Energy's Future: Bio-diesel possible changes

Companies are switching the type of molecule they are using to produce Bio-Diesel. The change will be from the famous ethanol, derived from corn, to an easier to a more easier to handle molecule called Butanol.

NYTimes

Butanol is more valuable than ethanol because it contains more energy and can be blended a little easier than Ethanol. But it is a costly process.


Advantages

-More energy
-More Materials to choose from other than corn.
-Easier to mix in gasoline.
-Doesn't evaporate easily as compared to Ethanol.

Consequences
-Reduced amount of plant supply, more energy more plants used.
-Costly Process
-Experimental and possibly won't meet air requirement needs.

What's your opinion of the topic? Would you like the advantages, risking possible consequences?

It's costly, and therefore a big no for me. The government can feel free to use it for war if it takes money from things that don't need them (professional sports players, congress members, etc.) so long as they keep away from things that could use money. If it's for the citizens, then I'm ignoring it if it's more costly than what "normal" gas is. Better for the environment or not, I'm not paying more money for an already overpriced necessity.

Well it is still in development process and perhaps we might see something new coming. I personally don't like to let go a chance to save mother earth if i can but it also depend on my wallet.

There's one thing we have to be aware though; biodiesel comes from crops like palm oil, rapeseed, coconut and peanuts. Over-relying on biodiesel means we will plant more of such crops relative to other crops such as corn and rice. Farmers in Southeast Asia are treating biodiesel crops as cash crops, lessening supply of consumption crops produced. This can lead an increase in food prices. Not to mention, less arable land for farming rice and the like...

Corn for biodirsel is bullshit, as it's has a negative energy index - you use up more petrol growing, harvesting and processing the crops than what you gain as a product. Making the processing more complex and energy intensive won't help a bit.

It's yet another scheme to make rich farmers richer at the taxpayers' expense.

Bio diesel...from one perspective, it might be worthwhile to invest, as it is cheaper to use the called buthanol from the conventional ethanol.However, in my opinion, i don't think that this statement is correct, at least in the terms of usage in the long run. The article states that this buthanol needs to be mixed with petrol that we used today, and we all know that oil is finite, and is going to deplete completely soon. There's a lot of better alternative, like fuel cells- http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_cell, solar, or even air- http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2266632/Car-runs-air-coming-soon-Peugeot-Citroen-unveil-new-117mpg-hybrid.html.

The thing is, it might not be worthwhile, especially for companies and government, to invest in bio-diesel and such alternatives that still uses oil as energy to power the vehicles. Indeed, the joy of listening v10 or even v12 revving is happiness (i really love cars, i do) and replacing them with these type of alternatives will make it really sucked. Although at some point, it still is arguable that using bio-diesel is more practical, as it is obviously costs less to R&D than the alternatives i mentioned above, if we're talking about gaining profits in short terms. But obviously we're talking more than just profits, right...?

All n all, in my opinion, i will say no. I'm talking about long term prospect here, where we all can enjoy our place and for our ancestors. As for the engine revving, no worries, they've covered it, http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/news/industry/the-rise-of-the-fake-engine-roar-11291754.

P.s. My argument is a bit off-topic, sorry :(, but i think it's worth mentioning, as for the extra info might change your mind (i hope).