Los Angeles: 3 million gal./year ethanol plant fueled by wood/paper waste

[HoosierRon]

LA County to weigh allowing ethanol plant

LANCASTER, Calif.—Los Angeles officials this week will consider whether to approve the county's first ethanol plant.

Irvine-based BlueFire Ethanol says its plant proposed for Lancaster would be the first commercial facility in the nation to process biowaste into ethanol.
Ethanol is an alcohol added to gasoline to make it burn cleaner. . . .

The county Planning Commission will consider the proposal Wednesday, and construction on the $30 million plant could start as early as next month.

California will have five ethanol plants operating by the end of August.

[PRO_USA1776]

I am all for alternate energy, but what about the termites food supply? How dare the US of A lessen its dependency on foreign oil off the backs of termites! How dare they!

[hercman]

A step in the right direction.

[osv_alero]

1 step closer to just using actual waste.

[K-1]

Is anyone working on a smug->biofuel conversion?

[Greg Burr]

Originally Posted by osv_alero

1 step closer to just using actual waste.

A big step in the right direction, but yes, a solution that does not drive up demand for food or recyclable materials would be even better.

[TruckMan]

Great. Now particle board/MDF/engineered lumber/paper prices will be going up.

[HoosierRon]

Originally Posted by TruckMan

Great. Now particle board/MDF/engineered lumber/paper prices will be going up.

Why do you take the attitude that the manufacturers of particle board are entitled to cheap raw materials, but the manufacturers of cellulosic ethanol are not? If particle board manufacturers would stop consuming so much cellulose, we would not have to pay so much for cellulosic ethanol.

The bottom line is that both manufacturers will compete for the product, and which ever one makes the product most desired by the public will be able to afford the raw materials. I am sure that OPEC does not want the United States using its resources to make fuel, and I understand your agreement with OPEC. But there actually are Americans who want to spend their money on American ethanol rather than OPEC oil or particle board.

[camaro_freak]

Originally Posted by osv_alero

1 step closer to just using actual waste.

one step closer to Mr Fusion!

[eb110americana]

California will have five ethanol plants operating by the end of August.

That's surprising. I've lived here my whole life (in northern and southern California) and I've never seen E85 ethanol sold anywhere. I'm sure there are a few boutique stations somewhere, but they're the exception.

Edit, we have 4 of 'em for the entire state:
http://e85vehicles.com/e85-california.htm

[Ed Arcuri]

We can hope that Los Angeles County will approve the project. It could prove to be a watershed moment.
In the meantime:
There are no cars available, that I want to buy, that are E85 compatible. (Iwant E85 in a GM sports car).
California just got a huge gift from the rest of the country in movie viewership this weekend and California still uses more gas than any state in the Union and . . . Yet . . .
California still stonewalls against drilling for U.S. oil 50 miles or more off the U.S. coast.
I appreciate the optimism. It may be misplaced.
The Speaker of the House is one of many rich California women whose husbands' fortunes have allowed them to dabble in politics. She has refused to allow a vote on drilling.
In my opinion, that is because she knows she'd lose. The effort to force us out of our cars continues unabated.
I read a great deal of complaining that U.S. auto manufacturers did not see "this" coming. How many things are happening presently which we are missing?
Cheers,
Ed Arcuri
"Nothing is impossilbe for he who doesn't have to do it." The Admiral's Rule.

[Ming]

Originally Posted by TruckMan

Great. Now particle board/MDF/engineered lumber/paper prices will be going up.

Dude, and I was just going to do my living room up in wood paneling...!

[TruckMan]

Originally Posted by HoosierRon

Why do you take the attitude that the manufacturers of particle board are entitled to cheap raw materials, but the manufacturers of cellulosic ethanol are not? If particle board manufacturers would stop consuming so much cellulose, we would not have to pay so much for cellulosic ethanol.

The bottom line is that both manufacturers will compete for the product, and which ever one makes the product most desired by the public will be able to afford the raw materials. I am sure that OPEC does not want the United States using its resources to make fuel, and I understand your agreement with OPEC. But there actually are Americans who want to spend their money on American ethanol rather than OPEC oil or particle board.

First of all - I don't think anybody is entitled to anything. But when I look at problems facing our economy, I see the production of Ethanol as being one of the least important accomplishments - especially when it's being attributed to the artificial inflation of produce, and now construction and business materials. Sure, people would love for the US to be energy independent, or at least to stop buying OPEC oil - me included. But when you ask those same people if they'd be willing to pay substantially more for energy, food, construction material, business supplies, etc. to support that measure, I bet at least 70% of those people change their minds - me included. What substantial benefits are gained from not buying cheap OPEC oil? Other than peace of mind - not much else. If we can find a way to generate usable energy from sources that don't inflate other aspects of our economy, then I'm all for it. But if we continue to damage our own economy as a whole to prove a point in one small sector of the economy, there's a net loss and everybody suffers.

[HoosierRon]

Originally Posted by TruckMan

First of all - I don't think anybody is entitled to anything. But when I look at problems facing our economy, I see the production of Ethanol as being one of the least important accomplishments - especially when it's being attributed to the artificial inflation of produce, and now construction and business materials. Sure, people would love for the US to be energy independent, or at least to stop buying OPEC oil - me included. But when you ask those same people if they'd be willing to pay substantially more for energy, food, construction material, business supplies, etc. to support that measure, I bet at least 70% of those people change their minds - me included. What substantial benefits are gained from not buying cheap OPEC oil? Other than peace of mind - not much else. If we can find a way to generate usable energy from sources that don't inflate other aspects of our economy, then I'm all for it. But if we continue to damage our own economy as a whole to prove a point in one small sector of the economy, there's a net loss and everybody suffers.

Cheap OPEC oil? The United States DOES NOT HAVE 700 billion dollars to give away every year. That is what is damaging our economy, not paying an extra 5 cents for a box of corn flakes.

Furthermore, it is curious that you embrace studies from the likes of Greenpeace, but ignore those by Merrill Lynch that concludes gasoline is 50 cents per gallon cheaper because of ethanol.

[TruckMan]

Originally Posted by HoosierRon

Cheap OPEC oil? The United States DOES NOT HAVE 700 billion dollars to give away every year. That is what is damaging our economy, not paying an extra 5 cents for a box of corn flakes.

Furthermore, it is curious that you embrace studies from the likes of Greenpeace, but ignore those by Merrill Lynch that concludes gasoline is 50 cents per gallon cheaper because of ethanol.

Fear mongering statements such as these will give you little credibility.

Last time I checked, "giving away" means you receive nothing in return. We are buying oil from an international market - because we have determined that is cheaper to buy it from them than produce it ourselves. The plethora of restrictions placed on our local industries has forced them to look elsewhere for cheaper sources of material. That's what you do when you have an international/free trade economy. And if you'd do a search for inflation over the last year or so, I think you'll find that it's much higher than "5 cents for a box of corn flakes." Inflation has increased faster over the last year than probably ever before in US history, and produce is one of the worst hit categories.

And claiming that Ethanol has saved us 50 cents on a gallon of gas is also misleading. Does that take into account the reduction in fuel economy caused by ethanol blends? I highly doubt it. And seeing as how a large percent of the US has little to no access to ethanol blends, I can hardly believe 50 cents a gallon of savings. That's 12% at $4.00 gas. A bit of a stretch in my opinion.