<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: U.S. Navy Fires off Another Round of Biofuel Power</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cleantechnica.com/2012/07/03/navy-doe-and-usda-partner-on-new-low-cost-biofuel-projects/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2012/07/03/navy-doe-and-usda-partner-on-new-low-cost-biofuel-projects/</link>
	<description>Clean Tech News &#38; Views: Solar Energy News. Wind Energy News. EV News. &#38; More.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2014 06:06:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Navy Biofuel Program Gets Four New Pilot Projects</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2012/07/03/navy-doe-and-usda-partner-on-new-low-cost-biofuel-projects/#comment-159541</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Navy Biofuel Program Gets Four New Pilot Projects]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Apr 2013 07:01:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=39723#comment-159541</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] response, the Obama Administration used its powers under the decades-old Defense Production Act and other pipelines to authorize funds for private companies to build pilot projects and [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] response, the Obama Administration used its powers under the decades-old Defense Production Act and other pipelines to authorize funds for private companies to build pilot projects and [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SolarCity, Lend Lease extend rooftop solar program for US air force - reneweconomy.com.au : Renew Economy</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2012/07/03/navy-doe-and-usda-partner-on-new-low-cost-biofuel-projects/#comment-127033</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SolarCity, Lend Lease extend rooftop solar program for US air force - reneweconomy.com.au : Renew Economy]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2012 00:14:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=39723#comment-127033</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Navy is forging ahead with a $62-million biofuel research and development project under the force of a 1950′s-era law, and DoD has just announced a $420-million [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Navy is forging ahead with a $62-million biofuel research and development project under the force of a 1950′s-era law, and DoD has just announced a $420-million [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: U.S. Air Force Gets Solar Power from SolarCity, Continues Clean Energy Push - CleanTechnica</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2012/07/03/navy-doe-and-usda-partner-on-new-low-cost-biofuel-projects/#comment-126907</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[U.S. Air Force Gets Solar Power from SolarCity, Continues Clean Energy Push - CleanTechnica]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jul 2012 13:32:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=39723#comment-126907</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Navy is forging ahead with a $62-million biofuel research and development project under the force of a 1950&#8242;s-era law, and DoD has just announced a $420-million [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Navy is forging ahead with a $62-million biofuel research and development project under the force of a 1950&#8242;s-era law, and DoD has just announced a $420-million [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Boeing, American Airlines and FAA partner on ecoDemonstrator</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2012/07/03/navy-doe-and-usda-partner-on-new-low-cost-biofuel-projects/#comment-126579</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Boeing, American Airlines and FAA partner on ecoDemonstrator]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Jul 2012 09:00:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=39723#comment-126579</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] of Energy and Department of Agriculture partnered in a $62 million public-private effort to develop drop-in aviation biofuel as well as biodiesel.That announcement was followed by a $420 million, public-private initiative [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] of Energy and Department of Agriculture partnered in a $62 million public-private effort to develop drop-in aviation biofuel as well as biodiesel.That announcement was followed by a $420 million, public-private initiative [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pentagon Announces New $420 Biofuel Project</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2012/07/03/navy-doe-and-usda-partner-on-new-low-cost-biofuel-projects/#comment-126042</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Pentagon Announces New $420 Biofuel Project]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Jul 2012 02:06:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=39723#comment-126042</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] effort to quash its biofuel initiatives. Early last week, the Obama announced a Navy-supported $62 million biofuel research program, and it followed up a few days later with another $420 million effort by the Department of Defense [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] effort to quash its biofuel initiatives. Early last week, the Obama announced a Navy-supported $62 million biofuel research program, and it followed up a few days later with another $420 million effort by the Department of Defense [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DeniDieselSubdude</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2012/07/03/navy-doe-and-usda-partner-on-new-low-cost-biofuel-projects/#comment-125637</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[DeniDieselSubdude]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jul 2012 14:59:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=39723#comment-125637</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Go Navy...I guess.  I&#039;m a 28 year Navy Nuke submarine vet.  While we all watch our inept government try to sustain biofuel-ology many of us are already driving on our own renewables (150,000 miles now).  Reviving the simple tried and true (pure) veg oil diesel engine fuel methods of its inventor, this is my 7th year of making my own NON-BIODIESEL (no waste byproduct, no excessive energy inputs, no water/oil waste runoff, no hazardous chemicals required - methanol, caustic...) blended biofuel from waste veg oil.  Why must we insist on complicating the processing of hydrocarbons?

After building another 8 systems for those asking for help, I will continue to carry on with a smile in my little corner and keep cranking fuel through my 6 year old processor as it nears its 6,500 gallon mark.  It&#039;s not rocket science - no wait, that would be easy compared to Nuclear Reactor Physics.  The only drawback is that the newer diesels 2006+ have injector systems that are too wimpy for this fuel to act as a &#039;drop in.&#039;

As for carbon footprints, the oil stock I use comes 5 miles away.  The oil stock we buy at the pump comes several hundred if not thousands by (probably non-bio)diesel truck.  My oil stock sequestered carbon before it was used in a restaurant&#039;s business.  I use less than a kWh to run a 50 gallon batch.  Even with the emissions of my worst vehicle - 1997 Benz, I&#039;m liking the sustainability of this big picture.  Energy Return on Investment (EROI) is through the roof, too.  Best of all, no tax dollars were needed for any of the research or SIMPLE equipment, just a little American initiative, and yet, still plenty of American skeptics.Go Old Navy!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Go Navy&#8230;I guess.  I&#8217;m a 28 year Navy Nuke submarine vet.  While we all watch our inept government try to sustain biofuel-ology many of us are already driving on our own renewables (150,000 miles now).  Reviving the simple tried and true (pure) veg oil diesel engine fuel methods of its inventor, this is my 7th year of making my own NON-BIODIESEL (no waste byproduct, no excessive energy inputs, no water/oil waste runoff, no hazardous chemicals required &#8211; methanol, caustic&#8230;) blended biofuel from waste veg oil.  Why must we insist on complicating the processing of hydrocarbons?</p>
<p>After building another 8 systems for those asking for help, I will continue to carry on with a smile in my little corner and keep cranking fuel through my 6 year old processor as it nears its 6,500 gallon mark.  It&#8217;s not rocket science &#8211; no wait, that would be easy compared to Nuclear Reactor Physics.  The only drawback is that the newer diesels 2006+ have injector systems that are too wimpy for this fuel to act as a &#8216;drop in.&#8217;</p>
<p>As for carbon footprints, the oil stock I use comes 5 miles away.  The oil stock we buy at the pump comes several hundred if not thousands by (probably non-bio)diesel truck.  My oil stock sequestered carbon before it was used in a restaurant&#8217;s business.  I use less than a kWh to run a 50 gallon batch.  Even with the emissions of my worst vehicle &#8211; 1997 Benz, I&#8217;m liking the sustainability of this big picture.  Energy Return on Investment (EROI) is through the roof, too.  Best of all, no tax dollars were needed for any of the research or SIMPLE equipment, just a little American initiative, and yet, still plenty of American skeptics.Go Old Navy!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JMin2020</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2012/07/03/navy-doe-and-usda-partner-on-new-low-cost-biofuel-projects/#comment-125635</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[JMin2020]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jul 2012 14:05:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=39723#comment-125635</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I could graciously just chalk the impediment of Bio Fuel Use and Production to political band standing; but I suspect it has more to do with a reluctance to let go of petroleum as a fuel source feedstock. This is an election year and another two term Presidency is on the line; so there is plenty of politicale motivation involved; but Isee the impediment of bio fuel production and use as an impediment to our National Progress. After all; one good disruption of the oil supplies in the Middle East would bring the price of oil and oil based fuels right back up to where any alledged expense of bio fuels would certainly seem quite livable. I applaud the currenrt Administrations use of the Defense Production Act. At least Bio Fuels have a high degree of relative predictability where availability and raw resources are concerned. Syngas produced from Landfill materials can go a long way to replacing jet fuel made from oil and there are countless options for liquid and gaseous fuels to be produced from bio mass; waste carbon dioxide and so forth.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I could graciously just chalk the impediment of Bio Fuel Use and Production to political band standing; but I suspect it has more to do with a reluctance to let go of petroleum as a fuel source feedstock. This is an election year and another two term Presidency is on the line; so there is plenty of politicale motivation involved; but Isee the impediment of bio fuel production and use as an impediment to our National Progress. After all; one good disruption of the oil supplies in the Middle East would bring the price of oil and oil based fuels right back up to where any alledged expense of bio fuels would certainly seem quite livable. I applaud the currenrt Administrations use of the Defense Production Act. At least Bio Fuels have a high degree of relative predictability where availability and raw resources are concerned. Syngas produced from Landfill materials can go a long way to replacing jet fuel made from oil and there are countless options for liquid and gaseous fuels to be produced from bio mass; waste carbon dioxide and so forth.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cliff Claven</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2012/07/03/navy-doe-and-usda-partner-on-new-low-cost-biofuel-projects/#comment-125629</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Cliff Claven]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jul 2012 11:59:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=39723#comment-125629</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The U.S. Congress has been subsidizing biomass crops to the tune of $6 Billion a year since 2005.  The Department of Energy has already spent more than $600 Million on biorefineries since 2010. The IRS has been granting millions in annual tax breaks.  The USDA has been giving out hundreds of millions in loan guarantees to the likes of Range Fuels that implode in high-profile bankruptcies.  Now the Administration is using the Department of Defense to funnel more subsidies. These refineries go out of business (or never start) as soon as the free money dries up. Google &quot;ethanol bankruptcy&quot; and the endless list will water your eyes. There are failed biorefineries for sale all over the country, yet a government $16 Trillion in the hole is spending taxpayer money to build more. Since 2007, the U.S. Military has purchased 1.3 million gallons of biofuels at an average price of $48 per gallon.  Biofuels are not just bad economics, they are bad thermodynamics.  As to the claim that biofuels offer superior performance, this is because of a process called hydrotreatment which adds fossil fuel hydrogen to make true hydrocarbons from bio-oils and alcohols.  Hydrotreating can also be done to fine tune petroleum fuels.  Refineries don&#039;t do it because it adds only 4-7% increased performance for a doubling of the cost and rational consumers wouldn&#039;t pay for it.  However, the U.S. Government is not a rational consumer since they are spending other people&#039;s money.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The U.S. Congress has been subsidizing biomass crops to the tune of $6 Billion a year since 2005.  The Department of Energy has already spent more than $600 Million on biorefineries since 2010. The IRS has been granting millions in annual tax breaks.  The USDA has been giving out hundreds of millions in loan guarantees to the likes of Range Fuels that implode in high-profile bankruptcies.  Now the Administration is using the Department of Defense to funnel more subsidies. These refineries go out of business (or never start) as soon as the free money dries up. Google &#8220;ethanol bankruptcy&#8221; and the endless list will water your eyes. There are failed biorefineries for sale all over the country, yet a government $16 Trillion in the hole is spending taxpayer money to build more. Since 2007, the U.S. Military has purchased 1.3 million gallons of biofuels at an average price of $48 per gallon.  Biofuels are not just bad economics, they are bad thermodynamics.  As to the claim that biofuels offer superior performance, this is because of a process called hydrotreatment which adds fossil fuel hydrogen to make true hydrocarbons from bio-oils and alcohols.  Hydrotreating can also be done to fine tune petroleum fuels.  Refineries don&#8217;t do it because it adds only 4-7% increased performance for a doubling of the cost and rational consumers wouldn&#8217;t pay for it.  However, the U.S. Government is not a rational consumer since they are spending other people&#8217;s money.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
