BioDieselNow - Renewable biodiesel fuel

Clean, Renewable, Domestic Biodiesel Fuel for any Diesel Engine
Welcome to BioDieselNow - Renewable biodiesel fuel Sign in | Join | Help
in Search
 

Is Imperium's Palm oil, an Imperial Blunder?

Last post 01-05-2008 06:00 PM by ecogenics3. 14 replies.
Page 1 of 1 (15 items)
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  • 03-31-2007 07:05 PM

    Is Imperium's Palm oil, an Imperial Blunder?

    Imperium Renewables (Seattle, Wa) is currently constructing a 100 million gallon/year biodiesel production facility  with plans to make biodiesel from Malaysian palm kernel oil. Malaysia is currently deforesting rainforest to make room for palm plantations. The loss of trees and biodiversity is most likely a bigger negative environmental impact than the positive impact presented by the decrease in emissions from all that biodiesel. It seems to me that someone at Imperium has lost sight of the purpose of using biodiesel in the first place, perhaps they can't see over that stack of money their saving by going overseas for their feedstock. Forign oil??? Big money??? This seems familiar.......    Any thoughts?
  • 03-31-2007 08:07 PM In reply to

    • natescape
    • Top 10 Contributor
    • Joined on 01-14-2002
    • Between Providence and Cape Cod
    • Posts 4,587

    Re: Is Imperium's Palm oil, an Imperial Blunder?

    There was an article today in the Providence Journal about palm oil and how clear-cutting rainforests/draining peat bogs to grow the palm oil makes for a bad combination.
  • 03-31-2007 08:11 PM In reply to

    Re: Is Imperium's Palm oil, an Imperial Blunder?

    natescape, does the providence journal have a website where I might read this article?
  • 04-02-2007 06:28 PM In reply to

    • epk
    • Top 75 Contributor
    • Joined on 05-16-2003
    • Cambridge, MA
    • Posts 277

    Re: Is Imperium's Palm oil, an Imperial Blunder?

     

    That article was probably the same AP article that was in the NY Times.  Which is:

    Scientists Weigh Downside of Palm Oil

    Filed at 11:47 a.m. ET

    AMSTERDAM, Netherlands (AP) -- Only a few years ago, oil from palm trees was viewed as an ideal biofuel: a cheap, renewable alternative to petroleum that would fight global warming. Energy companies began converting generators and production soared.

    Now, it's increasingly seen as an example of how well-meaning efforts to limit climate-changing carbon emissions may backfire.

    Marcel Silvius, a climate expert at Wetlands International in the Netherlands, led a team that compared the benefits of palm oil to the ecological harm from destroying virgin Asian rain forests to develop lucrative new plantations.

    His conclusion: ''As a biofuel, it's a failure.''

    Scientists and policymakers from more than 100 countries are meeting in Brussels, Belgium, starting Monday to report on the impact of global warming, including storms, flooding and the extinction of plants and animals.

    Then in May, the group intends to issue recommendations on how best to fight it, through new technologies and possible use of alternatives. The lessons of palm oil are sure to figure into their discussion.

    Long a primary ingredient in food and cosmetics, palm oil derivatives caught on about five years ago as a source of renewable energy, spurred by subsidies in many European Union countries. Imports have risen 65 percent since 2002.

    Palm oil is attractive because it is relatively abundant, cheap at about $550 per ton, and requires few or no modifications to existing power stations.

    Unlike carbon-rich fossil fuels, palm oil is considered carbon-neutral, meaning the carbon emitted from burning it is the same as what is absorbed during growth.

    But the result of intensified farming has been to unleash far more greenhouse gases than will be saved at power stations.

    The report issued late last year by Wetlands International, Delft Hydraulics and the Alterra Research Center of Wageningen University in Holland studied the carbon released from peat swamps in Indonesia and Malaysia that had been drained and burned to plant palm oil trees. About 85 percent of the world's palm oil comes from the two countries, and about one-quarter of Indonesia's plantations are on drained peat bogs, the report said.

    The four-year study found that 600 million tons of carbon dioxide seep into the air each year from the drained swamps. Another 1.4 billion tons go up in smoke from fires lit to clear rain forest for plantations -- smoke that often shrouds Singapore and Malaysia in an impenetrable haze for weeks at a time.

    Together, those 2 billion tons of CO2 account for 8 percent of the world's fossil fuel emissions, the report said.

    Friends of the Earth, another environmental group, called the report ''astonishing,'' and said it shows that harvesting palm oil for fuel is counterproductive. ''It undermines the whole project,'' said a climate specialist for the group, Anne van Schaik.

    The study was not independently verified by the U.N. Climate Change Secretariat in Bonn, Germany, or by the World Resources Institute in Washington, D.C., the two leading monitoring groups. But experts said the research appeared credible. It is due to be published for peer review later this year.

    Deforestation is the No. 2 cause of greenhouse gas emissions after the burning of fossil fuels, said Jeffrey Dukes, a biologist at the University of Massachusetts who was not part of the research. He said clearing peat swamps for plantations is ''a double whammy.''

    It not only releases carbon trapped over many millennia, but destroys the most efficient ecosystem on the planet for sucking carbon from the atmosphere, Dukes said.

    Expanding production of palm oil is ''a terrible decision. Whether or not it's consciously made, it's society going in reverse,'' he said.

    Major power companies are divided on whether to continue or pursue palm oil generation.

    Leon Flexman, of RWE npower, Britain's largest electricity supplier, said his company decided against palm oil after a year of study because it could not verify its supplies would be free of the taint of destroyed rain forest or peat bogs, he said.

    The Dutch power company Essent announced in December it had stopped burning until it can trace and verify the sources.

    Biox, a Dutch startup, said it plans careful scrutiny of palm oil sources but will proceed with construction of three 50 megawatt power stations that burn palm oil byproducts exclusively. That's enough electricity to light all the homes in Amsterdam.

    ''From the start, we knew we can't stay in business if we can't prove that production is sustainable,'' said Biox executive Arjen Brinkmann. ''Until this report came out, peat lands was not an issue because we hadn't heard of it. Nobody had heard,'' he said, adding that it will now be a factor in the company's sustainability criteria.

    So far, the reservations about palm oil do not seem to have affected the market. Production rose 6.6 percent last year and will increase another 5.5 percent this year to 37 million tons, according to Fortis Bank. Prices have risen 35 percent in the last year and are still rising, it said.

  • 04-03-2007 06:31 AM In reply to

    • natescape
    • Top 10 Contributor
    • Joined on 01-14-2002
    • Between Providence and Cape Cod
    • Posts 4,587

    Re: Is Imperium's Palm oil, an Imperial Blunder?

    Yep, that's it. The Journal requires registration, so I didn't want to link to it.

    This is the kind of black eye that bio doesn't need.  

  • 04-16-2007 11:13 AM In reply to

    • Dante
    • Top 75 Contributor
    • Joined on 04-22-2005
    • Seattle, WA
    • Posts 320

    Re: Is Imperium's Palm oil, an Imperial Blunder?

    I just sent this to the Seattle PI

     "Pelosi brings promise to Seattle to keep energy dollars at home" in Friday's P.I. quotes Pelosi as saying lawmakers "have an approach that says that America's farmers will fuel America's energy independence. We will send our energy dollars not to the Middle East, but to ... the Midwest and to rural America"  news conference at the headquarters of Seattle Biodiesel.  Perhaps she is not aware that Seattle Biodiesel's parent company, Imperium Renewables, is building the nation's largest biodiesel refinery at the Port of Grays Harbor so it can import Malaysian palm oil for $2.07 a gallon, about 60 cents a gallon cheaper than Midwestern soy oil.  So much for "keeping our energy dollars at home."

    IMO, in the US the best oils for use in biodiesel production are (1) WVO and (2) oil that is a byproduct of other products (e.g. Soy Meal) or methyl esthers that are a byproduct of other products (e.g. soap).  I, for one, will not knowingly buy any biodiesel produced from foreign produced vegetable oil.  To do so would defeat my political and environmental reasons for using biodiesel.

  • 04-19-2007 07:26 AM In reply to

    Re: Is Imperium's Palm oil, an Imperial Blunder?

    Plant will be too big, too far from markets, too far from reality.
  • 07-06-2007 10:46 PM In reply to

    Re: Is Imperium's Palm oil, an Imperial Blunder?

    No. They haven't lost sight. We have gained insight. Corporate profit motive is so strong that to keep the high-profit system of automobiles and sprawl, the southern hemisphere will be stripped of trees for biofuel farms and global warming will be accelerated.
  • 01-03-2008 09:55 PM In reply to

    • mobe
    • Top 150 Contributor
    • Joined on 04-11-2003
    • Tacoma, WA
    • Posts 153

    Re: Is Imperium's Palm oil, an Imperial Blunder?

    Any word on Imperium's source of feedstock for this MEGAWALMART plant that became operational in August and currently running at capacity? At least that is what I heard on KPLU this afternoon. http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/kplu/news.newsmain?action=article&ARTICLE_ID=1206754&sectionID=1
  • 01-04-2008 03:09 PM In reply to

    Re: Is Imperium's Palm oil, an Imperial Blunder?

    In all fairness I must say ImperiumHAS been looking for alternative feedstocks.. we have a letter of intent in  which Imperium would buy all the algae cake we could produce. but we didnt agree on the issue of who would pay for the shipping costs If they would have paid the freight we would have gladly supplied them with algae to meet thier needs.

    marc

     

    Marc Orion Cardoso
    www.ecogenicsresearchcenter.org
  • 01-04-2008 03:55 PM In reply to

    Re: Is Imperium's Palm oil, an Imperial Blunder?

    The problem is not the =use= of palm oil.  The problem is inappropriate methods of =obtaining= palm oil.

    The solution is as simple as saying "Here are the standards for bio oil we will buy.  They include standards for the growing of the plants providing said bio oil.  Don't meet the standards, we don't buy your bio oil."

    Then make it an international crime with a huge fine + possible jail time attached to buy bio oil that violates such standards.

    This "stick" should go hand in hand with the "carrot" that the international community will help, both fiscally and otherwise, areas that want to cultivate bio oil to set up growing and harvesting facilities in an ecologically + fiscally responsible fashion.

    Problem solved.

  • 01-05-2008 01:44 AM In reply to

    Re: Is Imperium's Palm oil, an Imperial Blunder?

    They have cancelled or postponed their IPO, so something is most definitely wrong, most likely feedtsock problems.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/innovationNews/idUSBNG2164920080103 

  • 01-05-2008 01:26 PM In reply to

    Re: Is Imperium's Palm oil, an Imperial Blunder?

    This is an interesting Topic I will look further into it and see what I can find.

    To Your Gas Savings!

    Andres
    www.water-for-gas.com
  • 01-05-2008 04:36 PM In reply to

    • The Trouts
    • Top 500 Contributor
    • Joined on 01-06-2003
    • Central North Carolina
    • Posts 42

    Re: Is Imperium's Palm oil, an Imperial Blunder?

     

    ecogenics3 wrote:

    we have a letter of intent in  which Imperium would buy all the algae cake we could produce. but we didnt agree on the issue of who would pay for the shipping costs If they would have paid the freight we would have gladly supplied them with algae to meet thier needs. 

    So this means that if they pony up the cost of the freight, you're ready to supply them feedstock in the 10mgpy plus range?

    What is your leadtime?

    What is your price per pound FOB your plant?

    Can you supply a quote for 100,000 gallons per month?

    If so, I'd like to get a quote - I can probably pick up the $0.03 to $0.05 per pound of freight.

    Unless your leadtime is 5 year ARO.

    Please Advise,

    Bob in Moncure 

    Got Biodiesel?
  • 01-05-2008 06:00 PM In reply to

    Re: Is Imperium's Palm oil, an Imperial Blunder?

    Contact us  through our email for relavent data concerning our dealings with IMPERIUM.(which were very cordial by the way)

    ecogenics3@aol.com email addy.

    Marc

    Marc Orion Cardoso
    www.ecogenicsresearchcenter.org
  • Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 1 (15 items)
Home | Blogs | Forums | Promote Biodiesel | Testimonials | Links | Downloads | Top of the page

Forum Navigator: