RE: Hydrogen Economy greatly overrated, biomass underrated...

[Laszlo Paszner <lpaszner@shaw.ca>]

Dear Philip,

I do not intend to get into an argument on the usefulness of wind 
energy.  Considering the developments in Holland in the past, it was 
amazing that it took so long to get back to putting up wind mills world-wide.

Undeniably, no one renewable energy source could carry the world when the 
fossils run out.  The point is, that humanity needs jobs desperately now 
and more so in the future.  May be I am old fashioned and think that 
manufacturing more than the services industry keeps the world primarily 
afloat.  IT has industry has failed because it assumed that all you need to 
do is to organize sales and everything will be O. K.  It was ahead of 
itself.  As manufacturing of goods increased disproportionately to 
consumers, the industry had to slow down and issue pink slips to employees, 
which in turn reduced consumption because suddenly the buying power of 
nearly 15% of the industrialized N American population disappeared.  The 
buying power of the world can only be increased if the job rate in 
developing countries is also increased.  Due to the state of affaires in 
developing countries, that can be done only by creating elementary job 
opportunities as in forestry or agriculture.  It could not be in 
manufacturing as we already have an over-capacity in that sector.  Biomass 
production and its conversion to bioethanol and other energy products is a 
good way to increase the buying power without crowding the manufacturing 
sector with more products.

When I am talking about new jobs, it is primarily for those poor who live 
on subsistence in developing countries without any meaningful income or 
purchasing power.  Various reports put the number at 2-4 billion.  Giving 
these people jobs would expand the customer base for goods and eliminate 
the large surpluses which cause over-production, job lay-offs and recessions.

While production of renewable energy devices (wind turbines and solar PV 
panels) create jobs all right, but after their installation become 
"passive" energy sources as far as permanent jobs are concerned, because 
one job per 10 MW is next to nothing, nor does it make much difference 
whether the landowner makes any money on land rental for the wind 
turbines.  That does not touch the poor masses.  Neither will putting wind 
turbines into a developing country, if the poor have no jobs and disposable 
income for buying the power.  Loans to developing countries to install wind 
and solar power directs the aid to the wrong segment of society and will 
not significantly decrease poverty while at the same time create potential 
new sources of income for the petrochemical companies which seem to own 
these technologies and have no interest in re-investing the funds where 
they earn them.

The story is different for bioethanol.  For securing sustainable biomass 
sources the profits need to be re-invested in afforestation (at least in 
part) and thereby generate (continue to generate) jobs for the 
poor.   Bioethanol (also requiring 125 permanent workers for every 45 
million L/yr ethanol production) on the other hand will profit the country 
in two ways:  1. if part of the bioethanol is used to generate power 
(electricity) with fuel cells at the site where the biomass is grown and 
the bioethanol  manufactured, electricity becomes available locally and the 
surplus wheeled only to the cities.  2. City diesel electric generators 
would be adopted for running on bioethanol (partially, if not entirely) 
thus saving on imported diesel fuel.  If the biomass program is large 
enough in each country, the surplus bioethanol, beyond that required for 
local power generation, can be exported to save on the balance of payment 
of foreign exchange.  I doubt it that power generated by wind and solar 
power would be an exportable item. On the other hand, to benefit from wind 
and solar power, to eliminate wasting power, it would have to be used in 
manufacturing of goods and thereby this activity would create competition 
in many sectors.  In this way we would be back where we are now: recessions 
and lay-offs for lack of markets.  Does this limit growth potential in 
developing countries?  For now, no.  In the future, I admit: yes.  The 
solution?

It appears that for poverty eradication a partial solution is the right 
solution.  If SUNCOR and Shell has trouble selling wind turbines and solar 
panels in Canada because they are too expensive, how could developing 
countries afford them?  Of course, if the World Bank and IMF pays for them, 
who cares, the developing countries can be tossed in debt for ever 
again.  Will they fade away with their demand to improve their living 
standards?  I doubt it.  Being busy to create existence does not eliminate 
social unrest any more.  For the first time in history, some real demands 
were made for implementation of programs for poverty eradication at 
Johannesburdg.  I am sure we will hear more from the African countries on 
this in the near future.

Regards,

Laszlo Paszner
Professor Emeritus
UBC, Dept. Wood Science
SURREY, B.C., V4P 1C2
Tel: 604 538 1349
Fax: 604 538 5108
e-mail: lpaszner@shaw.ca




At 04:25 PM 9/22/2002 -0400, you wrote:
>Dear All,
>
>I disagree with Laszlo that only ethanol production produces jobs all the
>way through production. Wind energy for example produces jobs "all the way
>through" as well, starting with exploration (wind resource assessment etc.),
>continuing with the production of the wind energy equipment, construction of
>the wind farm and then the operation and maintenance of the wind farm
>(approximately 1 direct permanent maintenance job for each 10 MW of wind
>energy equipment, plus the additional jobs created from parts production
>etc.).  Besides creating permanent jobs in the manufacturing and the O&M of
>the wind turbines wind energy generates extremely important new cash flow
>for farmers with only minimal negative impact on their farming operations
>(only about 1% of the land is taken out of production for access roads and
>wind turbine placement).
>
>I believe renewables  such as wind energy are truly the missing link for the
>hydrogen economy since only through renewable energy can we make a hydrogen
>economy sustainable and realize the benefits of lower pollution. If the
>hydrogen is produced from natural gas and other fossil fuels then we will
>have just transferred the pollution from one place to another.
>
>I also believe that pure hydrogen is the way to go within a hydrogen
>economy, since reformers have the nasty side effects of producing carbon
>monoxide and other undesirable effects. At the end of the day all renewable
>energy technologies will have to be deployed in a joint effort with each
>having their specific benefits and disadvantages if we want to make it in a
>hydrogen economy. By integrating the transportation sector through the
>production of hydrogen via  electrolysis from off peak wind energy for
>example we can mitigate one of the disadvantages of wind energy, namely
>being an intermittent energy source.
>
>By the way the world has many times its energy requirements available in the
>form of wind energy alone, so the future is bright for renewables, we just
>need to have some vision and reallocate some of our resources away from
>supporting fossil fuel.
>
>
>
>Regards,
>
>Philipp Andres
>Senior Vice President & General Manager
>Vestas-Canadian Wind Technology, Inc.
>R.R.#5
>1475 Concession 5
>Kincardine, Ontario N2Z 2X6
>Canada
>Tel:   (519) 396-6922
>Fax:  (519) 396-6158
>e-fax & voice mail: (416) 352-5901
>e-mail 1: pandres@vestas-awt.com
>e-mail 2: pandres@bmts.com
>
>  -----Original Message-----
>From:   Laszlo Paszner [mailto:lpaszner@shaw.ca]
>Sent:   Sunday, September 22, 2002 2:03 AM
>To:     Harry W. Parker; Tom Reed; bioenergy; Stoves; gasification; Milne,
>Thomas
>Cc:     John Reardon; Al Balch
>Subject:        Re: Hydrogen Economy greatly overrated, biomass underrated...
>
>
>Dear All,
>
>Discussion of the impending hydrogen economy is very appropriate.  However,
>it is unlikely that it will be pure hydrogen which we would be
>using.  There are plenty of liquid fuels, including the renewable ethanol,
>that can provide the hydrogen.  In fact a recent study at MTU Munich,
>Germany shows that we could run fuel cells (SOFCs) on as low as 10% ethanol
>and still get around 40% conversion efficiency.  Vodka-strength (40%)
>ethanol gets 60% conversion efficiency.  Methane, while a good hydrogen
>source, is non-renewable if from natural gas, and too difficult to collect
>and transport/export any distance (from Africa to the USA) if from
>MSW.  Process of conversion is also very slow.  None of these constraints
>hold with ethanol.  In fact, it must be emphasized, that ethanol from
>biomass is the only energy form which generates jobs every step of the way
>viz., from growing the seedlings to harvesting the timber and manufacturing
>the ethanol.  None of the other renewable energy forms will generate jobs
>after installing the  energy devices.
>
>It is not too difficult to imagine that in 15-20 years oil and natural gas
>will be in short supply.  Does anybody have a better idea as to what will
>be the future renewable energy source, other than biomass?  The choice is
>limited.  Bioethanol will be a good fuel requiring little or no change in
>the infrastructure for liquid fuel distribution and organic chemicals
>production (all/most by fermentation of sugars).  I do realize that this
>seems to be so simple and natural, however we must take a pencil and a
>calculator and figure out how much biomass will be required to displace the
>world transportation fuel (about 750 billion L/yr), at least 40% of the
>world electricity (now around 30 million MW) and 50% of the world organic
>chemicals production (in excess of 100 million T/yr).  When you look at
>these numbers and assume that the average ethanol yield will be about 350
>L/T dry wood matter, the biomass required turns out to be staggering;
>anywhere from twice to four times the total harvestable biomass production
>(today) of the world (about 2 billion T/yr).
>
>Thus if the world is concerned about the poor and our energy future, all we
>have to do is to initiate an intensive afforestation program world-wide,
>this will give the poor a disposable income, while at the same time prepare
>the world for the impending collapse of the fossil fuel economy.  Since we
>have no idea how the global warming will play out in the long run, and
>assuming the worst, afforestation seems to be the safest energy reserve
>program which will not stare us in our eyes 20 years from now.  The lead
>time for new increased volumes of harvestable biomass is from 8 to 40
>years.  In the meanwhile, we should gradually increase the use of renewable
>residues (N. America has about a billion T/yr biomass wastes) and convert
>it to bioethanol.  Do not underestimate the significance of
>bioethanol.  Ben Wiens, a former Ballard Power fuel cell stack development
>engineer, swears that the fuel of the future for fuel cells is going to be
>ethanol, provided we can make enough of it in time.
>
>We need to think the energy issues globally, not locally.  Smaller size
>conversions are easy to organize on a local scale, the global strategy will
>require real commitment.  I wonder who are the real visionaries?  I
>certainly could use some help with getting a solvent assisted wood
>hydrolysis process commercialized which starts with dissolution of wood to
>its monomeric sugar component, lignin and extractives and separates the
>components to refine them to high value products.  The wood substance
>recovery is >98% and ethanhol yield about 94% of theoretical from the
>hexoses (glucose and ammnose).  Xylose goes to sweeteners (xylitol),
>microbial cellulose and other high value fermentation products.  The
>ethanol value is only 10% of the total value recovered and the ROI for 350
>T/day dry feedstock capacity plant is 35-54%.  This is certainly the best
>process for wood hydrolysis today.
>
>Dr. Laszlo Paszner
>Professor Emeritus
>UBC, Dept. Wood Science
>VANCOUVER, B.C.
>Tel: 604 538 1349
>Fax: 604 538 5108
>
>
>
>
>
>At 03:59 PM 9/21/2002 -0500, Harry W. Parker wrote:
> >Hello all,
> >
> >Yes, Tom is right about the H2 economy.  The H2 economy is imagination
> >obscuring the reality of economical energy requirements for the
> >continuance of  our whole society, as per my paper "Essentials of
> >Essential Consumption", which is available upon e-mail request..
> >
> >Fuel cells for economic personal transportation is also imagination
> >obscuring the reality of providing less polluting transportation fuels and
> >for  CO2 management with less costly technologies.
> >
> >Harry
> >
> >Harry W. Parker, Ph.D., P.E.
> >Professor of Chemical Engineering
> >   & Consulting Engineer
> >Texas Tech University
> >Lubbock, TX 79409-3121
> >806.742.1759 fax 742.3552
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>-
>Bioenergy List Archives:
>http://www.crest.org/discussion/bioenergy/200207/
>
>Bioenergy List Moderator:
>Tom Miles,  tmiles@trmiles.com
>List-Post: <mailto:bioenergy@crest.org>
>List-Help: <mailto:bioenergy-help@crest.org>
>List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:bioenergy-unsubscribe@crest.org>
>List-Subscribe: <mailto:bioenergy-subscribe@crest.org>
>
>Sponsor the Bioenergy List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
>-
>Other Bioenergy Events and Information:
>http://www.bioenergy2002.org
>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon


-
Bioenergy List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/bioenergy/200207/

Bioenergy List Moderator:
Tom Miles,  tmiles@trmiles.com
List-Post: <mailto:bioenergy@crest.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bioenergy-help@crest.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:bioenergy-unsubscribe@crest.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:bioenergy-subscribe@crest.org>

Sponsor the Bioenergy List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
-
Other Bioenergy Events and Information:
http://www.bioenergy2002.org
http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon