I had heard about electric cars and hybrids, the occasional
solar power van and even cars fueled by biodiesel. But a car that runs on
whiskey? That was a new one.
To those appalled at the thought of precious Scottish whiskey
being expelled through an exhaust pipe instead of consumed, breath easy:
whiskey itself will not be used as the biofuel. Founder of Celtic Renewables
Ltd Martin Tangney has uncovered a way to produce biobutanol, the main
component of biodiesel, from by the by-products of whisky. Draff, the remnants
of grain after fermentation, and pot ale, the residue from the still, are the
two main sources of waste from whiskey production. Currently the draff and
still are dumped into the sea, recycled into animal feed or used as a form of
fertilizer on agricultural fields.
Commenting to Bloomberg, Tangney remarked, “If we can get
this right in Scotland, we can adapt it anywhere. India makes whisky, Japan
makes whisky, Ireland. And Cognac
uses a similar process. A lot of waste ends up in the sea.”
"Biodiesel is biodegradable as sugar and less toxic than table salt"
Biofuel cars release significantly fewer carbon dioxide emissions per mile than gasoline-powered, diesel-fueled and even electric cars. Fewer emissions means cleaner air in cities and less environmental repercussions. "Biodiesel is biodegradable as sugar and less toxic than table salt"
Photo/Quotation credit: http://www.incadventures.com/about/biodieselinfo.htm
Scotland itself deserves some of the accolade for the
motivation behind biofuel innovation and production in the country. Aiming to turn
itself into a “renewable energy hub,” it hopes to supply 100 percent of its
electricity need by renewable resources including wind, water and marine
sources by 2020. In eight years, Scotland plans to jump from 35 percent to 100
percent (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/print/2012-10-04/whisky-to-fuel-cars-as-professor-drives-recycling-plan.html
).
That is quite an ambitious goal.
With such a stake and dependence on big oil companies, the
United States would never dare make such a bold proposition. In 2011, about 9.3
percent of the total United States energy consumption and 12.7 percent of
electricity generation came from renewable energy sources. The EIA, the US
Energy Information Agency, bragged that the former percentage was the “largest share
of energy consumption since 1950” and the latter “the largest share of electricity
generation since 1984” (http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=92&t=4).
It is extremely discouraging that the 2011 figures can only be shone in
positively light by comparing them to sixty and twenty-five year old
statistics. If so much can be done, why are my tax dollars going toward an
extraneous war in the Middle East when they could be trying to rival Scotland’s
100% renewable energy goal? Scotland is not addicted to fossil fuels the way the
US is. Until we decide to break that addiction, our renewable energy technology
will continue to lag behind other countries.
In the United States, it would cost between $0.51 - $0.70 to produce a liter of biodiesel. Though the costs of labor, transportation, electricity for the plant, and other equipment have yet to be factored in, the availability (and cost) of biodiesel does not depend on conditions halfway across the globe. I was unable to track down a figure on the cost to product 1 liter of unleaded regular to compare the two.
Photo credit: http://origin.arstechnica.com/news.media/BiodieselMap.jpg
I approve my tax dollars to do that: fund the development of
biofuel-powered cars.
No comments:
Post a Comment