atpcliff
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2001
- Posts
- 4,260
Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
- Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
- Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
- Share the passion for aviation
- Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun
New Eco-Friendly Jet Fuel In The Works
- Thread starter atpcliff
- Start date
Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
- Invite your friends
- Share the passion of aviation
- Friendliest aviation community on the web
YeOldeProp
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2002
- Posts
- 102
Can you imagine the amount of fuel we can generate by all that excess farmland out there? All those folks who've been getting government subsidies to "not grow" anything on it can now jump up and start their own energy crops. An acre at a time. Then, the money the government saves on all those crop subsidies can go towards social security (AKA the Congressional slush fund).
But, to get rid of the sarcasm...the real oil is gonna disappear or get overwhelmed by demand some day. We might as well transition off of it ASAP (as long as we get the research done right and done "relatively" soon). And...political exemption...it's not the current administration's fault...the American culture has had it pretty good for a really, really long time and the negatives are starting to show...
Now we need to trust all those really smart folks out there to figure it all out. I can see Revenge of the Nerds XI...all those really smart guys saving the global economy via a way to turn garbage into fuel (but ontly if they pay royalties to Back to the Future).
But, to get rid of the sarcasm...the real oil is gonna disappear or get overwhelmed by demand some day. We might as well transition off of it ASAP (as long as we get the research done right and done "relatively" soon). And...political exemption...it's not the current administration's fault...the American culture has had it pretty good for a really, really long time and the negatives are starting to show...
Now we need to trust all those really smart folks out there to figure it all out. I can see Revenge of the Nerds XI...all those really smart guys saving the global economy via a way to turn garbage into fuel (but ontly if they pay royalties to Back to the Future).
CA1900
Big Member
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2002
- Posts
- 5,435
Just remember, though, that crop-based fuels are not "creating" energy. Right now, we spend more oil to create a gallon of ethanol that we would use if we just burned it directly in our cars. In its current form, it's just another government pork project.
We need to reduce wasteful consumption. (This means you, SUV driver.) And we need an alternative source of power to do all the work to create ethanol, "eco-jet fuel," and so forth. Wind and solar should be explored, but they're a drop in the bucket compared to demand.
It's time to get over our fears of Three Mile Island, and start building more nuclear reactors. (Hydrogen is only viable if we have a non-fossil-fuel supply of electricity to create it, for example -- Nuclear would provide that.) Safer, steam-free Pebble Bed Reactors are one option. On the solar front, the solar tower design can generate massive amounts of power.
My point is, crop-based fuels are only half the picture. Created using our current power technology, we're not saving a drop of oil. Where are we going to get the electricity?
We need to reduce wasteful consumption. (This means you, SUV driver.) And we need an alternative source of power to do all the work to create ethanol, "eco-jet fuel," and so forth. Wind and solar should be explored, but they're a drop in the bucket compared to demand.
It's time to get over our fears of Three Mile Island, and start building more nuclear reactors. (Hydrogen is only viable if we have a non-fossil-fuel supply of electricity to create it, for example -- Nuclear would provide that.) Safer, steam-free Pebble Bed Reactors are one option. On the solar front, the solar tower design can generate massive amounts of power.
My point is, crop-based fuels are only half the picture. Created using our current power technology, we're not saving a drop of oil. Where are we going to get the electricity?
"The energy balance of ethanol
Ethanol has a positive energy balance, meaning the ethanol yields more energy than it takes to produce it. It is an efficient fuel made through an efficient process.
It takes less than 35,000 BTUs of energy to turn corn into ethanol, while the ethanol offers at least 77,000 BTUs of energy. Ethanol's energy balance is clearly positive.
Research studies from a variety of sources have found ethanol to have a positive net energy balance. The most recent, by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, shows that ethanol provides an average net energy gain of at least 77%.
One faulty, outdated study shows ethanol's net energy balance to be negative. That research uses fundamentally flawed, decades old data that is not valid considering today's efficiencies in agriculture and in ethanol production."
I agree that we need to look at more efficient ways to produce ethanol, as well as nuclear power. But ethanol is still better than buying oil from the Arabs.
Ethanol has a positive energy balance, meaning the ethanol yields more energy than it takes to produce it. It is an efficient fuel made through an efficient process.
It takes less than 35,000 BTUs of energy to turn corn into ethanol, while the ethanol offers at least 77,000 BTUs of energy. Ethanol's energy balance is clearly positive.
Research studies from a variety of sources have found ethanol to have a positive net energy balance. The most recent, by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, shows that ethanol provides an average net energy gain of at least 77%.
One faulty, outdated study shows ethanol's net energy balance to be negative. That research uses fundamentally flawed, decades old data that is not valid considering today's efficiencies in agriculture and in ethanol production."
I agree that we need to look at more efficient ways to produce ethanol, as well as nuclear power. But ethanol is still better than buying oil from the Arabs.
Big Slick
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2004
- Posts
- 284
Ethenol only helps slow down consumption. Petroleum will still provide the fertilizer, pesticides and transportation of the organic matter.
It is not enough to only look at the transformation process itself. We will use a lot of petroleum products just to get the organic matter to the ethanol refinery.
Personally, I like the pebble reactor idea. The reactor can produce electricity and hydrogen. Of course, we will eventualy run out of nuclear fuels, then we are back to square one.
Converting coal to oil is another consumption-slowing idea. We have yet, however, discovered an energy source that does not run out at some point.
One book I read said that all energy sources - oil, natural gas, coal, nuclear fuel - will run out within about 100 years. So, we are only delaying the inevitable exhaustion of non-renewable fuels. Hopefully, another power source will come along in the next 100 years.
It is not enough to only look at the transformation process itself. We will use a lot of petroleum products just to get the organic matter to the ethanol refinery.
Personally, I like the pebble reactor idea. The reactor can produce electricity and hydrogen. Of course, we will eventualy run out of nuclear fuels, then we are back to square one.
Converting coal to oil is another consumption-slowing idea. We have yet, however, discovered an energy source that does not run out at some point.
One book I read said that all energy sources - oil, natural gas, coal, nuclear fuel - will run out within about 100 years. So, we are only delaying the inevitable exhaustion of non-renewable fuels. Hopefully, another power source will come along in the next 100 years.
Last edited:
GVEtrucker
Member
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2004
- Posts
- 20
Always look at what the money people are saying. Popular Mechanics magazine has a rich history of predicting the future, but a poor track record of predicting when a new idea/product/technology will become economically viable and mainstream.
Here’s an article from Fortune magazine that sums up where we are on the path to bio-fuel being at the corner gas station. Looks like “the stain fighting ingredience in Tide” is the key to ethanol production.
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2006/02/06/8367962/index.htm
GVE
Here’s an article from Fortune magazine that sums up where we are on the path to bio-fuel being at the corner gas station. Looks like “the stain fighting ingredience in Tide” is the key to ethanol production.
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2006/02/06/8367962/index.htm
GVE
Nay, that's crap
THIS is where the future is.
http://www.mindfully.org/Energy/2004/Changing-World-Technologies4apr04.htm
Soon we will be simply mining the old landfills for fuel.
This is also why we will NEVER run out of oil. As the price goes up, other technology becomes cost effective.
Cheers
Wino
THIS is where the future is.
http://www.mindfully.org/Energy/2004/Changing-World-Technologies4apr04.htm
Soon we will be simply mining the old landfills for fuel.
This is also why we will NEVER run out of oil. As the price goes up, other technology becomes cost effective.
Cheers
Wino
CA1900
Big Member
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2002
- Posts
- 5,435
Do you have a cite for that quote? That's contrary to every other source I've read so far. The numbers I've seen claim it takes 131,000 BTUs to make one gallon of ethanol. So with a yield of 77,000 BTUs, that's a 59% loss, not a 77% gain.Flapjack said:
The only independent study I've seen (ie., not sponsored by the government of a corn-growing state nor ADM) claiming the contrary is a very recent UC Berkeley study, and I haven't seen any other confirmation of it. If it's accurate, I'd be behind it 100%. I'm skeptical, but I hope I'm wrong.
Short-term, using domestic coal and natural gas to create an alternative liquid fuel, instead of using imported oil to create gasoline, is still a win in my book. Anything to keep from sending one more dollar (or soldier) to the middle east is a good thing in my view. But the coal and gas will run out; it's only a question of when.
Long-term, more needs to be done to replace that part of the equation. If the refining process really has gotten efficient enough to yield a fuel that can release more BTUs than we put into it ourselves, that's a huge gain. (Obviously the sun is adding a lot to that energy equation, too.) I guess it depends on whose numbers you believe at the moment.
"Do you have a cite for that quote?"
Yeah, I do, but everyone's gonna blast me for it. It's from the ethanol.org website! ha ha If you Google around a bit, you will find other studies and articles disputing the Berkely and Cornell studies...
OK, so I understand they have a vested interest in all of this. So do the people who funded the Cornell and the Berkely anti-ethanol studies, I'm sure. My only point is that many other studies can be found to both support and deny the benefits of this fuel source. It's kind of like ALPA asserting a position which runs contrary to the ATA. There's truth on both sides being stretched to maximize their own advantages.
Admittedly, it's a stop-gap measure, a consumption slowing alternative. However, it's a fuel source that already has significant production mechanisms in place, it's pretty well-known, requires little for the consumer to adopt (Flex Fuel Vehicles are regular cars with corrosion resistant fuel tanks/lines/injectors), and it puts money into American farmer's pockets instead of the Saudi Princes and the like. It's going to be ready for large scale use sooner than other forms or energy, and it doesn't face the political obstacles that nuclear plants have.
Anything to get the ball rolling in the right direction, I say. And bring on the waste reclamation technology, the nuclear power, the hydrogen, etc.!
Yeah, I do, but everyone's gonna blast me for it. It's from the ethanol.org website! ha ha If you Google around a bit, you will find other studies and articles disputing the Berkely and Cornell studies...
OK, so I understand they have a vested interest in all of this. So do the people who funded the Cornell and the Berkely anti-ethanol studies, I'm sure. My only point is that many other studies can be found to both support and deny the benefits of this fuel source. It's kind of like ALPA asserting a position which runs contrary to the ATA. There's truth on both sides being stretched to maximize their own advantages.
Admittedly, it's a stop-gap measure, a consumption slowing alternative. However, it's a fuel source that already has significant production mechanisms in place, it's pretty well-known, requires little for the consumer to adopt (Flex Fuel Vehicles are regular cars with corrosion resistant fuel tanks/lines/injectors), and it puts money into American farmer's pockets instead of the Saudi Princes and the like. It's going to be ready for large scale use sooner than other forms or energy, and it doesn't face the political obstacles that nuclear plants have.
Anything to get the ball rolling in the right direction, I say. And bring on the waste reclamation technology, the nuclear power, the hydrogen, etc.!
atpcliff
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2001
- Posts
- 4,260
Hi!
I can see a modern version of "Soylent Green" coming on, where we use a "secret ingredient" to make our new fuel.
I guess none of this matters, since oil is on the way down this week. It's all the way down to $60/barrel, and $25/barrel should happen in only a couple of months, at least if we are to believe Exxon/Mobil. They say peak oil is a myth, which means we'll be awash in oil forever.
Cliff
YIP
I can see a modern version of "Soylent Green" coming on, where we use a "secret ingredient" to make our new fuel.
I guess none of this matters, since oil is on the way down this week. It's all the way down to $60/barrel, and $25/barrel should happen in only a couple of months, at least if we are to believe Exxon/Mobil. They say peak oil is a myth, which means we'll be awash in oil forever.
Cliff
YIP
Whale Rider
Unity is Our Strength
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2004
- Posts
- 864
Share this page
Latest resources
-
-
-
-
-
AC 90-89C - Amateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing HandbookAmateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook
- Neal
- Updated:
