Quote:
Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz
Okay, I'll ignore the falts in assuming that Albertans use these 220,000 barrels of oil per day in the exact proportions that they come out of the ground (also ignoring that these proportions vary greatly based on where it comes from), and even if your numbers were correct does that mean that we should ignore alternative fuel sources?
Just becasue one plant is only going to reduce out dependance on oil by 2.2% does this mean it should be abandoned? And do we know for sure that this is infact a subsidy for farmers? I would definaly not argue that in the US where they are using corn, and it has been well documetned for YEARS that it costs more to grow corn than the price farmers get, but the US governement subsidises the hell out of it, is this true for Canola? Not that I've ever heard.
Finally, this 220000 bbl/d of oil that alberta uses, is this truely barrels of oil or is this barrels of oil equavalent, meaning does this value include natural gas which is used for electricy production, home heating, etc, not to mention that the petrochemical industry uses a fairly large quantity of oil that would not be included in your gasoline calcuations.
Is this single plant going to singlehandedly rid us of our dependance on oil?
Of course not.
Do I think that biodiesel is the best option?
Not while we are using food sources as a feedstock.
Do I think you're right in passing this thing off as useless based on some incredibly flawed assumptions and the fact that the impact will be relatively small?
Definatly not. Just becasue something isn't going to make an astronomical impact doesn't mean it should be abandoned.
|
And as far as faults go, it is established that Canada uses approximately 2.2-2.3 million barrels a day of oil. There are pretty standard proportions which come from a barrel of oil. You are right though, given the high level of economic activity, it is likely that Alberta uses more gasoline than the estimate I gave, and thus I was generous on the impact that this plant will make.
Those are averages. A barrel of oil produces approximately 160 litres of usable fuel. There is 42 gallons in a barrel of oil, but it produces 46 gallons of useable fuel. 46 Gallons works out to roughly 160 litres. The gasoline portion is the portion of a barrel of oil that is used for gasoline, the diesel is the diesel proportion, etc. (kerosene, jet fuel etc.). The average amount of gasoline that a barrel of oil produces is pretty standard, although I purposely used a low estimate. The percentage that I used for gasoline per barrel of oil takes into account all those other factors that you cite. This state of California website
http://www.energy.ca.gov/gasoline/wh...arrel_oil.html shows it at being approximately 25 gallons per barrel of oil, which would be about 95 litres per barrel of oil. I used 75 Litres because it is generally the accepted figure in the industry.
It is actually 1.6% when you factor in the amount of diesel that is produced from an average barrel of oil. It is indeed a subsidy when the government is spending 170 million dollars on it. Something should be abandoned when it costs to much money vis-a-vis the output, unless it shows incredible growth potential. Biodiesel does not show this, fuel cells and hybrid cars do show this potential, those are the alternative fuels that government should be focusing on. Governments focus on biodiesel because it is a disguised subsidy to farmers. When you are putting money into promoting biofuel, it naturally creates another market for farmers and thus the price of their commodities rises. That is simple economics.