Name your favourite BioFuel Technology
- Thread starter Singularity
- Start date
2inquisitive said:
So how is white petrol made and why can we make such from vegetable oils ?
Carcano said:
Really? I see you post info re-worded from wiki without a reference to the source. You should look at more than one source. This is from the US National Biodiesel Board:
5. "Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) emissions from biodiesel increase or decrease depending on the engine family and testing procedures. NOx emissions (a contributing factor in the localized formation of smog and ozone) from pure (100%) biodiesel increased in this test by 13 percent. However, biodiesel's lack of sulfur allows the use of NOx control technologies that cannot be used with conventional diesel. So, biodiesel NOx emissions can be effectively managed and efficiently eliminated as a concern of the fuel's use." -- US National Biodiesel Board, Biodiesel Report, April 1998, "Biodiesel First Alternative Fuel to Meet EPA Health Effects Requirement -- Positive environmental and health effects results for Biodiesel"
[Sulphur poisons catalytic converters. Sulphur content of low-sulphur conventional diesel fuel: 0.05 percentage weight. Sulphur content of methyl ester biodiesel: less than 0.001 percentage weight.]
http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_nox.html
Also, not all diesel engines using biodiesel produce a higher level of NOx emissions vs. petrodiesel to begin with. Some are actually lower even without the use of a catalytic converter.
Try to research more than wiki when making 'absolute' statements.
That is probably true, but may be a little more complex. NOx production is greater with diesel for same reason the motors must be stronger and they get better miles / gallon. Namely the fuel (including the nitrogen taken in from the air is heated to higher temperatures during the combustion (even before combustion starts it gets very hot in the combustion chamber duer to the high compression ratio and that is why diesel engine do not need spark plugs ingnition system used in a car.)Carcano said:
You need to compare the NOx and other pollution produced per mile dirven, correcting for the weight difference between truck (or bus) and car also. I bet you are correct that even on this basis, that NOx production is more, but probably not significantly so if compared to the typically out-of-tune car production of unburt hydrocarbon pollution, which is probably more harmful to humans. (Trucks ad bus owners tend to keep their fleet in better tune than your average car owner) As I said, it is complex tade off that can largely be avoid with alcohol, which burns cleaner with less NOx produced than gas, I think.
Last edited by a moderator:
Since my post on Bio & Solar H2, I have been trying to track down some hard numbers without any luck.
In a phone conversation the president of NNLX was very tight lipped with the data I wanted, He Said things like; I was asking the Wright brothers how much transatlantic air fares were going to cost. He did admit to the potential of it's upward scalability, saying that they have gotten their bugs to double every 23 to 44 minutes!
I was nervous, and don't think I got across to him what I've done with other companies like Borealis, Electron Power Systems, and Coolerado Cooler, and could do for him if I could just get some ballpark figures on installed costs, Efficiency numbers at different scales, and Lbs of H2 production / KWh energy inputs. I got nothing but non-discloser, non-discloser
He wouldn't give me his email, but took mine saying he would send tech updates as allowed.
(An Example of the benefit of high lighting these Companies technologies: My " New Manhattan Project for Clean Energy" article, on the sites that count viewing's, has been read by over 100,000, science savvy, self selected, folks.)
Over the last two weeks NNLX stock ran up 150% with no appairent news , yesterday I found this:
At last, maybe the reason for the run up of NNLX:
from: http://www.nanalyze.com/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1253
"recommendation
Mar 31, 2006 (M2 PRESSWIRE via COMTEX) -- Geneva, Switzerland, and Dover, Delaware, USA - StockTargets, Inc., a private Swiss company and an innovator in investor sentiment tracking on listed stocks, measured a firm shift in investor targets over the past 2 days on NanoLogix Inc. (Pink Sheets: NNLX), following a new recommendation.
Investor sentiment and forecast shows a substantial increase, and remains resolutely positive on the stock's prospects, following the latest news and a revaluation of the company by TTS Zurich (http://www.ttszurich.com/).
Investors now forecast the stock rising to approximately US$ 0.46 during the next 12 months. The StockTargets consensus 12 months target was US$ 0.36 recently. Based upon their recommendation, the share price has recently moved from 0.29 US$ to 0.36 US$.
The 12 months target by TTS Zurich for the stock is US$ 0.92."
Erich J. Knight
In a phone conversation the president of NNLX was very tight lipped with the data I wanted, He Said things like; I was asking the Wright brothers how much transatlantic air fares were going to cost. He did admit to the potential of it's upward scalability, saying that they have gotten their bugs to double every 23 to 44 minutes!
I was nervous, and don't think I got across to him what I've done with other companies like Borealis, Electron Power Systems, and Coolerado Cooler, and could do for him if I could just get some ballpark figures on installed costs, Efficiency numbers at different scales, and Lbs of H2 production / KWh energy inputs. I got nothing but non-discloser, non-discloser
He wouldn't give me his email, but took mine saying he would send tech updates as allowed.
(An Example of the benefit of high lighting these Companies technologies: My " New Manhattan Project for Clean Energy" article, on the sites that count viewing's, has been read by over 100,000, science savvy, self selected, folks.)
Over the last two weeks NNLX stock ran up 150% with no appairent news , yesterday I found this:
At last, maybe the reason for the run up of NNLX:
from: http://www.nanalyze.com/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1253
"recommendation
Mar 31, 2006 (M2 PRESSWIRE via COMTEX) -- Geneva, Switzerland, and Dover, Delaware, USA - StockTargets, Inc., a private Swiss company and an innovator in investor sentiment tracking on listed stocks, measured a firm shift in investor targets over the past 2 days on NanoLogix Inc. (Pink Sheets: NNLX), following a new recommendation.
Investor sentiment and forecast shows a substantial increase, and remains resolutely positive on the stock's prospects, following the latest news and a revaluation of the company by TTS Zurich (http://www.ttszurich.com/).
Investors now forecast the stock rising to approximately US$ 0.46 during the next 12 months. The StockTargets consensus 12 months target was US$ 0.36 recently. Based upon their recommendation, the share price has recently moved from 0.29 US$ to 0.36 US$.
The 12 months target by TTS Zurich for the stock is US$ 0.92."
Erich J. Knight
Carcano
Valued Senior Member
My point there was about comparing the NOx emissions of biodiesel vs. petroleum diesel - not diesel engines vs. gasoline engines, but I'm sure you're right about the mpg stats balancing out the emissions per mile stats in the latter comparison.Billy T said:
I've been trying to track down some stats on the NOx emissions of pure (E100) ethanol, without success - got any links?
If there are any NOx emissions, the nitrogen must be coming from the air, as pure ethanol doesn't contain any nitrogen.
Last edited:
Carcano, perhaps the following will be of help. The tests were of a engine designed especially for alcohol with a 19.5 to 1 compression ratio and a three-way catalytic converter:
Engine Type 4 cyl., 4-stroke
Combustion Type PFI, SI
Displacement 1.9L
Valves per cylinder 2
Bore 79.5 mm
Stroke 95.6 mm
Compression Ratio 19.5:1
IVO -344o ATDC*
IVC -155 o ATDC*
EVO 152 o ATDC*
EVC 341 o ATDC*
Bowl Volume 18 cc
Clearance volume 26.4cc
Swirl Ratio 2.0
Injectors Holley, 36 lb/hr, 12-hole
nozzle
Rail Pressure 4 bar
Spark Plugs Champion recessed
gap, dual electrode
Turbocharger type Variable geometry
Exhaust
Aftertreatment
Ford FFV 2-stage,
three-way catalyst
Methanol-fueled
engines using high levels of EGR to modulate load [21-
23] have demonstrated efficiency gains of greater than
10% over throttled engines, while giving considerably
lower NOx emissions. Combining variable EGR rates
with variable intake manifold pressure allows for a wider
range of load control. This strategy has also been
shown as an effective means of achieving NOx levels
below 1.0 g/kW-hr and peak efficiency around 42% in DI,
lean stratified-charge methanol engines [23] and similar
improvements in PFI lean burn methanol engines [24].
In the present engine, EGR and boost levels are
maintained to achieve the best NOx and efficiency, and
still enabling MBT (or near MBT) spark timing at high
loads. Manifold absolute pressure (MAP) was varied
between 1.0-1.5 bar, while the maximum dilution level
was limited to about 50% EGR. Throttling, meanwhile,
was used only to achieve near-idle loads.
The engine is controlled to stoichiometric fueling,
enabling use of a three-way catalyst for attainment of
emissions at the levels required to achieve Federal Tier
II LDV standards. Earlier experience operating lean with
an oxidation catalyst [16] showed the ability to achieve
Tier II-level emissions on a methanol vehicle for all but
NOx, pointing to the need for a three-way catalyst.
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/presentations/sae-2002-01-2743.pdf
Edit: By the way, both methanol and ethanol were tested in the engine. Overall, methanol gave the best results. Methanol results were slightly better than diesel in a STOCK VW TDI engine, while ethanol was about equal. The VW diesel engine was burning petrodiesel. Now, remember the gains achieved with biodiesel over petrodiesel?
Engine Type 4 cyl., 4-stroke
Combustion Type PFI, SI
Displacement 1.9L
Valves per cylinder 2
Bore 79.5 mm
Stroke 95.6 mm
Compression Ratio 19.5:1
IVO -344o ATDC*
IVC -155 o ATDC*
EVO 152 o ATDC*
EVC 341 o ATDC*
Bowl Volume 18 cc
Clearance volume 26.4cc
Swirl Ratio 2.0
Injectors Holley, 36 lb/hr, 12-hole
nozzle
Rail Pressure 4 bar
Spark Plugs Champion recessed
gap, dual electrode
Turbocharger type Variable geometry
Exhaust
Aftertreatment
Ford FFV 2-stage,
three-way catalyst
Methanol-fueled
engines using high levels of EGR to modulate load [21-
23] have demonstrated efficiency gains of greater than
10% over throttled engines, while giving considerably
lower NOx emissions. Combining variable EGR rates
with variable intake manifold pressure allows for a wider
range of load control. This strategy has also been
shown as an effective means of achieving NOx levels
below 1.0 g/kW-hr and peak efficiency around 42% in DI,
lean stratified-charge methanol engines [23] and similar
improvements in PFI lean burn methanol engines [24].
In the present engine, EGR and boost levels are
maintained to achieve the best NOx and efficiency, and
still enabling MBT (or near MBT) spark timing at high
loads. Manifold absolute pressure (MAP) was varied
between 1.0-1.5 bar, while the maximum dilution level
was limited to about 50% EGR. Throttling, meanwhile,
was used only to achieve near-idle loads.
The engine is controlled to stoichiometric fueling,
enabling use of a three-way catalyst for attainment of
emissions at the levels required to achieve Federal Tier
II LDV standards. Earlier experience operating lean with
an oxidation catalyst [16] showed the ability to achieve
Tier II-level emissions on a methanol vehicle for all but
NOx, pointing to the need for a three-way catalyst.
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/presentations/sae-2002-01-2743.pdf
Edit: By the way, both methanol and ethanol were tested in the engine. Overall, methanol gave the best results. Methanol results were slightly better than diesel in a STOCK VW TDI engine, while ethanol was about equal. The VW diesel engine was burning petrodiesel. Now, remember the gains achieved with biodiesel over petrodiesel?
Last edited:
Carcano
Valued Senior Member
Thats almost what I was looking for - would have been even better if they used charts to show the actual E100 emissions and explained how they are formed in the engine. Simply burning pure alcohol yeilds a cool blue flame - unlike vegetable oil which produces a hotter yellow smoky flame.2inquisitive said:
HEY EXPERTS, cant U answer this,
Why cant we create petrol like fuel out of BioFuel ?
Why cant we create petrol like fuel out of BioFuel ?
I am not aware of any experts in this thread, but I will try to answer your question. We can, and do, make alcohol out of gasoline (petrol). We cannot make the much more chemically complex gasoline out of plants or grain. I am not sure what you mean by 'petrol like fuel'. Alcohol is similar to gasoline, biodiesel is similar to petrodiesel.
Don't be misled by statements like 'Simply burning pure alcohol yields a cool blue - unlike vegetable oil which produces a hotter yellow smokey flame'. That has absolutely nothing to do with the combustion process, and resulting pollutants, when comparing alcohol-fueled vs. biodiesel-fueled internal combustion engines.
Carcano, it should be obvious that the NOx emissions come from the nitrogen content in the AIR that is mixed with both alcohol and biodiesel during combustion.
The following from the U. S. Dept. of Energy should be of interest:
"Currently most research into efficient algal-oil production is being done in the private sector, but if predictions from small scale production experiments bear out then using algae to produce biodiesel may be the only viable method by which to produce enough automotive fuel to replace current world gasoline usage. The per unit area yield of oil from algae,(estimated to be from between 5,000 to 20,000 gallons per acre, per year), is 7 to 31 times greater than the next best crop, palm oil(635gal). Algal-oil processes into biodiesel as easily as oil derived from land-based crops. The difficulties in efficient biodiesel production from algae lie not in the extraction of the oil, which can be done using methods common to the food-industry such as hexane extraction, but in finding an algal strain with a high lipid content and fast growth rate that isn't too difficult to harvest, and a cost-effective cultivation system (ie, type of photobioreactor) that is best suited to that strain. Open-pond systems for the most part have been given up for the cultivation of algae with high-oil content."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algaculture
Don't be misled by statements like 'Simply burning pure alcohol yields a cool blue - unlike vegetable oil which produces a hotter yellow smokey flame'. That has absolutely nothing to do with the combustion process, and resulting pollutants, when comparing alcohol-fueled vs. biodiesel-fueled internal combustion engines.
Carcano, it should be obvious that the NOx emissions come from the nitrogen content in the AIR that is mixed with both alcohol and biodiesel during combustion.
The following from the U. S. Dept. of Energy should be of interest:
"Currently most research into efficient algal-oil production is being done in the private sector, but if predictions from small scale production experiments bear out then using algae to produce biodiesel may be the only viable method by which to produce enough automotive fuel to replace current world gasoline usage. The per unit area yield of oil from algae,(estimated to be from between 5,000 to 20,000 gallons per acre, per year), is 7 to 31 times greater than the next best crop, palm oil(635gal). Algal-oil processes into biodiesel as easily as oil derived from land-based crops. The difficulties in efficient biodiesel production from algae lie not in the extraction of the oil, which can be done using methods common to the food-industry such as hexane extraction, but in finding an algal strain with a high lipid content and fast growth rate that isn't too difficult to harvest, and a cost-effective cultivation system (ie, type of photobioreactor) that is best suited to that strain. Open-pond systems for the most part have been given up for the cultivation of algae with high-oil content."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algaculture
Carcano
Valued Senior Member
I'd be interested in knowing something about the reasons why the internal combustion of a particular fuel would produce more toxic emissions than simply burning the fuel with an open flame. Fireplaces, for example, that burn gelled alcohol do not need external venting - the fumes are not toxic.
If this is the only way use ethanol without harmful byproducts, then the only option for a completely clean vehicle would be to use a Stirling engine that generates electricity to charge ultracapacitors. Stirling engines do not use internal combustion, they are very quiet, and run well at a constant speed.
http://www.memagazine.org/pefeb05/runlong/runlong.html
If this is the only way use ethanol without harmful byproducts, then the only option for a completely clean vehicle would be to use a Stirling engine that generates electricity to charge ultracapacitors. Stirling engines do not use internal combustion, they are very quiet, and run well at a constant speed.
http://www.memagazine.org/pefeb05/runlong/runlong.html
I think reason is that molecule N2 has a reasonable strong bond that open flame (which can expand and thus cool itself some) can not break - Ergo no NOx formed as no atomic N available.Carcano said:
If you know anything about Carnot limit on efficiency of conversion of thermal energy to high quality energy like shaft power, you may be wondering why the cooler open flame powering the stirling engine is not much less efficient than the IC engine. Well, partially because stirling approximates the most efficient cycle (Carnot cycle) better than IC. Also because the much greater temperatures initially in the IC also drop rapidly as the piston goes down expanding the burning gases. (But they have made the NOx immediately after ignition.) There is also the need to keep the metal walls of the IC cool enough to not soften. Thus the IC engine is usually water cooled and this intentional removal of heat plays a greater role in the IC than in the stirling.
Charging condensors and then getting only most of the energy back when needed may not be as efficient as simple direct use of the shaft power. Especailly because you must carry the weight of both the capacitore and generator to charge them all the time.Carcano said:
Last edited by a moderator:
From what I have read, you are correct Billy T. The greater the combustion temperatures, the greater the formation of NOx. As paradoxical as it may seem to some, the NOx can also rise as the efficiency of the IC engine rises. The diesel engine is generally more efficient than the standard gasoline engine and that contributes to its greater NOx emmisions. The very high compression (17.5-19.5 to one) alcohol engines approach the efficiency of the diesel, but they also produce higher NOx emissions than a lower compression gasoline engine. A three catalysist can greatly reduce those emissions to very low levels, however. The good news for biodiesel vs. petrodiesel is that three way catalysists CAN be used in the biodiesel's catalytic converter, while the sulfur content of petrodiesel fuel prevents the NOx reducing converter from being used in conjunction with current petrodiesel. No sulfur in biodiesel. The sulfer levels in petrodiesel has been lowered through the years, also. It is currently at .5 (%?) in Europe and due to be reduced to that level in the USA later this year. I am sure it could be eliminated entirely from petrodiesel, but I have no idea of the cost factor. After all, alcohol can be extracted from petroleum.
Billy T, I'd like to ask you if you know anything about the suggestions I have read, once from Edufer on these forums and other places also, that alcohol fuel can cause rust on cast iron and steel engine components if the engine is not used regularly? I do know alcohol has to be 'dried' to remove the water content before it will mix with gasoline. Distillation only produces about 96% pure alcohol, which will not stay mixed with gasoline because of the water content. Are you aware of any problems with cylinders and rings rusting in engines that are not run regularly? I haven't researched the topic and I honestly don't know at this point in time.
Ah, I just found more information on the sulfur content of petrodiesel. A cut & paste:
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/diesel.htm
Carcano
Valued Senior Member
I know that Ford and AMC tried to create a direct drive stirling engine for their cars (Ford Torino 1975, AMC Spirit 1979), but they couldn't get the engines to start fast enough - a stirling engine cannot produce power instantly.Billy T said:
But, a smaller stirling with a linear generator might work in a hybrid car, which starts on batteries/caps, giving the stirling enough time to warm up...and would produce less emissions due to the *external* combustion of the fuel.
Last edited:
I know that there is a eutectic and will take your 96% alcohol as correct. I think from near there you use chemicals to get "pure" alcohol, but doubt it is done for alcohol sold as car fuel. In fact, I think perhaps at least 10% H2O in the "alcohol" may be useful boost to power, because the heat released in combustion of the pure alcohol is probably excessive from POV of easy cooling of the combustion chamber. - I.e. better to do some "internal fuel cooling" with water that expands to steam and pushes on the piston than to pull heat out thru the cylinder walls as 100% wasted energy. I know some WWII prop airplanes had water injectors that were used to boost power, but not full time.2inquisitive said:
I tend to trust Edufer and do not know much about all this. - I am just a physicist who sometimes can think my way thru questions correctly. I know alcohol will absorb water vapor from the air (I think gasoline will also, but not as rapidly or as much). If tank is sealed from air - this should not be much of a problem if one always fills the tank, so little "wet air" is initially put in it when the humidity happens to be high at gas station. (As fuel is used, there must be some "relief valve" to let air in but this would be an average of the humidity while driving, and never as bad as a "half fill" during the rain at gas station, I would guess.
I would think that if tank is full, during weeks of storage, there should not be much problem with oxidation anywhere in fuel / motor system, but again I do not know. The cylinder walls should have very thin oil film on them, and may be made of (or coated with?) type of iron (or have inserts?) that is not prone to oxidize even in contact thru an oil film with fuel containing some water.
I have never heard that this is a problem, but doubt if the car makers would publish this even if it were.
Stirling engines must pass all heat thru a heat exchangers, which have non-zero heat capacity, so no Stiring will never be "instant power" from cold start.Carcano said:
I do not know for sure what you mean by "linear generator" - Is it some permanent magnet oscillating (in straight line) in and out of a coil? If so, I would think it inferior to a conventional rotating alternator.
Also I do not think it feasible to have capacitors connected when starting if they have not been charged recently (Self discharger rate problems). I.e. if uncharged and connected, they would just drop the battery's "cranking voltage" down too much. Thus I do not understand "starts on batteries/caps" as I think engine must be able to start on batteries alone. Perhaps one could use a smaller, lighter battery to charge the capacitor for at least a significant fraction of a minute and then use both together for adequate starting current, but I do not think that would be marketable. - Few will wait 30 seconds or so to start the car. I think Ford engineers, with a two section heat exchanger, one section of low heat capacity, could have achieved a “30 second start,” but the marketing department said: “We can’t sell it.”
Again, compared to the direct use of the shaft power to turn wheels, I can not see the advantage of the extra cost and weight of bigger generators, capacitors, breaking recovery generators, motors for the capacitors to drive, and loss of energy on the charge/discharge cycle. Admittedly some of these motors and generators could be the same, but then it will not be optimum for either task.*
--------------------------------------------
*If you do not appreciate slightly sexual, but true joke, stop reading now. The chief of the Space Department where I worked had a relatively standard comment whenever one of the staff suggested that with just a little modification instrument X could do job Y in addition to job X. It was: "There is only one tool that is perfect for two tasks - and God made it."
Carcano
Valued Senior Member
Linear alternators/generators are often used on Stirling engines - not sure why, perhaps they are cheaper/lighter to build???Billy T said:
http://www.green-trust.org/2000/enginetechnology/biowatt.htm
One of the biggest selling cars in North America already has multiple systems with batteries and internal combustion engine - the Prius. What I suggest is replacing the IC engine in a hybrid car with a stirling generator that would keep the batteries/caps perpetually charged (no direct drive), with the benefit of much lower emissions and less noise.
I've discovered that this has already been tried with a Chevy Lumina back in 95, but they weren't happy with the results. I believe GM then went on to convert their electric car, the EV1, to a hybrid design using a gas turbine generator - that too was shelved, along with the EV1 itself, in spite of having a long waiting list of potential buyers.
I am sure it is technically feasible and even economically possible if there are enought "rich greens" around, but my concern remains the cost and weight (and efficiency if you do not also pay for energy recovery braking system) I read some where that Pirus owners can expect about a $3000 battery replacement cost every 3 years. I am not that rich or green. Are you? Also even the smart, rich, greens (if there are anyCarcano said:
) may get concerned about where all those old batteries end up or the efluent from the factory that made them, etc. and trade their Pirus in for an alcohol fueled car that in net removes CO2 from the air (while the cane was growing).
Last edited by a moderator: