This entry was posted
on Wednesday, January 18th, 2006 at 12:55 pm and is filed under Gavin Ayling's blog.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
If we mix a small amount of bioethanol into petrol, the resultant is a product that everyone can use and the oil companies are happy to sell, and burns cleaner than straight petrol. The result? 5% less petrol usage.
Sell the pure product and you need special cars, special tanks, special logistic networks. (The same argument holds for Biodiesel)
Unless you really believe that more than 5% of the product sold can be biofuel, what is the point in the pure fuels other than Ecological Masturbation?
You don’t need special cars or special tanks to use biodiesel in cars. You just need an ordinary diesel car – they can even run on used chip fat (sometimes tinkering is needed, but this doesn’t stop you from putting normal diesel in when you want to – you can mix and match the two fuels).
You would need a new distribution system for biodeisel (or if you want to put a litre of Tesco cooking oil into your car, you have to tell the authorities and pay fuel duty), but the distribution system doesn’t have to be national. If you need to fill up where there is no bio fuel station, you can put ordinary diesel in. Petrol cars are more problematic, as you point out.
The only problem is with capacity. Where the hell is 30bn litres of chip fat going to come from? Perhaps Scotland might have the answer…
But an important question is why Gordon Brown continues to tax ‘fuel’ when it comes from green sources. If cleaner bio-fuels are discouraged as much as fossil-based fuels, people won’t use the cleaner, but less convenient, alternatives.
If petrol duty is about the environment (it isn’t — it’s a left-wing ideology tax, but let’s suppose it is), why isn’t it lower for greener sources?
EU Serf, The government pretends it is concerned about the environment and it pretends it doesn’t want to invade middle-east countries… If that is so, why don’t they take simple measures to remove our dependence and to make the fuel carbon-neutral? This and nuclear could combine to remove all our impact on carbon-emissions eventually.
A lot of the effort involved in growing substantial quantities of biomass (for that’s all it need be) is removed if it does not need to be consumed or kept fresh. Let’s grow water-bound plants in great lit vats and be done with it all!
As you say – get on with it. They dither and prat about, though, do New Labour. Send them an anonomous message that it would finis England off and it will be up and running in the next week or so!
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
#1 by EU Serf on January 19th, 2006 - 3:02 pm
So is the lunacy of the Green movement.
(On the assumption that biofuels are a good idea)
If we mix a small amount of bioethanol into petrol, the resultant is a product that everyone can use and the oil companies are happy to sell, and burns cleaner than straight petrol. The result? 5% less petrol usage.
Sell the pure product and you need special cars, special tanks, special logistic networks. (The same argument holds for Biodiesel)
Unless you really believe that more than 5% of the product sold can be biofuel, what is the point in the pure fuels other than Ecological Masturbation?
#2 by lascivious on January 19th, 2006 - 4:53 pm
You don’t need special cars or special tanks to use biodiesel in cars. You just need an ordinary diesel car – they can even run on used chip fat (sometimes tinkering is needed, but this doesn’t stop you from putting normal diesel in when you want to – you can mix and match the two fuels).
You would need a new distribution system for biodeisel (or if you want to put a litre of Tesco cooking oil into your car, you have to tell the authorities and pay fuel duty), but the distribution system doesn’t have to be national. If you need to fill up where there is no bio fuel station, you can put ordinary diesel in. Petrol cars are more problematic, as you point out.
The only problem is with capacity. Where the hell is 30bn litres of chip fat going to come from? Perhaps Scotland might have the answer…
#3 by Gav on January 19th, 2006 - 6:38 pm
But an important question is why Gordon Brown continues to tax ‘fuel’ when it comes from green sources. If cleaner bio-fuels are discouraged as much as fossil-based fuels, people won’t use the cleaner, but less convenient, alternatives.
If petrol duty is about the environment (it isn’t — it’s a left-wing ideology tax, but let’s suppose it is), why isn’t it lower for greener sources?
EU Serf, The government pretends it is concerned about the environment and it pretends it doesn’t want to invade middle-east countries… If that is so, why don’t they take simple measures to remove our dependence and to make the fuel carbon-neutral? This and nuclear could combine to remove all our impact on carbon-emissions eventually.
A lot of the effort involved in growing substantial quantities of biomass (for that’s all it need be) is removed if it does not need to be consumed or kept fresh. Let’s grow water-bound plants in great lit vats and be done with it all!
#4 by Della on January 21st, 2006 - 12:11 am
As you say – get on with it. They dither and prat about, though, do New Labour. Send them an anonomous message that it would finis England off and it will be up and running in the next week or so!