What happens when coal is gone?

Well?

But a combination of sources, perhaps including saltwater-grown plants, could get us there in the relatively near term. “Oil will disappear and there’ll be no change at the gas pump because there’ll already be technologies in place,” predicts Laughlin. “The good news is once you build these [Fischer-Tropsch] plants, you can use anything, including garbage, for the biofuel conversion. The big problem is the initial capital cost.” We can adapt the facilities over time.

Biofuel Roadmap

Document issued by USDA. From an article at Biofuels Digest:

The USDA projected in its report that the US, in order to meet its 2022 RFS target of 36 billion gallons of renewable fuel, would produce 13.4 billion gallons formed educated energy crops, including perennial grasses, energy cane, and biomass sorghum; 500 million gallons from oilseed crops, 4.3 billion gallons from crop residues (corn stover, straw), 2.8 billion gallons from woody biomass (logging residues only) and 15 billion gallons from corn starch ethanol.

The report, entitled "A USDA Regional Roadmap to Meeting the Biofuels Goals of the Renewable Fuels Standard by 2022" can be found here (PDF, 21 pages).

Ethanol is dead, long live butanol

Butamax.

BD: What about the production economics?

BuMx: Using our process, a 100 MGy corn ethanol will make 80 Mgy of biobutanol, but every fuel molecule will have 25 percent more energy, so its a balance. Also, with 16 percent butanol, you are getting higher concentrations of a higher energy molecule, so you are getting real improvements in fuel economy and efficiency.

Butanol vs. Ethanol (Infrastructure)

And I will readily admit to being a bit biased. I've already said I think our best bet would be to focus on butanol and scrap the entire ethanol talk.

Before I head out to play softball ...

... I'll leave this for people to read. Biofuels: What do the experts think?

Some good comments in there. I might expand on this entry tomorrow as time permits.

Biofuels leading to hunger crisis?

The article from CNN.

Those battling global warming by promoting biofuels may unintentionally be adding to skyrocketing world food prices, creating what one expert calls "a silent tsunami" in developing nations.

Also in the article ...

"The drive for more biofuels means more investment is going into those crops, meaning less land and less investment going in for food crops, causing a massive conflict and resulting in rising prices, which is having a huge negative impact, especially on developing countries," Clare Oxborrow, food campaigner for Friends of the Earth, told CNN.

That's not entirely true. There are a variety of efforts looking at non-crop biofuels, such as algae. Or synthetic bacteria to make hydrocarbons. There are also efforts to look at non-agricultural lands to grow energy crops. Imagine using land on the side of highways to grow switchgrass for eventual use in cellulosic ethanol production, as an example. I think a balance can be, and will be, struck between the essential needs for fiber, food, and fuel.