Sounds too good to be true, reading the origional article it seems to be a load of bull.

here is a little quote from the article

"Vetroleum, as Rivera calls it - can then be further refined into everything from gasoline to jet fuel and just about every petrochemical in between."

So this guy can make petrol! impressive, belivable, but.. he then claims that his "petrol" burns without heat or pollution....if this is true his "petrol" isnt petrol, or a petrochemichal for that matter but something entirely different and probabarly fictional.

well i am not a chemist or a physisist and i havnt seen the stuff in action so i cant say wether this guy is lying but it sure sounds false to me.

Its a law of physics you burn something heat is created period no way around it and there is always some sort of pollution.

With the right catalysts his reaction can actually work but 10 pounds per gallon sounds alittle Too efficient. Otherwise its not exactly waste but more like burning coal with a super effective catalyst.

I'm sure he's calming it's clean because i could potentially be considered "carbon neutral". However "carbon neutral" assumes you don't produce more carbon than is used by plants during their life cycle. I believe his method would produce more carbon then is used by plants for the end product, but may not do so for the initial refining. That's the only why it could be considered clean.

This just sounds like good old Thermaldepolymerization.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_depolymerization

Leftover feed is waste; why can't the animals eat leftovers? Rice is food, grain is food, and beans are food. Who cares if he can turn 60 pounds of food into fuel? 60 pounds of food is a LOT of food and produces only between 5 and 6 gallons of gasoline. The only product listed that is actually "waste" is husks (of corn?) but it is not like we have an infinite supply of those.

I have never in my life seen anyone who looked more like a snake oil salesman than Mr. Rivera (if indeed that is his real name). NOTHING he has offered on any of his SSTP websites offers any PROOF of what he claims. Even the so-called 'analysis' of the so-called bio-crude isn't a laboratory chemical analysis at all. It doesn't say anything about WHAT the bio-crude IS, how it burns, or what it's chemical properties are. This is truly (until proven otherwise) just SNAKE OIL. If, however, by some strange twist of the imagination, this really does work (all physics and logic be damned), then farmers should get PAID to supply these so-called 'reactors' with farm waste (or receive the residual fertilizer for FREE), and the resulting bio-fuel should cost LESS THAN $1 per gallon to the end consumer. Internal combustion engines rely on the highly volatile nature of gasoline to work. And no form of combustion is completely free of pollutants. Even natural gas when used as a motor fuel produces CO2 as a byproduct. The only emission-less form of energy creation is a hydrogen fuel-cell, where the byproduct of its operation is WATER. Unfortunately however, there is presently no way to create abundant supplies of hydrogen without also polluting the atmosphere with CO2 at one stage or another in the process. As others have said: This is BULLS__T, plain and simple. If it were true, wouldn't he (Mr. Rivera) have brought in EXPERTS to evaluate and prove his process, not bureaucrats from South America (who don't know Jack-S__T about chemistry!)

that's just trash talk advertising .... that in fact came up to surface from time to time just to focus up on reinventing something known for a century at least. and it seems pretty weird to see that paid advert on tech news site, it really not worth our attention.

seems like some govag needs to wash some tpm in investing in some bs farm job, and whats raises up least questions then new fuel creation method in time of benzin crysis. well let's releax a bit with a great video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jwXQFFLSHo

There are certain naughty words in the english dictionary like "almost" and "near" and "close to." In this case, he said it burns at "NEAR 100% efficiency," which means it is not totally efficient (there is some heat and/or waste, pollution).

Please read articles carefully before posting your single-minded comments.

isn't this the stuff that goes back into the land to provide 'goodness' to the soil. We already have food shortages caused by using land for bio-fuel production instead of food production. Perhaps the new slogan should be 'Feed people before cars'!

it's called biogas...

Not only Vietnam, in North America too; there is a Biofuel plant going up in my town next year.
It will take plastics and recycle them into Diesel and Furnace fuel.