Speaking of Cellulosic ethanol as an alternative energy...There has been establishment using process simulation software to look at bio refinery design at the moment.

Let's look at economic point of view:

Fundamental scale of economies can be achieved if 5,000 to 10,000 tonnes of biomass per day can be processed. Else, if the tonne metric is below 2,000 per day, the capital costs will go upward.

Let's go the science point of view:

Is it cleaner and greener? For the combustion of ethanol, formaldehyde and acetaldehyde, both known carcinogens are produced. Levels of peroxyacetylnitrate (PAN) may also increase and this is definitely will not be a good news for our Ozone.

A more technical and safety measures should be addressed accordingly to achieve a sustainable resources. If this science hurdle is overcame, it would be a viable option to consider.

This however comes in the question of: Will Ethanol (Green Gold) could replace imported crude oil (Black Gold)? With Shell Oil predicting global market for bio fuels such as mentioned would grow to exceed $10 billion by 2012, I would not say the notion being coined by "dreamer101" is not viable. It's just a matter of time for us to have a potential substituting resources.

Malaysia can utilises the waste from Palm Oil plantation since our country has abundant pile of palm oil waste. Would our Government considering it's plausible possibilities? It can be considered as long as the environmental and economic issues are tackled accordingly.

Regards, Joey

p.s: Some excerpts are from Institute of Science in Society (back dated ISIS Report).

This post has been edited by Joey Christensen: Aug 10 2009, 11:02 AM

Option A and B are not viable. It's even worst off.

What makes me think is, if we can somehow or somewhat convert formaldehyde and acetaldehyde in a safely and/or environmental friendly manner, Cellulosic Ethanol is definitely a better choice.

Regards, Joey

---

Added on August 10, 2009, 11:11 amDecomposition is unquestionable. I have to admit, since "dreamer101" mentioned of landfilling, would it be " occupationally unsafe" to build high rise building on it? It sounded stupid but I can't get rid of the notion of landslides or "quicksand effect". (Highland Towers incident still gives me the shivers, yu know?)

Hey! Anyone thought of "sand"? Sand is everywhere! As far as my science mind can take me; glass, silicon are made of sand composition, right? It would be great if we can somehow uses it to create energy, right?

Regards, Joey

This post has been edited by Joey Christensen: Aug 10 2009, 11:14 AM

Even though from science point of view it is deemed as feasible but in terms of economic point of view?

As much as I would want to agree, as long as the economies of scale is not reached, I'd say it's a thought to be KIV-ed.

Regards, Joey