Our First Peak Oil Recession

Our First Peak Oil Recession

Why Oil Prices May Never Rise Above $150
One of the most bedeviling problems for oil producers (and oil investors) is knowing when it's too cheap to keep producing, and when it's too expensive to sell.
Last year gave us new boundaries: $147 a barrel was too expensive, and $33 was too cheap. But those aren't terribly useful numbers in the real world.

We now know that $147 was extra-inflated by too much money sloshing into the sector, and $33 was extra-deflated by the fear and confusion that dominated all markets in December of last year. It's likely that tighter regulation of the oil futures market will tamp down the former, and the latter will not be seen again. . . so long as the world banking system continues to beg, borrow, and steal its way to stability and "full faith and credit."

If you're a Chevron trying to decide if you should plunk down another $5 billion for a big new deepwater platform, or a marginal producer of oil from unconventional sources where the production cost is high, you'll find it hard to commit to new projects with price volatility like that.
One way to get a handle on the question is to look at the supply side costs. As I wrote in March, the current cost of new production in the few places in the world where oil production can still be increased ranges from $60-$75 a barrel, and the average minimum is around $65. The more extreme and marginal projects we'll be eyeing in ten years' time will need closer to $100 a barrel to pay off.

But prices on the demand side of the equation are harder to gauge. Our First Peak Oil Recession
Several presenters at the Association for the Study of Peak Oil (ASPO) conference two weeks ago used measures of GDP to express the economy's tolerance limit for high oil prices.
Murphy changed the time scale from years to months at the end of the chart to demonstrate how the portion of GDP paying for oil last year spiked and crashed as much in 12 months as it did in 4-5 years during the most recent recessions.

Steven Kopits, Managing Director of Douglas-Westwood LLC, came to similar conclusions in his presentation. He noted how oil stopped responding to price signals in 2004, with production remaining basically flat even as prices tripled. The global oil supply only expanded by 2% while global GDP grew 17%, causing prices to increase by about 25% per year from 2003 on.
By 2008, when crude expenditures reached 4% of GDP, the U.S. fell into recession. In fact, said Kopits, oil over $80 would have been enough on its own to cause what he called "our first peak oil recession."

Former head of exploration and production for Saudi Aramco Sadad al-Husseini opined similarly in his interview with ASPO, saying that the spending ceiling is between 5% and 6% of global GPD. Accordingly, he thinks alternatives to petroleum like Arctic oil, coal- and gas-to-liquids, and so on may not be economical to develop because their costs are too high.

In essence, OECD countries are simply getting squeezed out of the market as the global drivers of demand shift to the developing world. When the cost of filling the tank on an SUV goes from $60 to $100, it really takes a bite out of consumption in America. But your average resident of, say, India or the Philippines can shrug off a 50-cent increase in the cost of filling the tank on his scooter, because he gets so much more economic value from the transportation.

Kopits believes that $70 oil is enough to effectively lock out the EU from the oil market, and $75 locks out the U.S. This begins to explain how, as independent oil producer Jeffrey Brown observed in his presentation, the U.S. was outbid by Kenya for oil last year.
On a related note, ASPO analyst Dave Cohen made a convincing argument that economic fundamentals will not support increased oil demand - even from China - for years to come, ensuring that global GDP growth remains weak.

In counterpoint, Matthew Simmons asserted that we don't yet know the economy's tolerance point, and thought it could be as high as $500-$700 a barrel.

This is where I must make my departure from Simmons' camp. The data presented on GDP and price at the conference have forced me to reconsider my longstanding belief that peak oil will bring much higher prices. Although prices 5 to 10 years from now, when we're well past the peak and into decline, remain an open question. . . I now doubt that we'll see oil over $150 anytime soon.

A Narrow Ledge
If these analyses are correct, then we are on what Kopits called "a narrow ledge": Houston needs $75 oil to keep drilling, but the economy goes into recession with oil at $80.
Two editors of "The Oil Drum" generally concurred. Nate Hagens put the boundaries a bit wider at $60 to keep drilling and $80-$100 as the economic pain tolerance point, and Gail Tverberg observed that oil at $75-$80 seems to kick off a recession.
If the stability of oil production relies on oil spending staying within roughly 4% and 5% of GDP, it's going to be dicey. But if the oil price ledge is only $5 wide, then it's not clear to me whether the global GDP can manage to stay on it.

In short, the world may not be able to continue executing the expensive oil projects of the future at all. The tension between the price of new production and the pain tolerance of the global economy may be resolved not by stable prices, but by a failure to bring new supply online.
This is indeed a crisis - but it's also a hint that it's time to focus on how we're going to replace oil.
Take it from Sadad al-Husseini: "The hidden opportunity may be efficiency and conservation."
The investment community has already heard that message. At the ASPO conference this year, I estimate that not one of the roughly 400 attendees represented development capital, while at a typical Cleantech Forum in San Francisco, at least half of the 1,500 or so attendees are with banks, VCs, and big hedge funds. Granted, the ASPO conferences are about information, not deal-making. . . Still, investors seem to prefer theses based on abundance to those based on scarcity.

It only makes sense. If you had a large chunk of capital to deploy in the energy space, would you rather try to balance on a narrow ledge, or jump into a sector that's growing at 30% per year - with no ceiling in sight - and the wind of oil depletion at its back?

Efficiency and conservation may not be as sexy as solar and wind, but for the next several decades they will be the only real way to survive a future of volatile oil and gas prices and declining supply. It takes a long time to rebuild an infrastructure. . . and in the meantime, we're going to have to make do with what we've got.

In the pursuit of investment capital, cleantech clearly has the edge over oil now.
Until next time,
Chris

Energy sector outlook Part 2 (2)

Renewable energy is still at the beginning of at least a 30-year secular bull market, and the decline of fossil fuels means the sky's the limit for its growth outlook. I doubt that we'll see again in our lifetimes the kind of growth that will happen in this next decade. I'm talking a once-in-a-century bull market here.

Solar and wind will continue to be the dominant technologies and receive strong investment, led by China and a few other projects like Masdar City and then moving into widespread adoption in the U.S. and the unsolarized parts of Europe (France, I'm looking at you!) by the end of the decade. The intermittency problem of wind and solar will be largely solved this decade, as new storage solutions come to market. Hundreds (perhaps thousands) of companies, small and large, have been working on a whole array of approaches to the problem, and I expect a few winners to emerge this decade. My bet that that a combination of vehicle-to-grid technology, flywheel storage, and large battery arrays or ultra capacitors will be the early winners. But there are many others, including stationary micro- or nano-scale hydrogen storage (but not hydrogen vehicles), pumped water, and compressed air. If regulatory and financing hurdles can be overcome - and I think they can in the next ten years - concentrating solar power (CSP) also holds enormous potential for cracking the storage problem at grid scale in solar-rich regions. As high as my long-term hopes for it have been, I reluctantly conclude that the geothermal sector will continue to see sluggish growth for at least the first half of the decade, due the difficulty of raising financing, regulatory, and underwriting hurdles and technical issues. Uncertainty over whether "enhanced geothermal" (deep, hot rock) projects cause earthquakes has shut down two major projects this month. The AltaRock Energy project north of the Geysers in California - the first major test of enhanced geothermal in the U.S. - was terminated immediately after another major project in Basel, Switzerland, was permanently shut down in response to a government study showing it was responsible for damaging earthquakes in 2006 and 2007. Likewise, it appears marine energy technologies are still lacking the research and development support they need to reach commercial viability. I do expect at least one or two of them to get there by the end of the decade, but I don't see them taking much market share. Final Thoughts The list of x-factors that could utterly change the outline I've offered here is so long that it questions the wisdom of even trying to attempt a decade-long outlook. Disease, war, natural disasters, monetary policy, drought and climate change, geopolitics, sovereign default, energy failures... you name it, it's in the mix. The one constant we can be sure of is human nature. I'm digging into some ancient history in search of clues to the future, and I suggest that you do, too. As we teeter on the peak of the biggest wealth bubble in human history and stare into the abyss, we would do well to learn the lessons of the past. Ours will not be the first empire to crumble, and there is nothing new about how or why it will happen. The only difference is the distance we have to fall. It's been a tough year and a wild decade, and I'm sure most of you will be happy to put it behind us. The next decade will be considerably harder, but it will force us to rethink our values and chart a more sustainable course into the future, as well as present some of the greatest wealth-making opportunities of all time.

For example, my colleagues Sam Hopkins and Nick Hodge are venturing out into emerging markets like Peru, China, and Morocco to find clean energy investments that will allow developing countries to leapfrog carbon-intense, rich-world energy habits. And as they report from the field, subscribers to their Green Chip International stock recommendation service will benefit. Again, my mind is drawn back to Dickens' critique of the British aristocracy in light of the French Revolution. The coming decade, as then, could be the best of times, it could be the worst of times. One thing is guaranteed: It will not lack for excitement.

Article by Chris -

Energy Outlook for the Next Decade: Part 2

Oil, Gas, Coal, Uranium, Renewables, Efficiency, Water, and Agriculture

Last week, I explored some of the big themes for the coming decade. For my final column of the year, I offer my specific outlooks for oil, natural gas, coal, renewables, uranium, efficiency, water, and agriculture. Oil

Oil will probably spend 2010 rangebound between $60 and $75, but could fall lower if the deflationary recession persists.

As I discussed in Part 1, it will probably take until 2012-2013 for demand growth to push the current 4-5 mbpd of spare capacity back down to the 1% breaking point, but then we should see another price spike.

For reasons I have discussed previously, I'm no longer convinced that the next few cycles of oil prices will breach the $147 peak or the $33 low set in 2008. But if Cohen's diagram (see Part 1) is correct, then we should continue to expect higher highs and higher lows, with oil peaking somewhere around $160s and bottoming around the $50s in the next cycle (with an error bar of perhaps $20!).

The best way to play it will be to scale in on the descent and scale out on the ascent, rather than trying to time the tops and bottoms.
By mid-decade, I think the world will be convinced that the peak of oil is in the past, putting an end to that debate. The realization should kick off an intense round of competition to secure the remaining resources, drawing more Chinese money to Canada, Brazil, and Africa, and committing the U.S. to retaining its military foothold in the Middle East.
Coal
As much as I hate to say it, coal is poised for a long-term bull market. As oil, and then natural gas decline, the world will fall back on it as the cheapest hydrocarbon of last resort in the next decade. It will be the fallback feedstock for liquid fuels for cars, trucks, and airplanes, plastics, and industrial chemicals.

The world will groan under the CO2 output of the devil we don't know, but will choose it over the devil we do know: economic decline. Therefore I expect the better part of the coal boom to fall in the latter half of the decade, as emissions concerns are overridden by economic pressure. Coal-to-liquids, in particular, will be the recipient of heavy sponsorship from the military and aviation sectors.

Natural Gas
The next decade outlook for natural gas is the most uncertain of all. The current glut in North America owing to the shale gas boom could be resolved in one of two ways: It will either continue through the decade, if long-term production rates are sustained at high levels, or it will crash around 2013-2014 if production falls rapidly after the initial burst of output, as some analysts believe.

There simply isn't enough data to make that call at this point, but my gut feeling is that there will be a short-term boom for the next few years, and a significant load will be shifted from diesel to CNG for transport trucks. Then supply will peter out before the end of the decade, with some ensuing panic.

Boom-and-bust cycles will characterize the North American gas market until prices stabilize above $7 per thousand cubic feet. LNG export capacity will continue to grow in the Middle East and Russia, but most of it will go to non-U.S. customers, and the North American market will remain largely domestic.
Uranium

As a spate of recent news reports have recognized, the global uranium supply is running low. We've nearly worked through the stockpile of uranium from retired nuclear weapons, and the quality and availability of fresh ores to mine is falling. As I do not see any significant momentum toward next generation reactor designs, I believe light water reactors will continue to dominate the nuclear sector, which means another decade of high demand for uranium.

While uranium supply peaks or declines, demand will continue to increase as new reactors are built, particularly in China and India. Nuclear power will not add a significant amount of primary energy to the global mix, but uranium will be a hot commodity. It will see at least one, and maybe two boom-and-bust cycles in the next decade.

One no-brainer investment in this sector would be Cameco Corporation (NYSE: CCJ). They've been making good progress lately and I think they will succeed in pumping the water out of their Cigar Lake mine and putting it back into action.
The whole uranium producer group should be a long-term hold for the decade.

Agriculture
At this point, I can't really think of any reason to be bearish about agriculture. Fertilizer and grains will be hot throughout the decade as we try to feed the world's growing population and combat the decline of oil with biofuels.

The added pressure will only exacerbate the problems inherent in commercial agriculture, accelerating the boom in organic and local food production.
The encroaching desertification of California - along with price spikes in oil - will make it increasingly difficult to export its produce to the Midwest and East Coast (unless by some miracle we get very serious, very quickly about rail in this country). This will have wide-ranging and very long-term implications for U.S. food supply.

GMOs designed for drought tolerance and water efficiency plays in the ag sector will figure prominently. Both technologies will probably see a frantic investment bubble this decade. How long they can hold back the tide of climate change and desertification will remain an open question in the '10s.

The long-term trend for agriculture is much easier to identify. By the end of the century, nearly all of our food supply will have to be relocalized. Those who are paying attention, however, will realize it by the end of this decade.
Accordingly, farmland will continue to be a hot market throughout the decade, particularly in Africa, Asia, Central and South America, and possibly Canada.

Water
Water will be one of the biggest investment areas - and socially speaking, one of the biggest pressure points - of the next decade, due to climate change and simple population overshoot.
This month brought three fresh examples of the issues we're facing:
* In a classic case of the energy-water nexus, the long-running drought in South America has reduced Venezuela's hydropower supply enough to force them to cut back on oil refining activity, with the end result that they'll have less heating oil to send to places like China this winter. China will make up the loss by burning more coal. * Much of East Africa received only 5% of its normal rainfall in November, putting millions of people at risk of starvation. * A new report found that the aquifers supporting the Central Valley of California, a region that produces 8% of the U.S. food supply, have lost more than 30 cubic kilometers of water (about 8 trillion gallons) since 2003 due to drought, reduced water exports from the Sacramento Delta, and too much groundwater pumping.
Water desalination and purification have long been a major investment focus in the Middle East, but the American Southwest, Australia, Africa, and South America will join them this decade as new markets in desperate need of solutions. Technologies running the gamut from personal water treatment to city-scale water desalination will benefit from this potentially enormous market.

Efficiency
Efficiency is by far the low-hanging fruit in our declining energy future, and this will be the Decade of Efficiency. Consider this simple metric: It takes $4-$5 in solar PV to generate the same amount of energy that $1 in insulation measures will save.
Cash for Clunkers and Cash for Caulkers were only the beginning of a long decade of incentives for higher efficiency. Not just cars and buildings... but appliances, combined heat and power applications, district heating from co-located waste heat generators, and dozens of other approaches will be vigorously pursued. By the end of the decade, I expect the efficiency of U.S. appliances and vehicles to approach what Europe enjoys today.
The largest niche in efficiency will be retrofitting homes with insulation, caulking, windows, and solar generation. Small businesses doing energy auditing and building efficiency upgrades - like San Francisco's Recurve, who have figured out how to scale their businesses - will be home runs. By the end of the decade, I also expect building efficiency, good passive solar design, and low water use to be mandatory elements of architectural college curricula.
Building the smart grid will be a top priority for this decade, along with at least the first part of a long-distance national HVDC grid. Not only will it enable the growth of renewable power, but it will be a saving grace in helping us cut the waste and make the most of our existing grid power supply.

Article by Chris -

Energy sector outlook (2)

Another driver of the down escalator is that the net energy (EROI, or energy returned on energy invested), of nearly all fossil fuel production is falling. Dr. Cutler Cleveland at Boston University has observed that the net energy of oil and gas extraction in the U.S. has decreased from 100:1 in the 1930s; to 30:1 in the 1970s; to roughly 11:1 as of 2000.Simply put: As the quality of the remaining fossil fuels declines, and they become more difficult to extract, it takes more energy to continue producing energy. This begs the question: What EROI must the replacements have to compensate for oil depletion? Vail presented several models attempting to answer it.

In his optimistic scenario, assuming a 5% rate of net energy decline and an EROI of 20 for the renewables, the "renewables gap" was filled in year 3.
In his pessimistic scenario, assuming a 10% rate of net energy decline and an EROI of 4 for the renewables, the gap wasn't filled until year 7.

For a sense of how reasonable those assumptions are, we must turn to the academic literature - since no business or government agency has yet shown any particular interest in EROI studies (much to my dismay). Studies assembled by David Murphy put the average EROI of wind at 18 (Kubiszewski, Cleveland, and Endres, 2009); solar at 6.8 (Battisti and Corrado, 2005), and nuclear at 5 to 15 (Lenzen, 2008; Hall, 2008). No data is available for geothermal or marine energy. All the biofuels are under 2, making them non-solutions if the minimum EROI for a society is indeed 3 (Hall, Balogh and Murphy, 2009).

[A quick aside: The huge range of the nuclear estimate is one indication of how difficult it is to accurately assess the costs of nuclear, which is part of the reason I still haven't written the article I know many of you are hoping to see some day. I'm working on it, and still looking for current research with appropriately inclusive boundaries and updated numbers. Nearly everyone is still using cost estimates that predate the commodities bull run, not even realizing how it distorts their analysis. So far, I have found nothing to change my outlook that the nuclear share of global supply will stay roughly the same for several decades.]I am not aware of any studies on the EROI of biomass not made into liquid fuels.
For example, methane digesters using waste, landfill gas, and so on. . . but its sources and uses are so varied that if the numbers were available, they probably wouldn't be very useful. While such applications are generally good, they're not very scalable: They work where they work, and don't where they don't. Theorem of Renewables SubstitutionWhere EROI analysis leaves us is unclear; it needs more research and a great deal more data.
There are some useful clues in it, though.

First, we know that biofuels - at least the ones we have today - won't help much, other than providing an alternate source of liquid fuels while we're making the transition to electric.

Second, we know that solar tends toward Vail's pessimistic scenario, and wind fits the bill for his optimistic scenario.But here's the rub: The lowest EROI source, biofuels, is the easiest to do, with the vigorous support of a huge lobby and Energy Secretary Chu himself. Rooftop solar is the next-easiest to do. . . but making up the lost BTUs takes longer, due to its moderate EROI. And the source with the highest EROI, wind, is the hardest. (I explained why solar is easier here.)

Therefore I propose the following, slightly snarky Theorem of Renewables Substitution: The easier it is to produce a source of renewable energy, the less it helps. The Winner: EfficiencyAll of these factors - the declining supply, the pressures of the developing world on demand, the renewables gap, and the theorem of renewables substitution - underscore how crucial efficiency is to addressing the energy crisis.They also underscore how profitable the entire energy sector will be for many years to come.With supply maxed out, and demand at the mercy of a developing world, the name of the game now is doing more with less. More efficient vehicles and appliances, building insulation, co-generation. . . and all the other ways to eliminate waste.I know it doesn't have the sex appeal of oh, say, space based solar power. . . but it's where the real gains will be made.
Until next time,ChrisChris Nelder is a self-taught energy expert who has intensively studied peak oil for five years, and written hundreds of articles on politics, peak oil and energy in general.

Energy Sector Outlook

Efficiency: The Way to Close the Renewables Gap

With peak oil already upon us, sustaining oil supply is akin to running up the down escalator.
Or, as Nate Hagens put it at the ASPO peak oil conference earlier this month, "Technology is in a race with depletion and is losing (so far)."

The urgent question then is: Can renewables fill the gap of oil depletion? Mind the Gap
The most recent global data summarized by fuel available from the EIA is, unfortunately, for 2006 and only preliminary (I know they're trying to improve their reporting, but seriously - they need to do better than that). But we'll use what we've got. . .

In 2006, the total amount of energy the world consumed was 469 quadrillion BTUs, or quads.*
If the latest information I gathered at the ASPO peak oil conference is correct (and I think it is, or at least as close to, correct as anybody is going to come at this point), then we should expect oil to begin declining at about 5% per year, starting around 2012-2014.

Of the 157 quads provided by oil, a 5% decline rate will give way to 7.85 quads lost per year, or 1.7% of the world's primary energy supply.
The "Geothermal and Other" category - supplying 1.6% of the world's primary energy - represents all the renewable sources combined: geothermal, solar, wind, biomass, and so on.
Since 1.7% is very close to 1.6%, we can put the challenge of substituting renewables for oil this way: Starting around 2012-2014, we will need to build the equivalent of the entire world's existing renewable energy capacity every year just to replace the lost BTUs from oil.

Fortunately, renewable energy of all kinds is enjoying a massive growth spurt, attracting trillions of dollars in investment capital. On average, the sector seems to be growing at about 30% per year, which is phenomenal. . . but it's not 100%.

In terms of BTU substitution, then, it seems unlikely that renewables can grow at the necessary rate.
Not Just BTUs
However, the challenge is more complex than mere BTU substitution.
Replacing the infrastructure, particularly transportation, that's based on oil with one based on renewably generated electricity will in itself require energy - and lots of it. As Vail pointed out, between 80% and 90% of the energy inputs for renewables must be made up front, before they start to pay any energy out.

Even if renewables were able to make up all of the lost energy from oil, still more would be needed to afford any economic growth.

In all, it seems a fair bet that it will take at least a decade for renewables to merely catch up with the annual toll of oil depletion. The gap will likely manifest as fuel shortages in the OECD, when the developing world outbids it for oil, and a long economic recession or depression. . . unless efficiency comes to the rescue.

To that point, Jeff Vail, an associate with Davis Graham & Stubbs LLP, said at the conference that population increase alone could offset as much as 30% of the improvement in conservation and efficiency. He noted that despite the recession, car sales are up 29% in India as people buy their very first cars.
Falling Net Energy

Until next time,
Chris
Chris Nelder is a self-taught energy expert who has intensively studied peak oil for five years, and written hundreds of articles on politics, peak oil and energy in general.

Alternative energy development

Alternative energy development

Japan is a densely populated country, and that makes the Japanese market more difficult compared with other markets. If we utilize the possibilities of near-shore installations or even offshore installations in the future, that will give us the possibility of continued use of wind energy. If we go offshore, it's more expensive because the construction of foundations is expensive. But often the wind is stronger offshore, and that can offset the higher costs. We're getting more and more competitive with our equipment. The price-if you measure it per kilowatt-hour produced-is going lower, due to the fact that turbines are getting more efficient. So we're creating increased interest in wind energy. If you compare it to other renewable energy sources, wind is by far the most competitive today. If we're able to utilize sites close to the sea or at sea with good wind machines, then the price per kilowatt-hour is competitive against other sources of energy, go the words of Svend Sigaard, who happens to be president and CEO of the world's largest wind turbine maker, Vestas wind systems out of Denmark. Vestas is heavily involved in investments of capital into helping Japan expand its wind turbine power generating capacity. It is seeking to get offshore installations put into place in a nation that it says is ready for the fruits of investment into alternative energy research and development.
The Japanese know that they cannot become subservient to the energy supply dictates of foreign nations-World War II taught them that, as the US decimated their oil supply lines and crippled their military machine. They need to produce energy of their own, and they being an isolated island nation with few natural resources that are conducive to energy production as it is defined now are very open to foreign investment and foreign development as well as the prospect of technological innovation that can make them independent. Allowing corporations such as Vestas to get the nation running on more wind-produced energy is a step in the right direction for the Japanese people.

The production of energy through what is known as microhydoelectric power plants has also been catching on in Japan. Japan has a myriad rivers and mountain streams, and these are ideally suited places for the putting up of microhydroelectric power plants, which are defined by the New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization as power plants run by water which have a maximum output of 100 kilowatts or less. By comparison, "minihydroelectric" power plants can put out up to 1000 kilowatts of electrical energy.
In Japan, the small-scaled mini- and micro-hydroelectric power plants have been regarded for a considerable time as being suitable for creating electricity in mountainous regions, but they have through refinement come to be regarded as excellent for Japanese cities as well. Kawasaki City Waterworks, Japan Natural Energy Company, and Tokyo Electric Power Company have all been involved in the development of small-scale hydroelectric power plants within Japanese cities.
http://www.globalwarming-prevention.com/Alternative energy development

Alternative Energy article by Parry P

New Discoveries in Solar Energy

New Discoveries in Solar Energy

The time might not be far off when the use of solar energy becomes a norm. There is currently a deep conviction amongst experts that given a few years stretch, solar power preference be in excessive demand that the cost will go down, inexpensive enough to undercut the prices of oil-generated electricity.

Prior predictions that it will still take place in a decade may possibly no longer be true. The anger generated by the current prices in oil and its vulnerability to promote forces and other actions may have already been sufficient to polarized folks, governments and controlled communities into seriously making an allowance for a reliable alternative energy source.

You can not get a source more dependable than the sun. Even these days homes that uses its power does not merely benefit from the silent, energy generating, boundless power of the sun, it additionally spikes up the prices of their homes. Those that maintain solar powered homes are even reimbursed for the surplus power that they supply to the power grid.

Presently, heliostats, photovoltaic cells and plate collectors are being used to collect the energy by focusing these panels towards the sun or constructing and installing the panel's on spots where the sun shines most. Development in technology as we all know often has a snowball effect. It never stops rediscovering and reinventing that the speed of development could often be surprisingly fast.

Today, a polymer foil, thin as a sheet of paper and lighter by 200 times when compared to the regular glass collecting plates, are being developed. Chances are, these new inventions and discoveries could very well have a great potential for mass production. Previously, the glass-based materials used for heat collection need expensive substrates and require additional support for mounting due to its weight. The polymer foil, being very light could now be attached even to the walls of a structure.

So confident are scientists in the development of this technology that while the polymer foil is being developed, a plastic solar cell, based on nano technology is gaining breakthroughs. This plastic material can collect the power of the sun even on a cloudy day through harnessing the infrared rays is believed to be five times more efficient than the current technology.
While plastic materials for harnessing the power of the sun are not new, it is only recently that this plastic composite could harvest the infrared portion. Previously, only the visible rays are generated, the infrared part, which is half of the power of the sun, is invisible.

Currently, the best plastic solar cells could only harness 6% of the suns energy, with further study and development, this new plastic solar cells are expected to harness 30% of the suns solar power.

Scientists and researchers alike agree that ultimately, solar farms will be harnessing all our energy requirements and costs of power will drop. Today the price of solar powered energy is about 3 to 4 times per kilowatt hour compared with conventional electricity. That could change dramatically though the development of the existing technology and recent discoveries.

The roller pressed flexible plastic materials and the polymer foil are only two of the best hopes in arriving at a cleaner, greener and safer environment that could ultimately free the planet from its dependency on the depleting supply of oil.

Alternative energy article by Ben Forbes

Advantages of Biomass As a Source of Energy

As the future and impact of traditional fuels like petroleum and coal come into question biomass is getting more attention as an alternative source of energy.
Biomass is simply any material that is formed by living things. Plants, animals, fungus, micro organisms and even you are biomass. When people talk about biomass they are usually talking about biomass that can be used as a source of energy which is called biofuel.
Fossil fuels like coal and petroleum are believed to be the remains of ancient plants and animals so they are biomass too but when people talk about biomass they are usually referring to material that comes from living things today.
The major advantage of biomass is that it is renewable and considered carbon neural. Unlike fossil fuels biomass is part of the current natural carbon cycle so there is no long term net increase in carbon in the atmosphere when biofuels are burned.
Many biofuels can be produced from waste materials that come from producing other agricultural and forest products. In this case energy is being utilized that would otherwise have gone to waste.
It's a domestic source of energy that is less influenced by political instability and world events. Using biofuel supports local economies.
Unfortunately biofuels haven't been cost competitive with most other sources of energy. So far as a fuel for cars or for generating electricity the cost and energy loss from converting biomass into other forms of fuel and energy are too great. Advances in technology could make it more practical in the future but so far we aren't there yet.
There is an exception to this and that is using biomass for direct heating. People have been heating by burning biomass like wood for thousands of years. This old technology may still be proving to be the most efficient way to utilize biomass energy.
Traditional wood heat may not be practical for most people but wood and other biomass pellets are a practical alternative. Pellet stoves are becoming more popular and are almost as convenient and clean burning as traditional heating systems.
For people who want to use biomass for energy they can do so today by switching to pellets for home heating.

Alternative energy article by M Wilson

Eco-Friendly Transportation Choices

People are wising up to the fact that non-renewable sources of energy will eventually run out. Thus, the green movement, which promotes more earth friendly options, has flourished. From green buildings to hybrid vehicles to sustainable farming practices to going organic, there's many ways to go green. One of the best ways to go green is to choose a more eco-friendly transportation method.

Hybrid vehicles are growing in popularity and a large number of people all over the world are looking to buy these vehicles or starting to consider them more. Hybrid vehicles generally combine two sources of power for a vehicles, often with regular gas as the backup option. Some vehicles use CNG (compressed natural gas) as fuel, and these have very low emissions. Similarly, in Asian countries, a lot of vehicles have a LPG (liquefied petroleum gas) kit installed in them. This costs less than gas and the emissions are almost negligible. Electric vehicles are also growing in popularity. One may have to compromise on speed with these vehicles but they can be easily charged and electricity is much cheaper than gas or other energy options. The future may even see cars and vehicles running on solar energy. A lot of research is going into solar and sometime soon you just might see solar powered vehicles make their way on to the market.
In some countries, the concept of 'green trains' has been introduced. These trains use permanent magnet motors that provide increased propulsion chain efficiency. Along with this, the traction energy is also reduced and less harm is caused to the environment. The operating cost of these trains is also relatively low and this is perhaps the reason why many new trains are based on this concept.

The standard public modes of transportation are also being given serious consideration by the governments of various countries across the globe. In some countries, old buses are being replaced by newer ones that operate on CNG or LPG. In some urban cities, the government has placed a fine on those vehicles that do not pass the pollution check test.

Not only are these vehicles eco friendly, but many also have a low operating cost. More eco-friendly cars are becoming available and as the years go by, prices seem to be coming down. At present, only a few companies manufacture eco-friendly cars, but as the market grows, more companies will start manufacturing 'green vehicles'. The world is certainly taking an interest in reducing the pollution caused due to vehicles that run on diesel and gas. Much research is being carried out and new models of eco-friendly transportation are being developed all the time.

Alternative energy article by by Lydia Quinn

What Hybrid Cars Will Look Like In The Future?

A hybrid car is a vehicle that combines and uses the strengths of an electric as well as a gas powered engine. Hybrid car is a pollution-free, economical and eco-friendly option over the traditional gas powered and electric powered cars. The car has two sources of energy, which also result in fuel economy improvement. Hybrid cars are also referred to as hybrid electric vehicles.
In the recent years, many leading car companies like Honda, Toyota and Ford etc. have introduced hybrid cars and have captured the hybrid car market. Due to its benefits, many people want to buy a hybrid car, not only because it is cost-effective but also because of global warming and usage of non-renewable resources. Unfortunately, hybrid cars remain the most expensive cars and many people cannot afford to pay for them.

A general view of future hybrid cars is that new features will be added that will make the car more affordable and efficient at the same time.
Hybrid car industry still needs to improve a lot as there is a large market to capture worldwide.

In future, many companies have focused on making the car more affordable and more innovative. To capture the potential market for hybrid cars, there will definitely be many innovative features that will change the outlook of the hybrid cars completely.

One of the expected changes in hybrid cars in future is its change from gas-electric hybrid to diesel-electric hybrids. The diesel hybrids will be more efficient, but it will increase the car cost greatly. For this purpose, development in hybrid batteries will be the area of focus. A lithium-ion battery in hybrid cars is a good solution to the problem. A lithium-ion battery costs half of the NiMH battery, used in the hybrid cars today, and is three times more efficient.
Since renewable bio-fuels have gained popularity, they are also being considered to be used in hybrid cars. It is expected that many companies will introduce Flex-fuel Hybrid cars. Hydrogen is also a form of fuel that can be used, and companies like Toyota and Ford are working on the Hydrogen Hybrids.


It s also expected that future hybrid cars will be electrified. Electrified vehicle is something very innovative; it will take a little time for engineers to work on it, but it will change the automotive industry completely. Electrified vehicle will need to be plugged in and charged. These cars will be more efficient, environment friendly, clean and safe.
Hybrid cars will not only change in models and designs over the coming years, but will also be more cost-effective. The changes expected in the hybrid car market include low price batteries and Electric Assist. The use of the technology, new features and more automation will change the look of hybrid cars completely.

One can have an idea from some of the hybrid cars that are planned to be released in near future. These hybrid cars include Chevy Volt, BMW X5 Mild Hybrid, Dodge Zeo hybrid, Chrysler ecoVoyager, Ford Freestyle, GM Denail XT hybrid truck, Ford Five Hundred. Hyundai Sonata Hybrid, Porsche Cayenne hybrid, Toyota Prius Plug-in hybrid and Volvo Recharge, planned to be released in 2010 or later.

Alternative energy article by Danny Green

Solar lights are the best solution

Solar energy

Amongst the alternative sources of energy, solar energy is the best and most suitable alternate source of energy. It is environment friendly and is economical too. More and more innovation is being carried out in this field of energy. Solar energy is being widely used in lighting homes, offices and is used for lighting gardens, outdoor lighting, etc.

Advantages of solar lights:
-Economical: It is so economical that now most of the outdoor lighting is being done with solar lights and the conventional lighting using electric power is being withdrawn. As a result, considerable amount is being saved on electricity bill.
-Environment friendly: There is no carbon emission in production of solar lightings. Water or uranium is not required in production of electricity by use of solar power.
-It is natural: The solar energy is totally environment friendly. In the conventional form of production of electric power, there are chances that it may cause damage to the environment. For example, uranium that is used in producing electricity by atomic reactors may harm environment. There is ample scope to harness the natural energy of sun and so it is renewable energy.
-Installation is easy: Solar lights do not require to be connected to any wire. Each light is independent by itself and there is nothing like power grid to distribute the power to various lights installed. They are safe and do not harm children or animals because they do not create any heat.
-Low maintenance cost: As said earlier, solar lights do not require any wiring. In many cases they do not require bulbs also. There are no transformers to distribute the power. So maintenance cost is almost 'Nil'.

Solar lights are now gaining importance as the best alternative to conventional lighting. This has prompted the scientists to conduct further research to perfect the solar lighting technology. With dwindling natural resources and huge cost of excavating the existing natural resources, this alternative source of energy appears to be the best choice. One can tap this energy as long as the sun exists. Of course, the limitation factor is that it may not be effective during cloudy season and during night time. Scientists are making every effort to address this shortcoming of solar energy. The day is not far off when the scientists will come out with a solution and solar lights will be the next generation lights that we see shortly.

article by Adam Jackson

Hydrogen car

Hydrogen car

A hydrogen vehicle is an alternative fuel vehicle that uses hydrogen as its onboard fuel for motive power. The term may refer to a personal transportation vehicle, such as an automobile, or any other vehicle that uses hydrogen in a similar fashion, such as an aircraft. The power plants of such vehicles convert the chemical energy of hydrogen to mechanical energy (torque) in one of two methods: combustion, or electrochemical conversion in a fuel-cell:
In hydrogen internal combustion engine vehicles, the hydrogen is combusted in engines in fundamentally the same method as traditional internal combustion engine vehicles.
In fuel cell vehicles, the hydrogen is reacted with oxygen to produce water and electricity, the latter being used to power an electric traction motor.
Hydrogen fuel does not occur naturally on Earth and thus is not an energy source, but is an energy carrier. It can be made from a number of sources, currently it is most frequently made from methane or other fossil fuels. Hydrogen production via electrolysis of water is generally inefficient and expensive and is rarely used.
Many companies are working to develop technologies that can efficiently exploit the potential of hydrogen energy.

From wikipedia

Hybrid car(more picture)

Ford Escape Hybrid

Honda Insight - Mild parallel hybrid

Camry Hybrid

Ford Fusion Hybrid

Alternative energy

Alternative energy - Hybrid car

Alternative Energy - Hybrid car

A hybrid electric vehicle (HEV) combines a conventional internal combustion engine propulsion system with an electric propulsion system. The presence of the electric powertrain is intended to achieve either better fuel economy than a conventional vehicle, or better performance. A variety of types of HEV exist, and the degree to which they function as EVs varies as well. The most common form of HEV is the hybrid electric car, although hybrid electric trucks (pickups and tractors) also exist.
Modern HEVs make use of efficiency-improving technologies such as regenerative braking, which converts the vehicle's kinetic energy into battery-replenishing electric energy, rather than wasting it as heat energy as conventional brakes do. Some varieties of HEVs use their internal combustion engine to generate electricity by spinning an electrical generator (this combination is known as a motor-generator), to either recharge their batteries or to directly power the electric drive motors. Many HEVs reduce idle emissions by shutting down the ICE at idle and restarting it when needed; this is known as a start-stop system. A hybrid-electric produces less emissions from its ICE than a comparably-sized gasoline car, as an HEV's gasoline engine is usually smaller than a pure fossil-fuel vehicle, and if not used to directly drive the car, can be geared to run at maximum efficiency, further improving fuel economy. Toyota Prius Hybrid

Honda Civic Hybrid

The hybrid-electric vehicle did not become widely available until the release of the Toyota Prius in Japan in 1997, followed by the Honda Insight in 1999. While initially perceived as unnecessary due to the low cost of gasoline, worldwide increases in the price of petroleum caused many automakers to release hybrids in the late 2000s; they are now perceived as a core segment of the automotive market of the future.Worldwide sales of hybrid vehicles produced by Toyota reached 1.0 million vehicles by May 31, 2007, and the 2.0 million mark was reached by August 31, 2009, with hybrids sold in 50 countries. Worldwide sales are led by the Prius, with cumulative sales of 1.43 million by August 2009.The second-generation Honda Insight was the top-selling vehicle in Japan in April 2009, marking the first occasion that an HEV has received the distinction. American automakers have made development of hybrid cars a top priority.

Alternative Energy

From wikipedia

Environmental Friendly Alternative Fuels

Environmental Friendly Alternative Fuels

Oil may be the foremost fuel that powers the industry but alternative fuels are increasing in popularity as it is environmentally friendly. Basically, there are fossil fuels which include coal, natural gas and oil and alternative fuels.

Fossil fuels are the fossilized remains of ancient animals and plants and presently power 95% of the world energy usage.

The alternatives to fossil fuels are natural gas, propane, electricity, biodiesel, ethanol, methanol, hydrogen in addition to P-Series fuels and they are just not only appropriate for our environment but for the economy too. Alternative fuels are rising in popularity, especially for vehicles mainly because fossil fuels resources are finite as well as putting less reliant on current energy source and they contribute to less environmental harmful emissions that result in global warming.

The fuels of the future such as biofuels are derived from plants and they are more renewable and environmental friendly than petrol chemicals. Ethanol and biodiesel may provide a cleaner options but they need as much energy and land to make it viable. Biodiesels diminish the dependent on foreign oil as it can be planted domestically but the task is to grow the crops to meet the demand and that might be asking too much. It also has its skeptics as creating the crops needed more energy than they can produce.

Hydrogen, in reality is a very clean fuel but the stumbling block is the cost. Burning fossil fuels add to global warming but the by-product of hydrogen is only oxygen and water. That do not harm our health and the environment but you need fossil fuels to harness it, unless we can employ solar, wind and other to generate it.

Natural gas may be cleaner than gasoline but it is finite and does not generate carbon dioxide.

Wind energy is one of the oldest and the most advance of all the alternative fuels and there are ample potential to harness it.

Hydroelectric energy may be a well developed alternative fuel source but not as receptive as harnessing it can have destructive effect on local environment and habitation.

Solar energy fuel the emergence of the human race as all other energy sources emerge from it.

Nuclear energy is a good substitute but it is too unstable when fall into the unscrupulous people.
Irrespective of what alternative energy sources we consider, it has to be cost effective and time will tell which will emerge as the most viable.

At present we are still very reliant on fossilized fuels and the likely solution in the near future is to prudently make full use of all other alternative fuels in addition to reduce our reliance on fossilized fuels. All things considered, the most ideal option is to conserve by lessening consumption.

About the Author
Jason is environmentally conscious and will like to see an emergence of a viable alternative fuel in the near future. Check out the website at http://www.researchalternativefuels.com/

The Alternative - Free Energy

The Alternative - Free Energy

Much has been discussed over the subject of "free energy" because this definition is supposed to stand for energy that can be directly extracted from atmosphere and in vast quantities, without affecting the environment. The debates have concentrated over whether free energy exists or not and how much it would cost to be used for large scale production; also, controversy has arisen over the terms abundant and efficient; how much do you need to be abundant? How much do you need to become efficient? The potential in research in this area needs to be exploited to its full maximum, therefore new things need to be uncovered before using free energy.
The term "free energy devices" has been coined to serve for multiple purposes. People use this term to describe a device used to collect and transmit energy from one source to another; it is also used to describe something that collects energy without requiring any fees or even to name machine with perpetual motion. Though it is needless to say, recall that the machine that produced perpetual motion by using only energy produced by itself was and is fiction, an impossible concept to put into practice. There is no possible machine on earth that is capable of being turned on and then starting to produce its own energy until infinity, without using any resources from the exterior. Technology, however, has advanced over the course of time and new ones have replaced the old technologies, thus giving rise to more efficient devices and less energy consuming approaches.

Nonetheless, no one can until now, come up with the technology to exploit all the free energy in the space and this idea is also something that hasn't been put into practice until now. Therefore, we needed to exploit the potential of atoms to create huge energy amounts. This fact become possible in the '40s when nuclear power proved to all that we can create incredulous amounts of energy. Flying was also fiction until the Wright Brothers were able to fly for the first time at the beginning of the twentieth century.

Those who support the ideas of "free energy" argue that mankind can utilize large amounts of energy coming from the Field named Zero Point. This represents the states where a defined system enters the mechanical state and then reaches a point in which the lowest energy points is located. Otherwise known as the "ground state", the Zero Point Energy is also known as "residual energy" because you are using an alternative to generate energy. This idea was initially coined by Albert Einstein together with Otto Stern.
This idea is also used to refer to vacuum energy, when studying quantum mechanics for instance. It is utilized in expressing the idea of empty space. The energy field generated inside the vacuum is attributed to the base of waterfall, according to the idea of one of those who proposed the idea, Hal Puthof. Puthof gives an explanation for the zero point, which basically means that provided that the universe is frozen completely, the energy from zero point would still remain there. Even so, it is not quite well known whether these implications are merely derived from the fact that this belongs to quantum physics or whether this is the consequence of another phenomenon. Therefore, finding the reservoir for such a big amount of energy is extremely difficult to do and there are also question on how gravity or inertia affect this side of the discussion.

These questions remain to be answered and they generate a lot of interest along the academia because they prove to be enticing challenging to an ever changing world, where finding the right resources of energies would insure the survival or the demise of the environment. Therefore, mankind needs to make some progress in the category of energy and be able to realistically advance with research. New engineering solutions might be coined in the future to help with the emission rates concerning atoms, molecules, laser research and other potential, interesting topics.

About the Author
Find out from the experts about the career options in alternative energy as well as the availability of government grants for research in alternative energy when you visit http://www.replaceablegas.com, the premier free resources on alternative home energy

Alternative Energy - The Increasing Use of Liquefied Natural Gas

Alternative energy article
The Increasing Use of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) by Chris Jent

When natural gas is cooled at normal pressure to about -260°F, it condenses into a liquid form known as Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG). LNG takes up about one six hundredth the volume of gaseous natural gas making it very efficient to transport. When it is necessary to transport natural gas energy to stranded or mountainous destinations, shipping it as LNG is much more practical. The absence of a pipeline infrastructure to these areas make direct connection of small gas utilities to the pipeline grid impractical.

Liquefied Natural Gas when vaporized to gaseous form, will burn in concentrations of between only 5 and 15 percent mixed with air. Another advantage is that LNG, or any vapor associated with it, will not explode in an unconfined environment. In the unlikely event of an LNG spill, the natural gas has little chance of igniting an explosion. The process of turning natural gas into a liquid form removes from it, oxygen, carbon dioxide, sulfur, and water, resulting in almost pure methane. LNG is a clean fuel and a safe fuel.

Liquefied Natural Gas is usually transported in specialized tankers with insulated walls. The process of auto refrigeration in these tankers is used in which the LNG is kept at its boiling point, so that any heat additions are countered by the energy lost from LNG vapor that is vented out of storage and used to power the vessel. This is another example of the efficiency of LNG.
LNG storage facilities continue to be important in meeting peak demand needs of local utilities and also provide a more economical way to store gas until it is needed. Several niche markets, such as vehicular fuel and using it as an alternative energy to propane for facilities off the pipeline grid, keep LNG in an increasingly high demand whether its from domestic or foreign sources. Replacing propane or other fuels in certain isolated industrial sites such as mineral extraction and forest product facilities has proven to be effective economically. Growth depends on expansion of current facilities and new construction. The need for additional supply sources to meet projected U.S. demand generally coincides with numerous developments in LNG trade on a worldwide basis.

Although Liquefied Natural Gas currently accounts for a small percent of natural gas used in the United States, it is expected that LNG imports will provide a steady, dependable source of natural gas for U.S. consumption. Domestic natural gas exploration companies like Triple Diamond Energy Corporation continue to locate new sources of natural gas as well. Since 2001, companies have announced plans for the construction of LNG import facilities to serve U.S. markets. LNG imported to the United States comes via ocean tanker, and receives the majority of its LNG from Trinidad and Tobago, Qatar, and Algeria. Some other shipments arrive from Nigeria, Oman, Australia, Indonesia, and the United Arab Emirates.

About the Author
Chris Jent is the Chief Marketing Officer of Triple Diamond Energy Corp. Triple Diamond Energy specializes in acquiring the highest quality prime oil and gas properties. For more information, visit http://www.triplediamondenergycorp.blogspot.com.

Alternative energy article

Hydrogen Fuel Cells - How It Works by Jon G. Michel

Hydrogen Fuel Cells - How It Works by Jon G. Michel
Alternative energy article

Converting your car to run on water is a technology based on splitting water on board a vehicle, and using the resulting gases not to drive the vehicle, but rather to boost the efficiency of its combustion. It is a do-it-yourself technology, specifically designed for beginners with no special tools and very limited budgets.

A working system can be built at home with basic hand tools for $20-$100, installed in minutes and removed in seconds. No modifications to the engine, computer or fuel injection systems is needed, so any backyard mechanic can install it easily.

The technology is age old... over 91 years, and all that's been done since then, is raise it from the dead and develop a simple structure based on low cost hardware. Basically, the hardware consists of an electrolyzer, bubbler and water reservoir which have all been combined into one super-simple device.

Another advantage is the employment of coiled/spiraled electrode wires - rather than flat plates or spiraled plates. The magnetic vortex created by the coil assists water splitting, so you don't need as much power from the car's electrical system, thus simplifying the system even further and lowering its cost.

Three major factors work together to cause water splitting; direct current flowing through the electrode wires to the water, the magnetic vortex created by the shape of the electrodes, and the vacuum provided by the engine itself.

The effects of this technology is lowered emissions and improved mileage, simply due to a more complete combustion. Today's internal combustion engines suffer from poor efficiency of 20%-25%, as any mechanic will tell you; 75%-80% of the gasoline, instead of being converted to forward motion, is instead converted to pollution and carbon deposits (unburned fuel), as well as heat (global warming), vibration and noise (knocking/pinging).

The main problem is oversized fuel droplets in the mixture . The hydrogen, being such a small particle, hits a droplet, cuts it into smaller droplets and attaches itself to the smaller droplets. Now the finer, hydrogen-enhanced mixture, is capable of burning more thoroughly. That basically explains hydrogen fuel cells and how they work.

On top of improved performance, the engine steam-cleans itself every day, and the resulting effect is smoother and quieter operation.
This technology is not capable of running a car on water alone. The aim is not to replace gasoline but to enhance it, and open the door and the mind to the possibilities of water to fuel technology. With correct fine tuning you can double the mileage, rendering a new energy balance... half gasoline, half water.

Very little water is used, in an economy car it's around 2700 miles per gallon of distilled water, together with 4-6 teaspoons of household baking soda as catalyst. Tests have demonstrated many times that the fuel consumption of a 4-stroke generator can also be cut in half with this technology.

Not all cars, loads and driving conditions will gain the same, obviously. For ethical reasons one would not build up expectations for more than 10%-50% improvement in fuel economy, however there are daily success stories from experimenters who are seeing gains of 80%-100% in various vehicles. For some, significant economy gains inflict a revelation that something can be done about it, while for others it's a life changing factor.

There are books that teach everything about the technology and how to manufacture it. Like in the Golden Age of Greece, we're in a period where one has to take advantage of this technology... before there's very little government and corporate america interference. Actually, from what I've heard, government is already making use of this technology in their army hummers. Plus their are contracts on the tables waiting to be signed from the big car manufacturers (hint).
All in all, with today's high prices in gas, this technology has become a buzzword for practicality and affordability. Now something can be done about gas prices, pollution and global warming... all three in one.

At the time of this writing the technology is only for gasoline and diesel cars and trucks. However many experimenters are working on adaptations to propane/LPG/CNG propelled vehicles, as well as boats and other applications such as stationary generators, lawnmowers etc.


About the Author
JG Michel webmaster and publisher, often writes about topics that improves people's lives, such as in this topic. Visit this site for more information on "how to convert your car to run on water"

Alternative energy article

Bioethanol: The Golden Fuel by Andrew Beckers

Bioethanol: The Golden Fuel by Andrew Beckers

With governments like the U.S. backing the bioethanol industry, biomass crop productions are growing. If CO2 emissions can be cut in half by growing and manufacturing conventional farm crops like corn, then bioethanol stands a good chance of becoming the soup du jour from the alternative fuel menu. Yet there are other complications like food price inflation due to increased food scarcity resulting from food being diverted energy creation. Of course one must first decide if bioethanol is really worth it in terms of its "green claims."

What is it, and is it clean enough?
Bioethanol, also called ethyl alcohol, is a non-fossil, high octane fuel with lower emissions than gasoline. Made from renewable agricultural sources, it is a clean fuel for internal combustion engines. Hydrous ethanol contains water and can be used as a gasoline substitute, but requires a modified engine. Dehydrated ethanol can be used in proportions of 5% (E5) to 85% (E85). Most cars today can use E5, and Flex Fuel Vehicles (FFVs) use E85. Both can be blended with conventional fuel.

It does take energy to produce it, and there are concerns related to the large amount of land needed for crops. Another concern is whether such biofuels release more carbon dioxide into the air than can be absorbed by growing plants. A better solution might be a process currently being developed in the U.S., whereby trash like waste paper is broken down into sugar and then converted into ethanol. This would by pass many of the ethical, environmental, and financial issues connected to bioethanol production.

How do they make it?
Bioethanol is obtained through a manufacturing process of fermenting biomass, which contains sugar and starch. Sugar cane is used in tropical areas, primarily wheat in Europe, and corn is produced in the U.S. and Brazil. Rectification and distillation processes turn the biomass into a concentrated form and removes by-products that are no needed in the fuel itself. The negative side of bioethanol as mentioned above is it's use of fertile land for food, which drives the food prices up and locks up usable land to grow more foodstuffs. There has all been great concern amongst certain environmental groups about the waste products left over from manufacturing bioethanol as evidenced in bioethonal pollution finding it's way in to the Gulf of Mexico via the Mississippi River. This of course provides a big argument from within the green fuel camp against bioethanol production and use. Despite it's negative aspects, when the issues have been worked like, which crop to use and where to grow it and of course what to do with the waste, bioethanol stands to be a very powerful clean fuel alternative. One hopes as the oil price continues to stay above 10 dollars that every means necessary is found to make bioethanol as efficient, clean, and financially attractive as possible.

Is your car a FFV?
Many FFV owners may not even know if their car is a FFV. Since most U.S. manufacturers, Japanese and European car manufacturers now produce FFVs, it may be worth checking to see if your car can use bioethanol - and where you can buy it.

Alternative energy article

About the Author
Andrew Beckers writes about information that is important to humanity. Learn more about bioethanol.

Brazil And The Road To Fossil Fuel Independence by James Chandler

Brazil And The Road To Fossil Fuel Independence by James Chandler
Alternative energy article

In the world today, Brazil is the one country that has already taken major steps to greatly reduce their dependence on foreign oil. During the 1973 oil crisis, the Brazilian Government at the time decided to implement their "National Alcohol Program", better known in Brazil as "Proalcool". It was in essence a plan to create an ethanol production infrastructure for the country's automobiles.

Today, 8 out of 10 cars on the road in Brazil run on ethanol. Some run on 100% ethanol. This brilliant program set the stage for ethanol to fulfill the promise of energy independence and freedom from reliance on fossil fuels for the Brazilian people.

The Source
The United States is the largest producer of Ethanol producing about 35% of the world's ethanol. Brazil is a close second producing about 32 to 33% of the world's ethanol. In America, Ethanol is derived from the distillation of sugar that is obtained from corn. In Brazil, ethanol is derived from the sugar cane plant. Sugar cane grows all year round in Brazil. The ethanol derived from sugar cane provides 8 times the energy that was used to make it. Also, the waste material after the sugar is extracted from the cane is used as energy for power plants.

Ethanol burns cleaner than regular gasoline because of the extra oxygen in its chemical makeup. Because ethanol is distilled from a plant, it emits no harmful toxic emissions such as carbon monoxide. The CO2 that is released into the air when ethanol is burned is absorbed by the original plant or biomass (such as the sugar cane plant) that the ethanol was extracted from to begin with, making ethanol a carbon-neutral fuel.

Brazil is poised to greatly surpass the United States in ethanol production worldwide. The road that led to this energy paradigm shift was not so smooth though. In the beginning, the government was subsidizing sugar cane growers. But as soon as oil prices dropped in the early 80's, the government stopped subsidizing sugar cane growers and many of them went out of business. Demand for ethanol had dropped.

The Future
Brazil has managed to achieve a 50% replacement of petroleum by ethanol. Also, 80% of all of Brazil's car fleet is flex-fuel capable. They can run on 100% gasoline or any combination of ethanol/gas mix such as E10, E25, or E85. Brazil is on the road to total oil replacement by ethanol, a notion that doesn't sit well with the national oil company in Brazil; Petrobras. The present sugar cane cultivated area in Brazil dedicated to ethanol production is about 7.4 million acres. It constitutes about 1% of the total arable land. In Brazil, there has been an increase of about 3% a year in ethanol production without having to add to the arable land with more sugar cane plantations. This is due to the refining of extraction technology and the derivation of higher yielding sugar cane plants. It wouldn't be hard for Brazil to achieve 100% replacement in the very near future.

About the Author
If you want to learn more information about ethanol, ethanol production and ethanol products, please stop by All Ethanol and have a look

Alternative energy article