Re: [Biofuel] To answer your questions

[Chris Burck]

jim, i posed some questions early on, which i'm glad to see you
answered (in part) when responding to jason.  it would still help to
know what sort of funds you have to work with.  whether it be your
economic development budget, or other funding streams which might be
under the control of other administrators, but which you could
influence in your capacity to coordinate programs.  there are almost
certainly grant monies which you could bring in as well.  not to
mention existing local business which might be convinced to donate
money or resources (materials, transportation, expertise) to the
cause.  i would encourage you, if you haven't already, to explore all
of this.  you might be surprised by what you can pull together.  that
said, in my opinion fritz (i think it was fritz) and jason are on the
right track.  and i wouldn't stop at biofuels.  wind, solar, even
small scale hydro.  all of these things require research (i.e. what
are the wind, water power, and biomass resources in your area).  this
is where your community colleges, tecnical schools and so on would
play a key role.  when it comes to actually put shovels in the ground,
so to speak, lots of materials are to be had for next to nothing at
your local scrap metal yard or trash dump.  i could go on, but the
point is, there is much you can do that doesn't hinge entirely on
whether or not some outside entity decides to bring their venture,
which might or might succed, to your neighborhood.

___
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/

Re: [Biofuel] To answer your questions

[Keith Addison]

>Actually the couple of centuries was not intended to come off as 
>sarcastic.  At some point fossil fuels are going to become 
>exceedingly costly as supplies dwindle.

"Peak Oil" in a couple of centuries? Well, that's a new angle on it. 
(For instance, check the list archives for discussion on "Confessions 
of an 'ex' Peak Oil believer", from April 2008.)

>That might create a natural market for biofuels instead of the 
>synthetic ones we try to create through legislation, regulation, and 
>treaties.  I was being genuine.

You do seem genuinely dead-set against seeing that there is already a 
"natural market for biofuels" and has been for some time, that's it's 
considerable, it's growing and spreading fast, and that it's not 
instead of synthetic markets anybody tries to create through 
legislation, regulation, and treaties, nor even in spite of them. But 
this natural market is local, and it seems you think anything local 
is not practical, although what's been emerging for some time now, 
rather emphatically, and what some people have always known, is that, 
with few exceptions, if it's not local it probably won't work well, 
if at all.

You also don't seem to see the close parallels with food production, 
though it's been pointed out. For at least six years now there's been 
a massive worldwide swing to local food production, and, like local 
biofuels producers and users, the local food growers and consumers 
simply disregard the established industrial market, which, by 
contrast, has been forced to take notice. Biofuellers very largely 
ignore both fossil fuels and industrial biofuels, ie Big Soy and Big 
Corn, both of which are heavily dependent on fossil fuels inputs 
anyway, and not only that, the local brew is usually much better 
quality. As with the food (naturally).

I think this was a pertinent question:

>>Plenty of practical ideas have been offered. So what's
>>non-negotiable? Central control?

I notice you didn't answer it.

>But let's quit beating this horse.

We'll see.

Meanwhile, please don't let me deter you from your discussion with Jason.

Best

Keith


>Jim
>
>
>On 6/16/2010 12:37 PM, Keith Addison wrote:
>>>   >
>>>Really!  I kind of thought the "couple of centuries" quote was better.
>>>
>>Naah, that's just whimsical/sarcastic. The other one was genuine.
>>
>>This one's quite good though:
>>
>>>This may be the first practical idea I have heard.
>>>
>>Plenty of practical ideas have been offered. So what's
>>non-negotiable? Central control?
>>
>>Best
>>
>>Keith
>>
>>
>>
>>>Jim
>>>
>>>On 6/16/2010 11:20 AM, Keith Addison wrote:
>>>
   That's a great quote:

   "To be honest biofuels is starting to look like a flop."

   In June 2010??

   LOL!!

   Surely it belongs here:

   "How much fuel can we grow? How much land will it take?"
   

   Nice counterpoint to Pan's "Small is beautifuel."

   Meanwhile, strength to yer arm, Jason.

   Best

   Keith


>   On 6/15/2010 3:39 AM, Jason Mier wrote:
> >   I have some questions about your project/situation:
> >
>
>
>> 1. What are your restrictions? (regulations, budget, public
>>"mood", etc.)
>>
>> 2. Is this a County project, or are you only going to be offering
>>   grants/incentives?
>>
>>
>>
> >   3. Is your department merely coordinating, or do you have a
>   direct influence such as engineering or contract handling?
> >
>   Jason,
>
>   1.  Virtually nothing in the way of legal restrictions.  Public mood is
>   being sculpted (maybe... but toward what?  I'm no longer 
>certain myself))
>   2.  No plans for incentives at this time.  May revisit that question if
>   things heat up.
>   3.  May have some influence if someone decides to locate an operation
>   here.  To be honest biofuels is starting to look like a flop.  I can't
>   find any way to make the numbers work.  Yields are too low and prices
>   also.  It may be another couple of centuries till this stuff "floats"
>   (pardon the pun).
>
>
>>>   >>  Jim
>>>   >
>>>Really!  I kind of thought the "couple of centuries" quote was better.
>>>
>>>Jim



___
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/

Re: [Biofuel] To answer your questions

[Jim Chalker]

On 6/16/2010 12:37 PM, Keith Addison wrote:
>>   >
>> Really!  I kind of thought the "couple of centuries" quote was better.
>>  
> Naah, that's just whimsical/sarcastic. The other one was genuine.
>
> This one's quite good though:
>
>
>> This may be the first practical idea I have heard.
>>  
> Plenty of practical ideas have been offered. So what's
> non-negotiable? Central control?
>
> Best
>
> Keith
>
>
>
>> Jim
>>
>> On 6/16/2010 11:20 AM, Keith Addison wrote:
>>  
>>>   That's a great quote:
>>>
>>>   "To be honest biofuels is starting to look like a flop."
>>>
>>>   In June 2010??
>>>
>>>   LOL!!
>>>
>>>   Surely it belongs here:
>>>
>>>   "How much fuel can we grow? How much land will it take?"
>>>   
>>>
>>>   Nice counterpoint to Pan's "Small is beautifuel."
>>>
>>>   Meanwhile, strength to yer arm, Jason.
>>>
>>>   Best
>>>
>>>   Keith
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
   On 6/15/2010 3:39 AM, Jason Mier wrote:
 >   I have some questions about your project/situation:
 >

  
> 1. What are your restrictions? (regulations, budget, public
> "mood", etc.)
>
> 2. Is this a County project, or are you only going to be offering
>   grants/incentives?
>
>
>
 >   3. Is your department merely coordinating, or do you have a
   direct influence such as engineering or contract handling?
 >
   Jason,

   1.  Virtually nothing in the way of legal restrictions.  Public mood is
   being sculpted (maybe... but toward what?  I'm no longer certain myself))
   2.  No plans for incentives at this time.  May revisit that question if
   things heat up.
   3.  May have some influence if someone decides to locate an operation
   here.  To be honest biofuels is starting to look like a flop.  I can't
   find any way to make the numbers work.  Yields are too low and prices
   also.  It may be another couple of centuries till this stuff "floats"
   (pardon the pun).

  
>>   >>  Jim
>>   >
>> Really!  I kind of thought the "couple of centuries" quote was better.
>>
>> Jim
>>  
>
> ___
> Biofuel mailing list
> Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
> http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
>
> Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
> http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
>
> Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages):
> http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
>
>
Actually the couple of centuries was not intended to come off as 
sarcastic.  At some point fossil fuels are going to become exceedingly 
costly as supplies dwindle.  That might create a natural market for 
biofuels instead of the synthetic ones we try to create through 
legislation, regulation, and treaties.  I was being genuine.  But let's 
quit beating this horse.

Jim

___
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/

Re: [Biofuel] To answer your questions

[Keith Addison]

>  >
>Really!  I kind of thought the "couple of centuries" quote was better.

Naah, that's just whimsical/sarcastic. The other one was genuine.

This one's quite good though:

>This may be the first practical idea I have heard.

Plenty of practical ideas have been offered. So what's 
non-negotiable? Central control?

Best

Keith


>Jim
>
>On 6/16/2010 11:20 AM, Keith Addison wrote:
>>  That's a great quote:
>>
>>  "To be honest biofuels is starting to look like a flop."
>>
>>  In June 2010??
>>
>>  LOL!!
>>
>>  Surely it belongs here:
>>
>>  "How much fuel can we grow? How much land will it take?"
>>  
>>
>>  Nice counterpoint to Pan's "Small is beautifuel."
>>
>>  Meanwhile, strength to yer arm, Jason.
>>
>>  Best
>>
>>  Keith
>>
>>
>>   
>>>  On 6/15/2010 3:39 AM, Jason Mier wrote:
>>>>  I have some questions about your project/situation:
>>>>
>>> 
1. What are your restrictions? (regulations, budget, public 
"mood", etc.)

2. Is this a County project, or are you only going to be offering
  grants/incentives?

   
>>>>  3. Is your department merely coordinating, or do you have a
>>>  direct influence such as engineering or contract handling?
>>>>
>>>  Jason,
>>>
>>>  1.  Virtually nothing in the way of legal restrictions.  Public mood is
>>>  being sculpted (maybe... but toward what?  I'm no longer certain myself))
>>>  2.  No plans for incentives at this time.  May revisit that question if
>>>  things heat up.
>>>  3.  May have some influence if someone decides to locate an operation
>>>  here.  To be honest biofuels is starting to look like a flop.  I can't
>>>  find any way to make the numbers work.  Yields are too low and prices
>>>  also.  It may be another couple of centuries till this stuff "floats"
>>>  (pardon the pun).
>>>
>  >> Jim
>  >   
>Really!  I kind of thought the "couple of centuries" quote was better.
>
>Jim


___
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/

Re: [Biofuel] To answer your questions

[Jim Chalker]

On 6/16/2010 11:20 AM, Keith Addison wrote:
> That's a great quote:
>
> "To be honest biofuels is starting to look like a flop."
>
> In June 2010??
>
> LOL!!
>
> Surely it belongs here:
>
> "How much fuel can we grow? How much land will it take?"
> 
>
> Nice counterpoint to Pan's "Small is beautifuel."
>
> Meanwhile, strength to yer arm, Jason.
>
> Best
>
> Keith
>
>
>
>> On 6/15/2010 3:39 AM, Jason Mier wrote:
>>   >  I have some questions about your project/situation:
>>   >
>>  
>>>   1. What are your restrictions? (regulations, budget, public "mood", etc.)
>>>
>>>   2. Is this a County project, or are you only going to be offering
>>> grants/incentives?
>>>
>>>
>>   >  3. Is your department merely coordinating, or do you have a
>> direct influence such as engineering or contract handling?
>>   >
>> Jason,
>>
>> 1.  Virtually nothing in the way of legal restrictions.  Public mood is
>> being sculpted (maybe... but toward what?  I'm no longer certain myself))
>> 2.  No plans for incentives at this time.  May revisit that question if
>> things heat up.
>> 3.  May have some influence if someone decides to locate an operation
>> here.  To be honest biofuels is starting to look like a flop.  I can't
>> find any way to make the numbers work.  Yields are too low and prices
>> also.  It may be another couple of centuries till this stuff "floats"
>> (pardon the pun).
>>
>> Jim
>>  
>
> ___
> Biofuel mailing list
> Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
> http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
>
> Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
> http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
>
> Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages):
> http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
>
>
Really!  I kind of thought the "couple of centuries" quote was better.

Jim

___
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/

Re: [Biofuel] To answer your questions

[Keith Addison]

That's a great quote:

"To be honest biofuels is starting to look like a flop."

In June 2010??

LOL!!

Surely it belongs here:

"How much fuel can we grow? How much land will it take?"


Nice counterpoint to Pan's "Small is beautifuel."

Meanwhile, strength to yer arm, Jason.

Best

Keith


>On 6/15/2010 3:39 AM, Jason Mier wrote:
>  > I have some questions about your project/situation:
>  >
>>  1. What are your restrictions? (regulations, budget, public "mood", etc.)
>>
>>  2. Is this a County project, or are you only going to be offering 
>>grants/incentives?
>>
>  > 3. Is your department merely coordinating, or do you have a 
>direct influence such as engineering or contract handling?
>  >   
>Jason,
>
>1.  Virtually nothing in the way of legal restrictions.  Public mood is
>being sculpted (maybe... but toward what?  I'm no longer certain myself))
>2.  No plans for incentives at this time.  May revisit that question if
>things heat up.
>3.  May have some influence if someone decides to locate an operation
>here.  To be honest biofuels is starting to look like a flop.  I can't
>find any way to make the numbers work.  Yields are too low and prices
>also.  It may be another couple of centuries till this stuff "floats"
>(pardon the pun).
>
>Jim


___
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/

Re: [Biofuel] To answer your questions

[Jim Chalker]

On 6/16/2010 2:36 AM, Jason Mier wrote:
> Maybe you're looking at it from the wrong angle. If you're having trouble 
> drawing business, try growing your own.
>
>
>
> Have you ever considered an advanced credit program for the highschool? Maybe 
> you could work with the University Board and the Ag Extension office to allow 
> a couple of college credits for participating. Most kids I know would jump at 
> the chance to play with chemicals, and transesterfication is a very visible 
> reaction when done properly.
>
>
>
> You could get the shop classes involved with manufacturing the containment 
> system, the chem classes for the process, if you insist there needs to be any 
> automation, you can get computer classes involved.
>
>
>
> The Ag department in my old HS has a test plot- if there can be anything like 
> that for you, you can even get them involved.
>
>
>
> Judging by the state profile of your county, I'm guessing the average 
> combined class size should be about 375. I see you have a tech school as 
> well, very nice.(hint-hint)
>
>
>
> If you want I can dig through the curricula for all the schools and build a 
> list of prereq's. Make it a senior year project.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> Jason,
>>
>> 1. Virtually nothing in the way of legal restrictions. Public mood is
>> being sculpted (maybe... but toward what? I'm no longer certain myself))
>> 2. No plans for incentives at this time. May revisit that question if
>> things heat up.
>> 3. May have some influence if someone decides to locate an operation
>> here. To be honest biofuels is starting to look like a flop. I can't
>> find any way to make the numbers work. Yields are too low and prices
>> also. It may be another couple of centuries till this stuff "floats"
>> (pardon the pun).
>>
>> Jim
>>
>> ___
>> Biofuel mailing list
>> Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
>> http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
>>
>> Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
>> http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
>>
>> Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages):
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
>>  
>   
> _
> The New Busy is not the old busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox.
> http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_3
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: /pipermail/attachments/20100616/702641ff/attachment.html
> ___
> Biofuel mailing list
> Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
> http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
>
> Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
> http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
>
> Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages):
> http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
>
>
This may be the first practical idea I have heard.

Jim

___
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/

Re: [Biofuel] Scum of the earth

[Keith Addison]

From: "Robert Weissman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [corp-focus] Closing BP's Escape Routes
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010

Closing BP's Escape Routes
By Robert Weissman
June 15, 2010

BP generates enough cash to absorb its liabilities from the oil 
gusher in the Gulf of Mexico.

But that doesn't mean it will.

One of the benefits of the corporate form is that it gives giant 
corporations the ability to escape liability. BP may or may not 
choose to capitalize on such escapes, but it would be foolish to 
presume that it won't. That's why President Obama's call for the 
company to establish a $20 billion escrow account is such a positive 
and needed -- if still inadequate -- step.

Consider first the liabilities that BP may face. No one really knows 
what the damage from the oil gusher or the overall costs to BP may 
ultimately be. Some analysts are now throwing around numbers of $70 
billion on the upper end -- but it's not hard to see how the ultimate 
cost to BP could rise even higher.

The company faces civil fines of up to $3,000 per barrel of oil 
polluting the ocean. If the gusher lasts for four months at 40,000 
barrels a day, the fine alone could hit $14 billion. If it is found 
that the actual oil flow is double that level, the fine could 
potentially approach $30 billion -- more, if the gusher lasts for 
more than four months.

Beyond the payments the company is making, it is going to face 
massive lawsuits, with damages surely in the billions and quite 
possibly in the tens of billions. On top of that, it may face a 
massive punitive damage award. Exxon challenged a punitive damages 
award of $10 billion in the Valdez case, and succeeded through 
appeals in dragging out payment for 20 years and lowering the amount 
to $500 million. But that was $500 million on top of compensatory 
damages of $500 million.

On top of all this, BP's brand -- just a couple months ago, the most 
valued among oil companies -- is now ruined.

Still, as hard as it is to conceptualize, BP can afford to pay $70 
billion. The company made $14 billion in profits in 2009, a bad year. 
Before the Gulf disaster, it was on track to make much more in 2010.

BP may be able to pay $70 billion, but it surely doesn't want to. 
Even as the company pledges again and again to cover all "legitimate" 
claims, you can be sure that its attorneys are conjuring a variety of 
maneuvers to avoid paying. Here are five approaches they must be 
considering:

1. The AH Robins/Dalkon Shield Bankruptcy Scam

A.H. Robins, the manufacturer of the defective Dalkon Shield 
intrauterine device, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 1985. Women 
who were victims of the dangerous device received less compensation 
than they otherwise would have. Meanwhile, with the company's 
otherwise open-ended liability demarcated in the bankruptcy process, 
Robins' value shot up. AHP (now part of Wyeth, itself now part of 
Pfizer) acquired the company at a premium, with the Robins family 
making off with hundreds of millions of dollars.

BP wouldn't follow the Robins' model exactly. The play for BP would 
not be to declare bankruptcy for the parent company, but for BP 
America or another subsidiary that could be tagged with the liability 
for the Gulf of Mexico gusher.

In advance of such a move, BP might try to move assets out of the 
designated subsidiary and into other subsidiaries in its vast 
network. Such asset shifting is not permissible, and creditors would 
challenge any such moves, if they could discover them. But using its 
labyrinthian structure, BP might hope to evade the creditors.

Even without the asset shifting effort, bankruptcy for an affiliate 
could prove attractive for BP.

2. The Union Carbide Disappearance

Union Carbide was the company responsible for the world's worst 
industrial disaster. A gas escape from its chemical facility in 
Bhopal, India killed many thousands (likely tens of thousands) and 
severely injured tens of thousands more. After settling for a paltry 
amount with the Indian government, Union Carbide disappeared as a 
standalone company. It is now a subsidiary of Dow Chemical.

Says Dow: "Dow has no responsibility for Bhopal." Moreover, "the 
former Bhopal plant was owned and operated by Union Carbide India, 
Ltd. (UCIL), an Indian company, with shared ownership by Union 
Carbide Corporation, the Indian government, and private investors. 
Union Carbide sold its shares in UCIL in 1994, and UCIL was renamed 
Eveready Industries India, Ltd., which remains a significant Indian 
company today."

BP might conceivably be acquired by another oil major. Or, more 
likely, it might just sell some or all of its U.S. subsidiaries. If 
the liability cap in the Oil Pollution Act works to protect BP from 
legally recoverable claims (perhaps less likely than has been 
reported, since the cap does not apply to a spill caused by violation 
of applicable federal rules), an acquiring company could simply state 
that it refuses to mak