964152011-04-23T23:21:40.587-04:002011-04-23T23:21:40.587-04:00Ask him about this ---
http://www.americanthinker...Ask him about this ---<br /><br />http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/02/epic_green_failure.html<br /><br /><br />dwrAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21297199.post-74799930930802393132011-04-23T22:35:24.431-04:002011-04-23T22:35:24.431-04:00.
In response to the questions I asked on Inbicon....<br /><br />In response to the questions I asked on Inbicon, I got a post that ignored the company but included,<br /><br /><br /> Quirk said...<br />.<br /><br /><i>Q, Everything is political. Exxon, and Shell own Oil Fields, not Corn Fields. They would Never, ever use a drop of ethanol if not forced.</i><br /><br /><br /><br />How does this in any way answer the questions I raised above on the Inbicon post?<br /><br />Everything is political? Of course it is. That's why the US is still paying oil companies subsidies they don't need. That is why the East Coast is fighting the West over government dollars for wind. That is why Bush and Obama pushed on electric, mandated it, and now why Obama is talking about taxing it. It is also the reason we have a mandate on ethanol usage. Don't even get me started on the influence of the 'greens' or local NIMBY concerns.<br /><br />You proclaim ethanol is the way to go and cellulosic is the wave of the future. Maybe. But then, you also constantly tell us ethanol is competitive. That it can be so without subsidies. Yet the CEO of the company you mention as an example of it "working like a charm" puts out a paper saying commercialization (if I read it right) is a little iffy and will depend on mandates, subsidies, tax credits, etc., etc.<br /><br />When some here raise questions about your rosy perspective they are called dumbfucks and morons. You have a simple answer for everything. When rising food prices and resulting riots in the ME and Africa are mentioned, you talk about the corn content in a box of corn flakes instead of any mention of the supply demand effects of commodity shortages. You assume all that fallow land out there is just waiting to be tilled for switchgrass. You have a simple answer for everything like "we'll just build a generating plant next to it" ignoring local zoning and NIMBY issues.<br /><br />When asked if it is so good, so competitive, cheaper than gas, why aren't we doing more of it commercially, you tell us it is "only" because of a plot by the big oil companies and the GOP.<br /><br />Sorry, I'm not that credulous. Are some Republicans and big oil against ethanol? Sure. Is that the only problem ethanol has? I don't think so.<br /><br />.<br />Sat Apr 16, 12:32:00 PM EDT<br /><br />.Quirkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00272168240606512672noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21297199.post-80906134167235661172011-04-23T22:30:32.034-04:002011-04-23T22:30:32.034-04:00.
Quirk said...
.
[Ref: Inbicon Commercializatio....<br /><br />Quirk said...<br />.<br /><br />[Ref: Inbicon Commercialization Chart Above]<br /><br />The most interesting slide in the Inbicon presentation (for me) was Slide 13 and to a lesser extent Slide 15.<br /><br />From what I can see from Slide 13 and Slide 15, Inbicon is looking for subsidies, grants, loan guarantees, tax credits, and R&D/demonstration funding for as far as the eye can see. Maybe I'm missing something here.<br /><br />In addition, looking at Slide 15 and Slide 12 together Inbicon seems to be saying that the projected growth in U.S. ethanol usage is driven by government mandate. That's understandable given the mandate is already in place through 2022.<br /><br />However, they project a doubling of usage in the EU that is dependent upon higher incentives being offered. Asia and Brazil also have a question mark next to them.<br /><br />Slide 15 is on 'feasible projects'. It outlines ways projects become feasible. It lists the following;<br /><br />Feasibility is possible through:<br />1.<br />Cheap biomass (already collected)<br />2.<br />Integration with power plant<br />3.<br />Integration with anaerobic digester<br />4.<br />Local incentives<br /><br />Many of these get back to the problem of NIMBY that I have mentioned before.<br /><br />For me there seems to be a lot of questions on the timing for commercial quantities of 2G ethanol. You usually dismiss these concerns as the rants of a loon.<br /><br />So my questions are,<br /><br />1. Am I missing something in Inbicon's 'road to commercialization' presentation?<br />2. Does the presentation present a viable plan to get to commercialization?<br />3. Based on your expertise, when can we expect the commercialization of cellulosic ethanol to be implemented in significant quantities, without subsidies and incentives?<br />And I should add mandates.<br /><br />.<br />Sat Apr 16, 04:40:00 AM EDT<br /><br />.Quirkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00272168240606512672noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21297199.post-45230875023820903012011-04-23T22:28:21.437-04:002011-04-23T22:28:21.437-04:00.
Quirk said...
.
[Ref: Inbicon Commercializatio....<br /> Quirk said...<br />.<br /><br />[Ref: Inbicon Commercialization Chart Above]<br /><br />From what I can see, Slide 12 is just a general projection chart showing the projected growth in 2G ethanol between 2009 and 2015. You are probably a lot more familiar with what it is saying.<br /><br />The only things I noted that were interesting was the the U.S. growth is all projected to be politically "targeted". I assume that refers to the current mandates through 2022.<br /><br />Also, of note is that Brazil's total usage drops for some reason and that Inbicon is using BP figures for their baseline projections. (I mention that only with reference to our discussion on sources.)<br /><br />.<br />Sat Apr 16, 04:05:00 AM EDT<br /><br />.Quirkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00272168240606512672noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21297199.post-40513356318796836712011-04-23T22:27:15.783-04:002011-04-23T22:27:15.783-04:00Quirk said...
.
You snicker and mock us poor bum...Quirk said...<br />.<br /><br /><br />You snicker and mock us poor bumkins for 'not getting it'; however, you have to admit it's not all that straight forward.<br /><br />For instance, you state: "The ones that work are the "Enzymatic" processes. Inbicon built the first one in Denmark, and it's working like a charm." <br /><br />Heck, I might know something about the enzyme guys but didn't know anything about Inbicon so I looked them up.<br /><br /><a href="http://ec.europa.eu/energy/renewables/events/doc/2010_10_13/1_demo_niels_henriksen.pdf" rel="nofollow">Inbicon Commercialization</a><br /><br />From what I can see this paper was put out by Inbicon in October, 2010. It purports to show the path to commercialization for their process. There are 15 slides in the presentation. Slide 4 summarizes the requirements they need for commercialization. <br /><br />The first requirement is a ‘proven technology in place’. They say they have proven this through pilot and demonstration plant volumes completed late last year. The second requirement is a 'demand for end products'. The last is 'feasible projects'. These are covered on slides 12, 13, and 15.<br /><br />I am going to posts comments on those slides separately because of blogger.<br /><br />.<br />Sat Apr 16, 03:45:00 AM EDT<br /><br />.Quirkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00272168240606512672noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21297199.post-34773908867885292982011-04-23T22:24:35.853-04:002011-04-23T22:24:35.853-04:00.
QuirQuirk said...
.
But, in case someone might....<br /><br />QuirQuirk said...<br />.<br /><br /><i>But, in case someone might be curious, the producer will need a price of about $2.25 - $2.50 to make a decent profit with enzymatic cellulosic ethanol. (Without Any Subsidies)<br /><br />Wholesale ethanol is selling for $2.61 gallon, today.</i><br /><br />Ruf, you get upset when we question you on your numbers or on whether cellulosic ethanol is currently ready for prime time. Admittedly, no one here puts in the time you do on this subject. Yet every day there are articles put out that dispute one or more aspects of your numbers or view on this subject.<br /><br />There is no point in you getting upset when some of us ask to see some evidence, i.e. substantial commercial production and usage.<br /><br />You laughed at my definition of short-term as a year or two. What is your definition of short-term?<br /><br />And given that definition, when do you project we will see cellulosic ethanol commercially available and used in large quantities without (as you noted above) subsidies?<br /><br />.<br />Sat Apr 16, 03:37:00 AM EDT<br /><br />.Quirkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00272168240606512672noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21297199.post-68479704090576544882011-04-23T22:22:40.714-04:002011-04-23T22:22:40.714-04:00.
Anyway, you ask; I'll answer.
That stream ....<br /><br /><i>Anyway, you ask; I'll answer.</i><br /><br />That stream Doug referenced had an awful lot of long posts in it Ruf. And most of the questions were accompanied by lengthy attachments. Doug’s were especially extensive.<br /><br />I'll just put down one of them that points out my problem with what you post here on cellulosic ethanol, not that you are necessarily wrong but that you are way too optimistic on the timing for a competitive product.<br /><br />The example I will use is Inbicon. You quoted it as being a company where the cellulosic process is "working like a charm."<br /><br />When I checked and came across a presentation put out by the Inbicon CEO a few months ago that seemed to raise some questions about the commercialization process, you ignored it. Or at least the only response we got was you indicating that it is all political and the GOP is to blame for us not having enough ethanol.<br /> <br />Subsequently, on the next stream as a rebuttal to Doug's arguments you again referenced Inbicon. And again tonight you mention Inbicon again.<br /><br />Therefore the following posts while primarily about Inbicon include some of the questions I have. (The italicized comments were yours)<br /><br />.Quirkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00272168240606512672noreply@blogger.com