Mauritius’ policy of increasing renewable energy utilization should serve as an initiative that can be passed on to other countries that are poor in petrochemicals but rich in biodiversity.
By: Vanessa Uy
The Mauritius government program of promoting the increased utilization of renewable energy sources like solar power and biomass was driven in part by the constant rise of petrol prices over the past few years. Also, government revenue that can be saved from reduced dependence on imported petrol could be put to better use in improving the social development programs in Mauritius. As opposed to just using the said funds to allow Middle-Eastern despots to continually build-up their own military might. Contributing further to the instability in the region.
Parts of the sugarcane that’s left over after sugar production is a good source of biomass that Mauritius has in abundance. By using this biomass as a “feed” for biogas digesters can provide 25% more energy than by burning the same biomass directly in an incinerator-type power plant. Currently, 20% of Mauritius’ electricity is generated from renewable biomass systems. Also the Mauritius government are finding ways to make photovoltaic/solar powered electricity production fiscally viable whether in large industrial installations or just small domestic set-ups used to meet typical household needs. A lot is riding on the success on this program because Mauritius doesn’t have local petrol, and a 100% renewable energy source could allow the nation to develop without increasing the effects of global warming.
Showing posts with label Biofuels. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Biofuels. Show all posts
Friday, January 11, 2008
How Green is Coco Diesel?
After watching a series of documentaries presented by the BBC in their climate watch series, I think its about time that we reevaluate coco diesel’s green credentials.
By: Vanessa Uy
Coco diesel is a bio fuel derived from the coconut fruit that can run conventional diesel engines with varying degrees of very minor modifications. At first, anyone, including the experts will testify that this is a very good way to limit our technological society’s continuous adding of carbon dioxide into our atmosphere, which is the main cause of global warming. Note: that coconut trees are continually growing and producing fruits and every time it does this it removes the carbon dioxide from the atmosphere where the gas increases the greenhouse effect to the coconuts various parts where the carbon dioxide is converted to cellulose. This is the idea behind “carbon capture” where excess carbon dioxide from the atmosphere is removed from where it causes the most harm to where it can be stored safely like the coconut tree’s cellulose structure. As we already know, excess carbon dioxide produced by our technological society is contributing to the greenhouse effect that’s warming up our planet thus increasing the strength of new hurricanes causing widespread damage.
This carbon capture solution via the widespread planting of coconut trees for use in bio fuel production seems like hitting two birds with one stone. Since coconut trees are sustainable because it continually bears fruits where the coco diesel can be processed unlike “fossil fuel” sources like petroleum in which the gasoline or diesel fuels derived from this doesn’t revert back to petroleum as opposed to a bio fuel like coco diesel.
So, what’s the problem? After watching those BBC documentaries on their climate watch series, so far, the scientists haven’t yet conducted studies on the extent on how truly carbon neutral (i.e. doesn’t contribute carbon dioxide into the atmosphere) plant derived bio fuels are from all levels of production to usage. After the coco diesel is burned in an internal combustion engine either for transport or electricity generation, the resulting carbon dioxide gas lingers in the atmosphere for a while. No study yet exists if how long should this carbon dioxide be allowed to linger in the atmosphere before it becomes a problem. It takes a relatively long time for this carbon dioxide to be absorbed into the coconut tree’s cellulose structure compared to the length of time coco diesel is produced from the coconut fruit. Also, the process of husking the coconut fruit and producing coco diesel takes energy at present, this energy is likely being generated by burning fossil fuels.
Also, using crops which are originally intended as food so that affluent people could continue to drive around their cars without being penalized by upcoming stricter environmental laws might do more harm than good. Coconut based food products would skyrocket, increasing the burden of the poor on their daily meals.
Another problem that hinders coco diesel from becoming fiscally competitive to petroleum derived diesel is the government-concerned-dragging-of-heels in legislating tax cuts and issuing grants to those start up companies who are making coco diesel.
Fortunately until a newer study of this nature is presented, bio fuels like coco diesel might only be a bit cleaner than their fossil fuel derived counterparts. The BBC, CNN, Discovery Channel, National Geographic or any other environmentally concerned media corporation are not likely to run out of ideas for documentaries about how to take better care of our planet.
If you like to know more about the carbon cycle and view detailed diagrams, check out “enviropedia.org.uk”.
By: Vanessa Uy
Coco diesel is a bio fuel derived from the coconut fruit that can run conventional diesel engines with varying degrees of very minor modifications. At first, anyone, including the experts will testify that this is a very good way to limit our technological society’s continuous adding of carbon dioxide into our atmosphere, which is the main cause of global warming. Note: that coconut trees are continually growing and producing fruits and every time it does this it removes the carbon dioxide from the atmosphere where the gas increases the greenhouse effect to the coconuts various parts where the carbon dioxide is converted to cellulose. This is the idea behind “carbon capture” where excess carbon dioxide from the atmosphere is removed from where it causes the most harm to where it can be stored safely like the coconut tree’s cellulose structure. As we already know, excess carbon dioxide produced by our technological society is contributing to the greenhouse effect that’s warming up our planet thus increasing the strength of new hurricanes causing widespread damage.
This carbon capture solution via the widespread planting of coconut trees for use in bio fuel production seems like hitting two birds with one stone. Since coconut trees are sustainable because it continually bears fruits where the coco diesel can be processed unlike “fossil fuel” sources like petroleum in which the gasoline or diesel fuels derived from this doesn’t revert back to petroleum as opposed to a bio fuel like coco diesel.
So, what’s the problem? After watching those BBC documentaries on their climate watch series, so far, the scientists haven’t yet conducted studies on the extent on how truly carbon neutral (i.e. doesn’t contribute carbon dioxide into the atmosphere) plant derived bio fuels are from all levels of production to usage. After the coco diesel is burned in an internal combustion engine either for transport or electricity generation, the resulting carbon dioxide gas lingers in the atmosphere for a while. No study yet exists if how long should this carbon dioxide be allowed to linger in the atmosphere before it becomes a problem. It takes a relatively long time for this carbon dioxide to be absorbed into the coconut tree’s cellulose structure compared to the length of time coco diesel is produced from the coconut fruit. Also, the process of husking the coconut fruit and producing coco diesel takes energy at present, this energy is likely being generated by burning fossil fuels.
Also, using crops which are originally intended as food so that affluent people could continue to drive around their cars without being penalized by upcoming stricter environmental laws might do more harm than good. Coconut based food products would skyrocket, increasing the burden of the poor on their daily meals.
Another problem that hinders coco diesel from becoming fiscally competitive to petroleum derived diesel is the government-concerned-dragging-of-heels in legislating tax cuts and issuing grants to those start up companies who are making coco diesel.
Fortunately until a newer study of this nature is presented, bio fuels like coco diesel might only be a bit cleaner than their fossil fuel derived counterparts. The BBC, CNN, Discovery Channel, National Geographic or any other environmentally concerned media corporation are not likely to run out of ideas for documentaries about how to take better care of our planet.
If you like to know more about the carbon cycle and view detailed diagrams, check out “enviropedia.org.uk”.
How Eco Friendly is Corn Derived Ethanol?
After watching a series of documentaries presented by the BBC in their climate watch series, I think its about time that we reevaluate corn- derived ethanol’s green credentials.
By: Vanessa Uy
Corn-derived ethanol is a bio fuel derived from fermenting corn syrup that can be mixed with varying amounts of gasoline or petrol that can run conventional gasoline engines with varying degrees of very minor modifications. At first, anyone, including the experts will testify that this is a very good way to limit our technological society’s continuous adding of carbon dioxide into our atmosphere, which is the main cause of global warming. Note: that corn plants are continually growing and producing fruits and every time it does this it removes- the carbon dioxide from the atmosphere where the gas increases the greenhouse effect- sending it to the corn’s various parts where the carbon dioxide is converted to cellulose. This is the idea behind “carbon capture” where excess carbon dioxide from the atmosphere is removed from where it causes the most harm to where it can be stored safely like the corn’s cellulose structure. As we already know, excess carbon dioxide produced by our technological society is contributing to the greenhouse effect that’s warming up our planet thus increasing the strength of new hurricanes causing widespread damage.
This carbon capture solution via the widespread planting of corn crops for use in bio fuel production seems like hitting two birds with one stone. Since corn plants are sustainable because it continually bears fruits where the corn-derived ethanol can be processed unlike “fossil fuel” sources like petroleum in which the gasoline or diesel fuels derived from this doesn’t revert back to petroleum as opposed to a bio fuel like corn-derived ethanol.
So, what’s the problem? After watching those BBC documentaries on their climate watch series, so far, the scientists haven’t yet conducted studies on the extent on how truly carbon neutral (i.e. doesn’t contribute carbon dioxide into the atmosphere) plant derived bio fuels are from all levels of production to usage. After the corn-derived ethanol is burned in an internal combustion engine either for transport or electricity generation, the resulting carbon dioxide gas lingers in the atmosphere for a while. No study yet exists if how long should this carbon dioxide be allowed to linger in the atmosphere before it becomes a problem. It takes a relatively long time for this carbon dioxide to be absorbed into the corn’s cellulose structure compared to the length of time ethanol is produced from the corn. Also, the process of harvesting the corn and fermenting it into ethanol takes energy at present, this energy is likely being generated by burning fossil fuels. And another thing, fermenting the sugars in corn syrup to ethanol produces carbon dioxide that eventually escapes into the atmosphere. Whether this amount of carbon dioxide is more or less than the one generated by the corn-derived ethanol when burned in an internal combustion engine is yet to be studied.
Also, using crops which are originally intended as food so that affluent people could continue to drive around their cars without being penalized by up and coming stricter environmental laws might cause more harm than good. Back in 2005, Mexican corn growers marched in protest against using corn as fuel because this might increase corn prices increasing the burden on the poor who are most likely to use corn as food as opposed to using corn to fill up their cars.
Fortunately until a newer study of this nature is presented, bio fuels like corn-derived ethanol might only be a bit cleaner than their fossil fuel derived counterparts. The BBC, CNN, Discovery Channel, National Geographic or any other environmentally oriented media corporation are not likely to run out of ideas for documentaries about how to take better care of our planet.
To know more about the carbon cycle and view detailed diagrams check out “enviropedia.org.uk”.
By: Vanessa Uy
Corn-derived ethanol is a bio fuel derived from fermenting corn syrup that can be mixed with varying amounts of gasoline or petrol that can run conventional gasoline engines with varying degrees of very minor modifications. At first, anyone, including the experts will testify that this is a very good way to limit our technological society’s continuous adding of carbon dioxide into our atmosphere, which is the main cause of global warming. Note: that corn plants are continually growing and producing fruits and every time it does this it removes- the carbon dioxide from the atmosphere where the gas increases the greenhouse effect- sending it to the corn’s various parts where the carbon dioxide is converted to cellulose. This is the idea behind “carbon capture” where excess carbon dioxide from the atmosphere is removed from where it causes the most harm to where it can be stored safely like the corn’s cellulose structure. As we already know, excess carbon dioxide produced by our technological society is contributing to the greenhouse effect that’s warming up our planet thus increasing the strength of new hurricanes causing widespread damage.
This carbon capture solution via the widespread planting of corn crops for use in bio fuel production seems like hitting two birds with one stone. Since corn plants are sustainable because it continually bears fruits where the corn-derived ethanol can be processed unlike “fossil fuel” sources like petroleum in which the gasoline or diesel fuels derived from this doesn’t revert back to petroleum as opposed to a bio fuel like corn-derived ethanol.
So, what’s the problem? After watching those BBC documentaries on their climate watch series, so far, the scientists haven’t yet conducted studies on the extent on how truly carbon neutral (i.e. doesn’t contribute carbon dioxide into the atmosphere) plant derived bio fuels are from all levels of production to usage. After the corn-derived ethanol is burned in an internal combustion engine either for transport or electricity generation, the resulting carbon dioxide gas lingers in the atmosphere for a while. No study yet exists if how long should this carbon dioxide be allowed to linger in the atmosphere before it becomes a problem. It takes a relatively long time for this carbon dioxide to be absorbed into the corn’s cellulose structure compared to the length of time ethanol is produced from the corn. Also, the process of harvesting the corn and fermenting it into ethanol takes energy at present, this energy is likely being generated by burning fossil fuels. And another thing, fermenting the sugars in corn syrup to ethanol produces carbon dioxide that eventually escapes into the atmosphere. Whether this amount of carbon dioxide is more or less than the one generated by the corn-derived ethanol when burned in an internal combustion engine is yet to be studied.
Also, using crops which are originally intended as food so that affluent people could continue to drive around their cars without being penalized by up and coming stricter environmental laws might cause more harm than good. Back in 2005, Mexican corn growers marched in protest against using corn as fuel because this might increase corn prices increasing the burden on the poor who are most likely to use corn as food as opposed to using corn to fill up their cars.
Fortunately until a newer study of this nature is presented, bio fuels like corn-derived ethanol might only be a bit cleaner than their fossil fuel derived counterparts. The BBC, CNN, Discovery Channel, National Geographic or any other environmentally oriented media corporation are not likely to run out of ideas for documentaries about how to take better care of our planet.
To know more about the carbon cycle and view detailed diagrams check out “enviropedia.org.uk”.
Al Gore in Bio Fuel Row
Al Gore, the man who brought the urgency of global warming to the world’s policymakers is now caught in a bio fuel controversy.
By: Vanessa Uy
Anti global warming crusader Al Gore has angered the environmental activists in Argentina last May 13, 2007 due to his relatively culturally insensitive introduction of bio fuel industry in Argentina and the rest of Latin America. Gore’s program of promoting bio fuel production to the rest of South America. Has the intent of lessening their dependence on Middle Eastern oil. Unfortunately caused an- uproar on Argentina’s environmental groups that sparked a series of loud demonstrations, burning of the US flag and chanting of anti- US imperialism slogans. The concerns of the Argentina’s environmentalist were warranted though.
Ever since the Argentina’s government started a program of producing ethanol from locally grown sugarcane. Even though the quantities of ethanol produced is for Argentina’s own domestic use, local sugar prices soared and the mono- culture created by the hundreds of hectares of sugarcane fields are a crop failure disaster waiting to happen. This can get much worse though if most Americans just substitute bio fuel like they waste petroleum based fuels. Energy conservation should be an integral part of every program if the industrialized world wants to reduce their “carbon footprint.”
Poorly conceived bio fuel production methods not only create mono -culture problems, this also increases the retail prices of staple foods in most of South America. If the US Government plans to use the whole of South America to grow the bio fuel quota needed to run their wasteful lifestyle, this could be seen as another form of US imperialism in the region. More importantly, the deeply held pre-Columbian beliefs and culture that recently began to assert despite of more than five centuries of European Christian hegemony failed to quell about the Native Latin American peoples reverence to their food crops. This is the main reason why they oppose the large- scale production of bio fuels using staple food crops. Even Venezuelan President Hugo Chaves and Cuban President Fidel Castro are now up in arms in opposition to this latest incarnation of US imperialism. Looks like Al Gore should have consulted Body Shop’s Anita Roddick first before launching such a venture.
By: Vanessa Uy
Anti global warming crusader Al Gore has angered the environmental activists in Argentina last May 13, 2007 due to his relatively culturally insensitive introduction of bio fuel industry in Argentina and the rest of Latin America. Gore’s program of promoting bio fuel production to the rest of South America. Has the intent of lessening their dependence on Middle Eastern oil. Unfortunately caused an- uproar on Argentina’s environmental groups that sparked a series of loud demonstrations, burning of the US flag and chanting of anti- US imperialism slogans. The concerns of the Argentina’s environmentalist were warranted though.
Ever since the Argentina’s government started a program of producing ethanol from locally grown sugarcane. Even though the quantities of ethanol produced is for Argentina’s own domestic use, local sugar prices soared and the mono- culture created by the hundreds of hectares of sugarcane fields are a crop failure disaster waiting to happen. This can get much worse though if most Americans just substitute bio fuel like they waste petroleum based fuels. Energy conservation should be an integral part of every program if the industrialized world wants to reduce their “carbon footprint.”
Poorly conceived bio fuel production methods not only create mono -culture problems, this also increases the retail prices of staple foods in most of South America. If the US Government plans to use the whole of South America to grow the bio fuel quota needed to run their wasteful lifestyle, this could be seen as another form of US imperialism in the region. More importantly, the deeply held pre-Columbian beliefs and culture that recently began to assert despite of more than five centuries of European Christian hegemony failed to quell about the Native Latin American peoples reverence to their food crops. This is the main reason why they oppose the large- scale production of bio fuels using staple food crops. Even Venezuelan President Hugo Chaves and Cuban President Fidel Castro are now up in arms in opposition to this latest incarnation of US imperialism. Looks like Al Gore should have consulted Body Shop’s Anita Roddick first before launching such a venture.
Thursday, January 10, 2008
Climate Change Threaten German Beer Festival
The effects of climate change are more insidious than we presently realize; even beer is threatened by global warming.
By: Vanessa Uy
If you think that global warming can’t possibly affect those traditions-no matter how trivial-that we hold dear, then you’re wrong. When spring arrived early in the heart of Europe this year, most Germans greeted the strange phenomena with much rejoicing and fanfare. But a warmer climate could threaten a much- loved German staple: beer. Whether you believe that the ancestral home of beer is Germany or Ancient Egypt, you should be concerned on how global warming and climate change can affect your cherished “brew.” The type of barley that is used to brew traditional German gourmet beer has not weathered very well to Europe’s increasingly warmer climate. Looks like ski resorts are not the only casualty of global warming.
A decline in barley harvest was noticed in Germany during the past few years. There was also a noted decline in the general health and well being of the kind of barley that is traditionally used in preparing German beer. Where this leads to can only be assessed by on going research on the warming climate’s effects on the barley crop.
Compounding the threat of climate change on Germany’s beer culture is the European Union’s heavy-handed approach in granting financial subsidies. The EU hand these out like their going out of fashion to farmers who comply to their current mission du jour. Crops that can be used to produce bio fuels like the rape plant whose rape seed oil can be easily converted to bio diesel are heavily subsidized. This “free-money” diplomacy can easily make small-scale German farmers to choose “favored” crops as opposed to barley.
By: Vanessa Uy
If you think that global warming can’t possibly affect those traditions-no matter how trivial-that we hold dear, then you’re wrong. When spring arrived early in the heart of Europe this year, most Germans greeted the strange phenomena with much rejoicing and fanfare. But a warmer climate could threaten a much- loved German staple: beer. Whether you believe that the ancestral home of beer is Germany or Ancient Egypt, you should be concerned on how global warming and climate change can affect your cherished “brew.” The type of barley that is used to brew traditional German gourmet beer has not weathered very well to Europe’s increasingly warmer climate. Looks like ski resorts are not the only casualty of global warming.
A decline in barley harvest was noticed in Germany during the past few years. There was also a noted decline in the general health and well being of the kind of barley that is traditionally used in preparing German beer. Where this leads to can only be assessed by on going research on the warming climate’s effects on the barley crop.
Compounding the threat of climate change on Germany’s beer culture is the European Union’s heavy-handed approach in granting financial subsidies. The EU hand these out like their going out of fashion to farmers who comply to their current mission du jour. Crops that can be used to produce bio fuels like the rape plant whose rape seed oil can be easily converted to bio diesel are heavily subsidized. This “free-money” diplomacy can easily make small-scale German farmers to choose “favored” crops as opposed to barley.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
