Recently there has been much talk of growing crops to produce energy. Is this a serious idea or just some political kite flying by DEFRA etc? When you look at the facts it is going to need one hell of a lot of more subsidy/loss of tax revenues to get such schemes off the ground particulary in the agricultural sector. Firstly crops catch less than 1% of all radiation that comes on the planet, so instantly we lose 99% in light lost and plant maintainnace, better off covering the fields in solar panels! Secondly transporting all of the 1% that we captured we may then have to process it and transport to site for the end use. Plant is expensive and the many non farming country residents would love all those lorries running around the countryside. The willow burning plant in Yorkshire if I have read right in the press cost £3 million per Mw capacity installed compared to £1millionper Mw installed in windpower, ok it is only assumed to run at 30% efficiency as the wind doesn't blow all the time, but it costs nothing to fuel it once its up. As for local heat and energy plants it may be a bit more of a starter, but again the lack of scale in local terms in the countryside would appear to make it seem more likely to be used in industrial areas such as waste plants and if it is happen in the uk the bi fueling, by which I mean power stations are designed to run with a mix of conventional fuels, coals oil, and waste by products. Also remember if the uk farming is stuffed UK electricity is even more stuffed with over 20 % over capacity, short electric market prices are as low as 1.3p/kw how does that compare to your bill? As for biofuels there is probably scope in recycling food oils and ethanol from fibrous materials. To me it seems first unethical to make fuel from food crops when there are starving all be it less of the population than ever before and secondly uneconomical in the EU as world suger prices are much lower than that of the EU. Oh well that is enough from me over to everyone else.

As some willow coppice is being grown close to me, i have asked many people if the energy used to; plant/cut/chop/haul/dry/handle, will be more than if the diesel used were to be burnt in an oil power station. I have yet to get an answer, so i suspect its NO!

Bio-mass strikes me as being a bit of a non-starter - new crops and machinery required. But Bio-fuels produced from oil seed rape, wheat and sugar beet must have a future. Look at what is happening in Brazil, the USA and Europe. Bio-fuels would be useful way of using the Black sea produce that is going to swamp Europe in the next decade.

I am a little bit biased on this subject because my Mother is a Director of a Bio Fuel company. I have been able to read many articles and letters from all sorts of people on this matter, and I think that the first thing that we should not do, if we are to discuss it sensibly, is to class all the bio fuels as one. Willow, for example, should not be grouped in the same category as Bio Diesel because it is grown to produce a different energy product and is aimed at a different market. It is a long term deal which, according to what the government admit, is really just a PR exercise and is in reality a waste of time. Road and industrial usable fuels such as Bio Diesel and Bio Ethanol, from rape or wheat, are much more viable options for farmers because it utilizes the crops already grown, requires no new skills or new machinery, and it would be much easier to get farmers 'on board' because there is no extra financial outlay for them. It is just another market for a surplus crop, and we should all welcome that. The other big plus is that quantity, not quality, will be the criteria for growing crops such as wheat for bio fuel. The type or variety is not important, nor is the bushel weight, nor is the moisture level (up to a reasonable amount), so that means we can all grow high yielding feed wheats with less emphasis on chemicals and fertilisers, and then combine through the night at 19% with no worries about drying costs or penalties. That alone has to be worth something. I know that once this Bio Fuel company was formed there were 2 or 3 oil companies knocking on the door wanting to get involved, and they are simply commercial companies, nothing to do with politics or PR. If there was no future in it, they would not even look at such a project. And let's not forget that conventional crude oil from the Earth's crust is not going to last forever. How are we going to replace it? If I had a choice between driving my car on bio fuel or driving around in one of Glenner's solar powered Sinclair C5's then I know what I would rather do. Farmers always moan about the job being crap, and then when an idea comes along that may help them, they don't give it a chance. Just keep an open mind and see what happens. MC

Whilst I can see the advantages of Biodiesel reclaimed from fish and chip oil has anyone done an energy audit on for instance diesel produced from oilseed rape? Jack Caley

Somehow I can't see Fish and Chip shop oil being the answer to the world's energy needs Jack. As for the audit, there is one underway at present in conjunction with the feasibility study into a new purpose built plant. I will let you know the results. MC

several studies have shown that the return is nowhere near as good as the promoters of bio fuels would like, But then that has not stopped the support of chicken litter power stations has it . Of course though it is not the chancellor losing tax on bio fuels which comes into play here but the dear old consumer who pays 10 times the price for "green electricity" which he he has to do under the rules obliging the energy supply companies to buy 10% green elctricity

Ok, so let's just forget about bio fuels and carry on using fossil fuels for the next 40 or 50 years, by the time it runs out most of us will be dead anyway and it will not be our problem, right? Sorry, but I don't agree with such thinking. Whenever a new idea comes along it is always ridiculed by the establishment. Cars would never replace horses, trains would never replace the canal systems, people were laughed at for trying to make a flying machine. When a proven system has reached it's limit of development then it is time for a rethink. Fossil fuel technology is decades infront of bio fuel, but there is more scope for development in bio technology than in fossil fuels. Time and progress will eventually make the input / return ratio more favourable. This has happened throughout history in all areas of industry and science. A reasonable man adapts himself to the world in which he lives. An unreasonable man tries to make the world around him adapt to his needs. Therefore, all the progress in the world has to be made by unreasonable men. If you consider yourself to be a reasonable man then this whole bio business might sound like a load of rubbish, I can understand that. But if you consider yourself to be a reasonable man then would you be happy to sell all your wheat to a bio fuel company in ten year time if they were offering a good deal? Probably? Thought so. MC

Mad Contractor, You missed the point, I do not expect recycled fish and chip oil to fuel the world. Whay I did ask for was an energy audit, if you did not understand does anyone else? Jack Caley

Yes MC But the question is; Is it taking 5 litres of petrol to make 4.5 litres of petrol equivilent just to make us all feel "green"?

Like I said Jack, I don't have one now but there is one underway at present and I will be glad to let you know the results in time. I fully expect it to return a non too favourable result, but that shouldn't be taken as a bad thing, it is the possibilities of such a project that should be viewed with a long term eye. MC

I don't know the answer, but it will not be too favourable I am sure. My point is that even if it is a very poor ratio of energy used for energy gained then that should not put an end to this idea because we have a long way to go and a lot of development to see in order a better return in the end. All these new technologies have a poor return to begin with but it is the future potential that is important. let me ask another question, what would you say if it was taking 5 litres of bio petrol to make 4.5 litres of bio petrol? MC

""5 litres of bio petrol to make 4.5 litres of bio petrol?"" Yes thats great!!!...do enough of that and all the crops grown get used up and we all go hungry!

[:)] So wheat and OSR prices will then go through the roof and farming will return to being a lucrative business? Why are you against it then?. {;)] MC

Talking biodiesel, on average it takes 1 hectare to produce 1 tonne of rapeseed oil that can be used to produce 1000 litres of biodiesel that replaces 1000 litres of fossil diesel. This saves nearly 3.5 tonnes of CO2 greenhouse gas emission. However, to be able to achieve this commercially, Treasury must give 35p per litre tax break. If it did, we could produce only 8% of fuel used in UK. As it is, Treasury has given 20p a litre tax break, which enables biodiesel to be produced from recovered cooking oil (currently used as an animal feed supplement but not for much longer). The potential for this is restricted to 100,000 tonnes a year for the whole of the UK. Meanwhile, Cropwise is understood to be looking for UK OSR to export to Germany for them to convert to biodiesel. www.ukbiodiesel.biz is the site address of the current UK producers, and there are two more large plants being commissioned. We have serious global problems ahead, but the answer really does 'loi in the soil'!

no no no! plants are the most effcient way of capturing the solar energy that we recieve. wind and solar power are too ineffcient, and you must consider the energy and money spent manufacturing them. Bio fuels are the answer to our energy problems. they give off less CO2 than conventional fuels, and by growing the crops we lock up carbon also; remember that the stubble is incorporated into the soil- hence locking up carbon. As for lorries transporting rape around the countryside it already happens- grain lorries. PLUS i get to grow and sell them and make money for the UK economy.

Couldnt agree more, difficult to see why this Government, which claims to be concerned about the welfare of the planet doesnt abolish excise duty on bio fuels and really make a useful contribution to saving the world, rather just yacking about it a international conferences. Could it be that they are just spouting hypocritical crap?

When I started this it was after a glass of port to many, and I shall admit from a position of interest in windfarm development. I have no argument that plants are the most efficient way of gathering solar radiation,they are the ONLY WAY. I was more concerned in the efficiencies of different ways of producing energy and their relative costs both in the energy yielded itself, and the financial costs. I recently read in the letters page of FW that a tonne of straw was worth £80 in oil equvalent terms in the field, but after transport etc what is it worth, because as straw it ain't going to power my car tractor etc so how can it be worth £80 as Oil? Another interesting question what would be oil equvalent value of the grain that was harvested? Would it be seen as unethicl to burn grain?, which was my line with using sugar as precuurser in ethanol, doubly so when EU sugar costs 3 times as much as that on the world market. Clearly I am no expert, but I do believe that we require an energy mix, and taht as growers of cereals, willow, beet etc for energy we should not expect our subsidy cheques in growing energy products and that in calculating the real costs of producing this energy. Of course the issue will surely soon be clouded with tax credits for carbon emmisions. If you believe in biocrops start speaking to the electricity generators. They all now have a renewables section and they will be tell you what they are really interested in. Of course the real answer would all be if we were to use waht energy is presently produced and availble in more efficient ways, that would be innovative.

Hi Glenner, Just a couple of points about what you have written well. A tonne of straw can produce the same energy if burnt as £80 worth of oil in a power station. This can be converted to electricity which can run an electric car (not a tractor but that's what biodiesel is for). In South America they have around 2 million cars that run on ethanol made from sugar cane, ethanol can also be produced from any grain or anything that can ferment, we can even run cars on whiskey if we wish. The Benzine count is lower from alchohol powered cars. The grain isn't burnt, it's fermented then burnt, being cleaner and less bulky, aye, whiskey basically. The best car would be hydrogen or steam powered (they had steam cars in the early 1920's to 30's. Unfortunatley in Mans quest for energy we found oil first, which has been our measure from then on, unfortunately other Greener fuels can't compete (economics, energy per volume etc dictate price, yeah?) And on a slightly more sinister note, Britain as a whole has a target for using green fuels as dictated by the EU and as we know Britain is very windy (particulalry where I live) and is surrounded by water, it's not particularly sunny so that means our only options are wind and wave energy (Hydo of course but the Greenies wouldn't want to see habitats destroyed now would they?), this then leaves ugly inefficient wind turbines and wave generators everywhere. Our beloved Government(s) will ultimately go for poncey turbines so we can be seen as leaders in renewable energy because lets be honest, we don't lead at anything else (as a note of interest France is over 85% nuclear powered, how would you feel about that in Britain?) I believe in Greener fuels, I beleive that we should be looking at alchohol cars, biodiesels and other fermented subsitutes, but not wind and wave generation. However, I'm very sceptical about our reasons for doing so, it's got nothing to do with our planet warming up anyway, it's to do with showmanship and Tony Blair securing himself as President of the EU if and when we decide to join. By the way, the first every oil and gas field opened in the North Sea hasn't dried up yet and we find more all the time.

it think that other forces are at work here. what would BP and SHELL etc. think if the usage of conventional fuels declined and hence lost them their giant profits? i suspect the government is more keen to keep bio fuels offline and continue to gain massive tax revenues.

it think that other forces are at work here. what would BP and SHELL etc. think if the usage of conventional fuels declined and hence lost them their giant profits? i suspect the government is more keen to keep bio fuels offline and continue to gain massive tax revenues.

i am less convinced of the benefits of bio mass production. there seems to be a lot of energy useage before even one tonne is burnt in a power station. i did not realise that bio mass such as coppice must be oven dried prior to incineration. i read some time ago that US farmers were burning grain, but for what use i cannot remember. Straw could be an alternative, and it is not a problem in terms of CO2 emmision as the next crop will take up the CO2. However i fear that our views will stand up to nothing as the government is happy using nuclear and gas power stations. I do believe that Biofuel will be the best option with regards to vehicles. As to whether ethanol or rape based diesel is better i do not know.

This is not actually the case. Currently BP, Conoco and Esso are working on their own variations of Bio diesel. Biodiesel will be sold as a blend of 5% biodiesel and 95% Derv. This is the only way current biodiesel stocks can be "spread around" (ie there isnt enough product available at the moment) This is also the only way that manufacturers warranties on vehicles, machinery etc will be validated. Anyone using 100% Biodiesel will find that no manufacturer will uphold the warranty as this product has not yet been tested thoroughly enough by manufacturers. Also, in France Total are selling Biodiesel on every forecourt they have in the country, they have been forced to by the French government in order to stimulate the biodiesel industry over there.