Switched to Renewable Diesel!

[thinwater]

Originally Posted by waterman46

Just because it is made from chicken fat, exactly why is this stuff any better for the environment?
Still puts same amount of CO2 into atmosphere when burned.

Biodiesel is made from vegetable oils. BD made from animal fats developed a well-earned reputation for gelling in cold weather. There are other uses for animal fats, chiefly animal feed.



[Not an answer to your question, just a clarification.]

[waterman46]

Originally Posted by zstine

I think you need to look into this more. The cause of climate change is moving carbon out of the million+ year old ground deposits by burning fossil fuel.

No, the real cause of climate change has not been determined, but reasonable folks agree that burning ANY fuel might be a contributor. Carbon that is on the surface but not in the air is harmless to the environment. Burning anything including any kind of socalled green fuel is what causes the global warming possibility.

[Compass790]

Never heard of renewable diesel bwindrope so thanks for your post. I like the idea of the higher cetane no. Can't have anything that is less powerful in our boat as it is underpowered anyway.
The smell factor has it's attractions as well. I'd try it if it was available here.

[billgewater]

Anything. Anything. Anything that can help slow down the staggering and clearly dangerous increase in atmospheric CO2 needs support.

[leftbrainstuff]

For those hoping to sleep better at night after switching to bio diesel. I have bad news.

The latest CSIRO and AEMO report shows biomass as the most expensive form of energy based on levellised cost of energy (LCOE). This is the figure investors use to determine the viability of energy generation investments.

https://reneweconomy.com.au/new-csir...nuclear-57530/

[leftbrainstuff]

It relies on access to many of the existing 135 refineries in the US, distributed storage and small scale refining on bases.

I remember a US DLA visit to Australia back in the norties where they described this fall back capability.

Australia for example has zero refineries, only about 12 days of supply in country and little storage capacity and very little distributed storage.

Originally Posted by redneckrob

Where exactly does that vast refining capability exist? In fact the U.S. Army (and all the services) get their fuel through DLA contracts that are let on the open market. If the Army refines any diesel it's very small scale demo projects for renewable and biodiesel.

[auskiwi]

I agree with Leftbrainstuff, I was warned
some years ago by a top engineer not to use bio diesel in my engine due to poor lubricity, as it can cause failure in fuel Injection pumps, my 2 cents worth.

[belizesailor]

Not only are biofuels not "green" they are one of the stupidest ideas mankind has ever come up with...burn food for fuel, brilliant.

Ive seen many of the negative affects here in Central America including deforestation, theft of indigenous lands, increased corn prices (a basic staple food for poor people here), murder of those who organize resistance, etc...

The only thing green about them is the revenue they produce.

[ArmyDaveNY]

LeftBrainStuff answered the question about cost. Until this is addressed, it is unlikely that it will become mainstream unless there is some sort of political intervention that distorts normal markets.

The question of wear is an interesting one. I hope it doesn't turn out like the ethanol fiasco.

The higher cetane is certainly nice. Have there been any reports on how this fuel does in the fuel tank?

[Compass790]

Originally Posted by auskiwi

I agree with Leftbrainstuff, I was warned
some years ago by a top engineer not to use bio diesel in my engine due to poor lubricity, as it can cause failure in fuel Injection pumps, my 2 cents worth.

In NZ at least the bio-diesel has to pass the same lubricity test as the dino stuff.
The refiners have to add a lubricity additive now to dino diesel AFAIK anyway as the allowable sulphur level is so low.

[RaymondR]

Originally Posted by leftbrainstuff

For those hoping to sleep better at night after switching to bio diesel. I have bad news.

The latest CSIRO and AEMO report shows biomass as the most expensive form of energy based on levellised cost of energy (LCOE). This is the figure investors use to determine the viability of energy generation investments.

https://reneweconomy.com.au/new-csir...nuclear-57530/

I would not put to much reliance on any studies coming out of Australian government institutions, they are fairly well all politicized these days.

The Australian state which, on the advice of these folks, opted most heavily for wind and solar and decommissioned their coal fired stations now has the most expensive electrical power in the world and it heavily depends upon one single connection to the coal fired grid in other states for it's reliability requirements. A couple of years ago when a storm interrupted the power flow many parts of the state were without power for weeks. Musky then installed the worlds biggest battery and they now have reliable backup for about three minutes??

There is an island down in Bass Strait which has it's own grid and which attempted to power the grid with "renewables". They have managed to get it to partially work but only by installing diesel backup generators.

Those of us who permanently live aboard and rely upon solar and battery storage know from experience that whilst, with the assistance of the grid and a battery charger or a gas or diesel genset, one can get by. When you apply the cost of backup generators the economics of solar and wind cease to look anywhere as good.

It has become impossible to have any sort of objective debate in Australia on the subject of future grid design due to the activities of the AGM/CC zealots which infest the establishment. The spectrum of activities of these folks ranges from young people who super glue themselves down to city streets to obstruct the flow of rush hour traffic to a political party which holds the balance of power in one house of the national parliament who wants to shut down all coal fired power stations tomorrow and devil take the consequences.

Australia now has no refining capacity and is totally reliant upon imports of refined fuels. There is also no strategic reserve of liquid fuels.

An example of what prevails in Australia as government policy.

In the seventies one of our state capitals flooded. In response the government of the day built a flood prevention dam. Two things then occured: many of the former flood prone areas were opened up for housing development. "Hey bro we don't need to exclude these spots any more, we've got a flood prevention dam."

As the city grew it became obvious that more municipal water storage was required and work was begun on a new dam. Unfortunately the local nimbys (not in my back yard) protested and in order to win their vote at the state election they were promised by one of the political parties that it would cancel the dam if it came to power. They won and cancelled the dam. "Oops, we're a bit short on water storage.", "No problem mate we've got an empty dam we can use, fill her up mate."

Those who know of the fickle nature of the gods know what happened next.

A deluge occurred and the "flood prevention dam" being already full it had to be allowed to flood the city. The usual response, enquiries and blame the poor sods operating the dam, and a monster damages class action suit by those flooded. The good old tax payer picks up the tab, the lawyers get richer, the true guilty escape censure, and life goes on as normal.

Sooner or later we will have to transition away from carbon and hydrocarbon fuels but Australia is not a good model to follow, nor Australian institutions sources of good advice if one is seeking a rational, economically least damaging means of doing so.

Wonderfully civilized place that Australia is, it has more than it's share of crazies and unfortunately many of them are employed in the political and public sectors.

[Dsanduril]

Originally Posted by leftbrainstuff

....Australia for example has zero refineries, only about 12 days of supply in country and little storage capacity and very little distributed storage.

Australia currently has three refineries that produce fuel products and a fourth that produces specialty hydrocarbons.

https://www.exxonmobil.com.au/en-au/...aRefineryFacts

https://www.bp.com/en_au/australia/h.../refining.html

https://www.vivaenergy.com.au/operations/geelong

https://www.aumanufacturing.com.au/l...wnsized-caltex

They may not be around for long, and they rely on imported oil, but they currently provide ~30% of Australia's refined fuel needs.

[valhalla360]

So before they found all these millions of gallons of waste oil (to be used now for ecological fuel), where were they dumping it?

This sounds a lot like rich folks buying carbon credits to justify flying private jets around the world...and claiming they are being eco-friendly.

[Brewgyver]

Originally Posted by zstine

I think you need to look into this more. The cause of climate change is moving carbon out of the million+ year old ground deposits by burning fossil fuel. (snip)

I think you should think about what you are saying, or many if not most people will dismiss your statement entirely.

Any scientist in the field will tell you that ANY sentence that begins "THE cause of climate change..." is false on its face.

Let alone the fact that the climate has been changing pretty constantly for the life of the planet, there are and always have been MANY reasons for that change.

I also expect that any botanist will tell you that the much of the carbon from CO2 taken in by trees remains in the wood, bound up in cellulose. The wood from trees that are farmed for lumber, for example, can keep that carbon bound up for decades, if not centuries.

[zstine]

Originally Posted by Brewgyver

I think you should think about what you are saying, or many if not most people will dismiss your statement entirely.

Any scientist in the field will tell you that ANY sentence that begins "THE cause of climate change..." is false on its face.

Let alone the fact that the climate has been changing pretty constantly for the life of the planet, there are and always have been MANY reasons for that change.

I also expect that any botanist will tell you that the much of the carbon from CO2 taken in by trees remains in the wood, bound up in cellulose. The wood from trees that are farmed for lumber, for example, can keep that carbon bound up for decades, if not centuries.

Waterman46 and Brewgyver: I will try to stick to facts based on evidence...



The claim that "the climate has been changing pretty constantly for the life of the planet" in argument that our current situation is in someway caused naturally is in error. Per Climate.gov, the pre-industrial CO2 levels haven't exceeded 300ppm (highest ~320,000 years ago) for over a million years. Natural variation causing ice ages and warm periods is about 100ppm (180ppm ice age to 280ppm warm). At 410ppm, CO2 levels now exceed the highest natural CO2 level by more than 100ppm! That 100ppm is in no way natural based on the above.



From NASA (under Trump no less) "human activities are changing the natural greenhouse. Over the last century the burning of fossil fuels like coal and oil has increased the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2).. . the United Nations, concluded there's a more than 95 percent probability that human activities over the past 50 years have warmed our planet."



I agree that I should have said "The PRIMARY cause is burning fossil fuels". I have seen that the cause of CO2 rise is anywhere from 65% to 85% due to fossil fuels and the remaining from various stuff like the beef industry, agriculture and deforestation, etc.


What is most disturbing to me is that as an American, we are the largest contributors to CO2 globally per capita (or close to #1) and China is now the world leader in renewable energy production (per Energy Information Administration, International Energy Study).


So as for the OP, BRAVO!! Yes, go for burning anything not from fossil fuel! Thank you... Who Cares if the LCOE is High, so its expensive but helps the environment. If you have the $$ go for it!