Talk-Polywell.org

Nothing we don't already know, but informative to have an admission:

U.S. corn ethanol "was not a good policy": Gore
By Gerard Wynn, Reuters

"One of the reasons I made that mistake is that I paid particular attention to the farmers in my home state of Tennessee, and I had a certain fondness for the farmers in the state of Iowa because I was about to run for president."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20101122/pl_ ... hanol_gore

It'd be nice if he recognised his competency on analysis in the matter was too flawed for him to attempt to repeat it, but the phrase;

"First generation ethanol I think was a mistake. The energy conversion ratios are at best very small."

begs the sigh "Oh boy, he's got a 2nd generation ethanol in mind already!?!?...."

We should not be surprised. Washington has run on ethanol right from the start. Mount Vernon recently rebuilt George Washington's distillery.

Frankly, if I could make ethanol from deadfall wood fiber, I'd be fueling my vehicles from it already. I have 54 acres of woods. I would probably put my smallest solar hot water panel to work running the still.

Gore seems to think ethanol can be an aviation fuel. So far I know of no aircraft certified to run on it, and it is prohibited in aviation gasoline. I believe the problem is fuel line material, though.

Growing corn to produce energy is not the point. The point is to produce a fuel that can be used in mobile applications (cars). Any end energy balance above breakeven is an additional advantage. The problems are the quantity of corn (or possibly better crops) available and the amount of energy needed for growing, fermentation and processing of this 'crude oil' equivalent. Currently natural gas is used. A Polywell or Fission power plant would change the picture to a large extent. From a presumed global warming standpoint ethanol is preferred if the energy balance is even a little positive, compared to oil. And, if the cost of oil continues to go up as it becomes more scarce, and the cost of producing the ethanol continues to be less, then it makes economic sense as well. Any improvement in crop sources (like grass, algae, etc. ) improves the aviability issue, improved processes or shifting to non greenhouse power inputs to the process improves the greenhouse picture and the natural gas aviability issue.

Even the most optimistic estimates are that ethanol can only replace a moderate amount of transportation oil use. But, conservation could make up a large portion of the shortfall (if we ever get really serious about conservation).

The only possible alternatives of ethanol as a mobile fuel, is coal gassification, or electric cars. Both of these have their own problems and limits. Hydrogen as a mobile fuel is a joke.

Dan Tibbets

Tom Ligon wrote: Gore seems to think ethanol can be an aviation fuel. So far I know of no aircraft certified to run on it, and it is prohibited in aviation gasoline. I believe the problem is fuel line material, though.

May also have something to do with this.
Ethanol: Flash point 13 °C (55.4 °F)
Jet A-1: Flash point 38 °C (100 °F)

D Tibbets wrote: The only possible alternatives of ethanol as a mobile fuel, is coal gassification, or electric cars. Both of these have their own problems and limits. Hydrogen as a mobile fuel is a joke.

Sorry, but there are a number of ways to convert bio-mass to liquid fuel. Ethanol simply has the best lobbyists. Can anyone say ADM?

Aviation gasoline flashpoint -46C. And it is potentially nasty stuff. Never had a light plane I was flying blow up though.

http://www.chevronglobalaviation.com/do ... on_gas.doc

The energy content of alcohol is fairly low ... takes nearly twice as much to get the same energy. It does have very high octane and has some interesting cooling effects in the compression stroke that increase efficiency. It is very clean. Still, the FAA has a long grudge against ethanol for some reason.

Biodiesel may trump it as a transportation fuel, but so far none of the biofuels have a great yield from the source crop. Genetic engineering is probably needed. We might avoid that with the right enzyme systems. There are aircraft piston diesels running (the DA-42 can be equipped with diesels).

KitemanSA wrote:Sorry, but there are a number of ways to convert bio-mass to liquid fuel. Ethanol simply has the best lobbyists. Can anyone say ADM?

One method that looks good to me http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_depolymerization

Tom Ligon wrote:Still, the FAA has a long grudge against ethanol for some reason.

FAA is no better then ICAO nowadays. Both organizations are controlled by "other" interests in the name of our safety. We should be thankful to them, as we are all unable to do so.....

Tom Ligon wrote: There are aircraft piston diesels running (the DA-42 can be equipped with diesels).

Jet A-1 or Diesel are the future for civil aircraft industry. 100LL fuel is becoming more and more difficult to source and the price is just becoming crazy. We pay 2.1 Euro/Lt. for 100LL here (that is almost 11US$/Gal at actual exchange rate) while Jet A-1 is around 50% that.
This is the main reason why more and more engine manufacturers are trying to get approval for Diesel engines designs for light planes. Of course ICAO and FAA are not helping in the process.

Hybrid or full electric engines might also become a competitive alternative in the coming future:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwyyQ1BckK0

ethanol from sugar cane is the way to go...

I silently implied the whole family of non fossilized biofuels when I spoke of ethanol. For once I tried to not ramble on. Algae may the most prolific biofuel source if the technology develops. It can be grown in large quantities, and currently it is not a food crop like most of the other crops.

Also, if cheap fusion power becomes available in huge amounts, the direct synthesis of hydrocarbon fuels may become economical. It would be carbon neutral (so long as you use atmospheric or sea water CO2 as the carbon feedstock). The production of hydrogen might be more sexy, but the tremendous local storage challenges (in cars) and infrastructure development needed for it's widespread use makes it the joke I mentioned above. And, of course, while crop derived ethanol or biodesel may be a small to moderate net positive energy source, hydrogen will always be net energy negative, even before compression or liquefaction losses are considered.

Dan Tibbets

Algae also offers a way of cleaning sewage and agricultural runoff. Killing two birds with one stone may justify the stone.

Again, there is development required. It may take gen-mod algae to get adequate yield, and in any case this is likely to require commercial quantities of economically-generated enzymes to process the raw material to fuel.

Like a lot of things, the energy is there, but the development and equipment are not trivial.

The downside of algae is that slime does not vote, so politicians tend not to court it. Curious, considering the obvious relationship.

Another news article on the topic.

Ethanol in crosshairs as tax deadline nears

by Rob Lever Rob Lever – Fri Dec 3, APF

Quotes Gore's comments in the first article, points out this is about ending corn ethanol subsidies and a tariff on Brazil's cane ethanol.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20101203/pl ... 1203135529

On the price and availablity of avgas, I think any shortage of it must be due to policy. I took part in a flight test yesterday. The FBO was charging the same price for 100LL avgas and for Jet A, $4.35 per gallon, which would work out to something like 1 euro per liter. I was frankly amazed, as it is little changed from the last time I rented a Cessna a few years ago.

Over at Hot Air they had a headline regarding ethanol.

No more pork fed corn.

Tom Ligon wrote:Quotes Gore's comments in the first article, points out this is about ending corn ethanol subsidies and a tariff on Brazil's cane ethanol.

Anyone else get the impression that Gore has turned on "!st Gen" ethanol because he didn't get a big enough piece of the subsidy pie?