It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Petrol must now include biofuels

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 10:56 AM
link   

Petrol must now include biofuels


news.bbc.co.uk

All petrol and diesel which is sold at UK pumps now has to include at least 2.5% biofuels.

These renewable fuels, made from crops such as sugar cane or maize, have been added to fuel sold around the country.

This target will rise to 5% by 2010. The move is aimed at making transport fuels more environmentally friendly and will not change how cars work.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 10:56 AM
link   
So there you have it.
Major decisions being made without consent. And such a strange decision to make in this time of rising food prices too.

IMO, there does seem to be a darker agenda behind all this. Surely they realise that use of food for fuel is going to make a major impact on the world population especially when a large number of European farmland is set aside and not actually growing anything right now.

I'd be happier with fuel rationing rather than use food for fuel.

news.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 11:04 AM
link   
This is bloody stupidity on behalf of the government.

The problems with the majority of biofuels are that they use food stocks to produce.

This is going to ramp up food prices further and cause even more to starve... and all for some piddly 5% biofuel additive that will do nothing major.

Theres even some debate about whether biofuels are carbon-neutral due to the amount of fuel used to transport the biofuels, to grow them etc.

I worked on biofuels using Jatropha Curcas L. seed stocks, which cannot be used for food. Such alternatives would stop corn, sugarcane etc prices being ramped up.



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 11:08 AM
link   
This is really starting to concern me. A few days ago it was announced that across the USA approx 9% LESS corn will be planted this year.

Farmers to plant less corn

With food prices skyrocketing and more mandates for more biofuels why who corn crops be REDUCED? It seems to fly in the face of all logic.



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 11:08 AM
link   
As an owner of a "supercar" that relies on a high-octane fuel to be used in it, I would like to know the technical implications of this "addative".

Or will the produce a "normal" fuel with the 2.5% biofuel mixed in and a stupidly overpriced highoctane non-biofuel for the rest of us?



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 11:41 AM
link   
It is indeed a stupid situation.

In the UK you can buy 'lead free petrol' that's safe to use on older cars that used to require the lead in the petrol in order to preform as designed.

This, according to some, is just a scam.

Apparently, it is generally believed that the lead free petrol is nothing more than the standard un-leaded petrol but with a different label.

Either way, the use of food as fuel is wrong and the planting of less corn is even more wrong and is just another pointer towards a possible 'dark scheme' to reduce the worlds population through starvation whilst keeping the major wheels of the machine grinding along so as to prop up developed countries while everyone else dies.



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 11:58 AM
link   
Mandated as an additive and farmers will be growing less corn? Good stuff.

I just found this info today which makes me even happier:

2 ethanol fill ups = food for 3 children for a year

Good thing nobody is going hungry. Oh, right.

Gotta love it when the people with all the guns and all the jails know what's best for all of us useless feeders.



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 12:20 PM
link   
Now that this Bio-Fuel additive becomes mandatory, the demand will grow, thus pushing up the price of the bio-fuel and, as a consequence, the price of fuel at the pumps will increase even more.
Meanwhile, people starve and the food that IS available get's traded by the big Agri-Corps at even higher prices.

This whole food shortage seems, to me at least, to be a blatantly engineered event. Brought about as a direct consequence of the climate change pluggers and their ill conceived thought processes. Fuel price increases, food price increases, mass starvation of third world nations. It all seems far too well planned. I mean, it's not difficult to see that diverting food crops to fuel production would cause a massive drop in the available food supply. Plenty of people were warning about this long ago but were ignored and called alarmists.


apc

posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 12:27 PM
link   

He added: "Fertilizer is very expensive. Farmers don't have the money to put extra nitrogen on their fields. That would be wasteful and cut into their profits."

So what do they do with the harvest leftovers? The green leaves and stalks. Compost it and put it back into the ground and you've got free nitrogen. All this reliance on expensive fertilizers it's no surprise farmers have to switch crops to cut costs. If they would just take the initial investment of time and even enter into an organic coop they would have plenty of fresh nitrogen rich compost which would greatly improve their soil quality and yields anyway. This increased demand for corn is driving up the prices which means greater profits for the farmer who successfully produces it. It's a shame to take the easy route and switch to soybean.

These mandated fuel additives are absurd. If I want ethanol in my fuel, I'll find a station that pumps it. If I want biofuel, I'll get it. But if I want straight good old unleaded, why the Hell can't I find it?! If there was a demand for these fuels the stations would voluntarily start carrying them. But nooo... government knows what's best.



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 12:39 PM
link   
A picture is worth a thousand words.



Says it all doesn't it?
.



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 07:20 PM
link   
Use an octane booster to get it up to 99 RON mate, but do it quietly in your garage!



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 07:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gools
A picture is worth a thousand words.




Nice... stared.

This is whacked - where to begin?

The UK is a puppet! - we are just following something.. and none of us (inc. that self pleasure'r Gordon
) know just what that is... The UK was sold off a couple of decades ago so far as I can figure - that's why our major 'export
' has been financial services.



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 07:51 PM
link   
Don't you people remember that they discovered a bacteria that can turn basically ANY plant (not just corn) into ethanol fuel?

www.washingtonpost.com...



[edit on 15-4-2008 by ALLis0NE]



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 07:51 PM
link   
Ethanol, has about 110 octane. So I imagine bio diesel would be pretty high as well.

www.biodieselamerica.org...



Like diesel fuel, bio diesels combustibility is measured with a ?cetane? rating. Octane ratings are only for gasoline engines and there is no correlation between the two ratings. Bio diesel generally has a cetane rating of between 50-60 whereas diesel fuel generally has a cetane rating of between 40-50. Biodieselss higher cetane rating is due to its higher oxygen content and superior combustion properties.


You would be raising your octane.


[edit on 15-4-2008 by ALLis0NE]



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 07:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Extralien
 


There's no need to use food crops to produce fuel. NO NEED.

Farmers are being given incentive from the government to produce ethanol, so blame them. Its not the farmer's fault. They grow what will make money.

Algae oil seems to be our best bet for producing fuel. Its not a food crop, can be grown in marginal land (pretty much anywhere), and only required water and CO2. I'd say that's a pretty low maintenance fuel.

No wells need to be built, no mines need to be dug, its a win-win situation.

Heck, there's even jobs that are created. Who wouldn't be happy? And we don't destroy our planet in the process.



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by freakyclown
As an owner of a "supercar" that relies on a high-octane fuel to be used in it, I would like to know the technical implications of this "addative".


Technically, you'll mainly get a slightly higher fuel consumption. If you have 2.5% of ethanol added in your gasoline, your mileage per gallon will get roughly 1% worse. If you're running on pure ethanol, your mileage will get about 25% worse, and you'll have more problems starting the engine in very cold temperatures. Also the exhaust composition will be a bit different, so your catalytic converter may not do its job effectively if you run on a very-high-alcohol-content fuel.

Another thing is the elimination of water-based problems if you have a carburetor instead of fuel injection. The alcohol additive will help in mixing any condensed water in your tank to the fuel, so that it won't clog the carb jets. This helps especially in freezing temperatures. Besides, water may do wonders to your power if you can mix it enough to the gasoline. Some have claimed that water only helps cool down the mixture in the intake manifold, but as this is a conspiracy site, I dare to give an alternative opinion. Actually you might be able to melt your exhaust manifolds and pistons if you use correctly tuned water injection in your engine, together with a nice power boost!

The only thing I wonder is why on Earth we are using food for making fuel for our cars? A large proportion of mankind is starving, and using biofuels will not help at all!

Today I took a photo of my friend's car. He converted it to run purely on firewood without any gasoline or other liquid fuels needed. Just like in WW2 times when we had no gasoline at all available...



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 08:59 PM
link   
I posted a thread in the Science and Technologies Section of ATS. I link it here for your reference.

www.abovetopsecret.com... e=1#pid4237344

We don't have to use edible oil grain to produce biofuel.



posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 11:40 PM
link   

Brazil's President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva has rejected allegations that biofuels are responsible for the recent rise in global food prices.

He said food had become more expensive because people in developing countries were gaining greater access to it.

news.bbc.co.uk...

WHAT????

Is he trying to tell us that because a country was poor before, its citizens were deliberately going hungry so the country could develop and now that the country is slightly more developed the citizens are now deciding to eat more food?. I am yet to see an Asian country complain about their over weight population like the USA and UK do.

I seriously cannot understand the thinking of this man.
Oh, wait, yes I can.. he's signing bio-fuel deals with the USA..

That says it all IMO.

Food for fuel is a crime against all living things and not just humanity as some have stated.



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 12:33 AM
link   
I can't help but wonder, if overpopulation doesn't help this problem...

I am NOT saying that this world doesn't have enough resources for even being as overpopulated as it is, but that is how they(dunno who) make it sound... Just toooooo many people.



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 05:21 AM
link   
Well anything that ups the power of my car and maybe drags the fuel consumption UP into double figures (at todays UK petrol prices) is a bonus for me...


I can see both sides of this, but I cant believe that MORE people will go hungry because of this...there will always be starving people in the world, whether we use food crops for biofuel or not...so surely its best for the environment if we switch to biofuel and then work out a way to feed the world?

If biofuel means a drop in fuel prices and better mpg for everyone then transportation costs will fall which will have a direct effect on the price of food in the supermarkets. The cost of Oil has no direct effect on fuel price in the UK but the fuel price does have a direct effect on businesses and food price.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join