The Red Brick Times

Biomass or bio-mess? The accounting is not yet done. Techno-mavens and adherents to the faith may argue until they are purple, but nothing moves the needle like a hard look at the system. Tony and I have argued in the past about where to draw the circle. How much of the universe do you include in the analysis? If you include the whole thing, nothing matters because the equation is balanced. If you include too little, inequalities appear. For example, "throw it away" means you don't see it any more. See it where? In your kitchen? In your house? In your city? In the ground? See what I mean? Who benefits and who is affected? There really ain't no such thing as "away", but you can draw arbitrary boundaries for analysis.

NPR Morning Edition (Feb 2, 2006) hosted an article about the current attractions of bio-fuels. Hear it at "Professor Attacks Enthusiasm for Bio-Fuels." Read a text article at "Cornell ecologist's study finds that producing ethanol and biodiesel from corn and other crops is not worth the energy." Another article, about UC Berkeley results, is " Ethanol Stirs Eco-Debate." Professors from Berkely and Cornell made an accounting of the "gozintas" and "comzoutas" of the ethanol process. They found that the current processes use more than they produce.

Arguments against their results include "Why should they include the environmental costs of building the farmer's tractor?" Looking at it one way, the farmer buys the tractor and drives the market production, so the costs are included. Looking at it another way, the farmer will use any old tractor and just switch fuels, if possible, so the costs are excluded.

So, where do YOU draw the circle?
Posted 12:20 PM by Andy (4) comments

       Comments:

Andy if you haven't read it check out this book
By William McDonough & Michael Braungart
North Point Press, 2002

They reference the rehab of the Rouge River plant, which I hope won't be too painful, and put forward the mantra that "Waste is Food". They tout chemically engineering producs that can be infinitely recycled at the same level of quality rather "down cycled" thru degrees of degradation til they become garbage.

There's obviously a social mindset hurdle to overcome with the attendant effort required to jump it, but it's an appealing idea in that it doesn't simply advocate retreat to some Hobbesian prehistoric lifestyle.

My future daughter-in-law gave it to for Christmas last year. The book itself is produced according to the principles it expounds which gave it some credibility.

# posted by  A. O. : February 02, 2006 1:53 PM
 
I'll check it out. The Rouge plant makeover was on three levels. 1) The least important was to keep the historical heritage and continuity of Old Henry's vision. Actually, the Rouge is dissected. The steel operation, the glass-making operation, and other elements were sold outside of Ford many years ago to shed fixed costs and aging equipment. 2) The public benefit of making a commitment to keeping jobs locally, and in a "green" and environmentally friendly manner. Given the size and scope of the industrial operation, the surface and air effluents are only reduced when compared to legacy installations. When compared to an average residential neighborhood outflow, it is still an overwhelming output. 3) Most importantly, the damn thing has to make money. Given a large and expsnsive set of tooling, it has to be as changeable as an erector set to handle new stuff. Total flexibility would allow them to build small plastic kiddy cars intermixed with full-sized SUVs, but that is an extreme view. Modern retooling must be done between shifts with no loss of production, and without extensive bricks and mortar changes. Flip some supports, turn some screws, and voila! The new vehicle fits the assembly line. The modern manufacturing plant must have "generic" written all over it to stay competitive.

# posted by  Andy : February 02, 2006 4:11 PM
 
Check out how the Germans do it. Great pictures of the VW Phaeton factory where they make the Phaeton and the Bentley.I'm not sure how "generic" it is,but it sure is cool. I always thought factories were supposed to be greasy at least.

# posted by  A. O. : February 02, 2006 5:38 PM
 
When you are paying $110,000 for a Volkswagen, I guess you should be able to get a hand-built one, and to see how it is assembled. New factories are largely bright and neat and clean. After 30-40 years, grime settles in the overhead, and festoons of cables appear, old abandoned conduits and pipes hang about and things start to look a bit worn around the edges. After all, remove the magnum mysterium of it all and what you have is a mechanical creature that eats parts and excretes vehicles.

Notice how the Dresden factory looks like a Frank Lloyd Wright design for a medieval castle? Moat, defensible bridges and all.

# posted by  Andy : February 02, 2006 10:06 PM
 
Post a Comment


---