| Pages:
1
2 |
Varmint
Hazard to Others
Posts: 264
Registered: 30-5-2013
Location: Near Atlanta, GA
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Zombie, you are woefully incorrect on several points, why mis-state something so easily researched?
You state ethanol has higher energy than gasoline, the fact is, ethanol has 21.2 MJ/l energy, while gasoline checks in at 34.8.
You state ethanol burns "cleaner", but "cleaner" is a subjective (literally, what subject?) term. In order to work around the various subjective
(NOX, hydrocarbons, CO2) statements, the Local Pollution Index was created (LPI), which is intended to compare and contrast based on the most
meaningful parameter, pollution. Ethanol checks in at 1.7, gasoline at 1.0.
Lastly, even forgetting the CO2 generated in production of ethanol as fuel (yeast "bubbles" are CO2 so you start losing at the very first step!),
since ethanol is a less efficient fuel, it takes more ethanol to do the same work, therefore creating more CO2 emissions than it's gasoline
counterpart.
Terrible idea to waste food on fuel, inefficient to convert cellulose to fuel, and in the end, both vastly increase the CO2 emissions the lying
"global (we want our hands in your pockets) warming" thieves have hitched their wagon to.
Will we eventually need alternative fuel? Almost certainly, but ethanol is not it, at least until people finally realize the global warming liars
need to be in jail rather than directing policy.
|
|
|
blogfast25
International Hazard
Posts: 10562
Registered: 3-2-2008
Location: Neverland
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Varmint, I agree with almost everything you wrote except that bio-ethanol is supposed to be almost 100 % carbon neutral. It is nonetheless generally
now regarded as a bad idea, except by a few hangers-on.
OOOOPSIE! Missed this bit.
Quote: Originally posted by Varmint  |
Will we eventually need alternative fuel? Almost certainly, but ethanol is not it, at least until people finally realize the global warming liars
need to be in jail rather than directing policy. |
Pure slander, Sir, nothing less. And throwing people in jail you disagree with is FASCISTIC!
[Edited on 15-2-2015 by blogfast25]
|
|
|
Dr.Bob
International Hazard
Posts: 2658
Registered: 26-1-2011
Location: USA - NC
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
There are already threads on the topic of biofuels under miscellaneous. There are many opinions on the subject, and even the facts are highly
dependent on the input as to what the output is. But the debate on global warming, energy "cleaness", and the politics of energy seem better suited
to other areas of the forum.
Ethanol has a lower energy content per L than hydrocarbon gasoline, that is measurable. And turbo yeast can go up to 20% ethanol, under the right
circumstances, which I have seen personally, I think we got about 18% in our case. And you can distill it to about 95% with the right still, but it
takes a large input of energy, which may come from carbon burning sources. Plus the tractors, fertilizer factory, water pumps, and fermenting
equipment all use some energy inputs. But fermenting sugars is certainly a viable way of synthesizing ethanol, which is an organic chemical, so that
part of the discussion seems relevant to this part of the forum.
Ethanol is a great and very safe solvent, and can be made for about $5 per gallon by fermentation, it is a shame that taxes make it so expensive for
most people. Methanol is even cheaper to make from natural gas but has toxicity issues. I would like to see continued work on producing
iso-propanol and butyl alcohols from bio-based starting material processes, both of which are better for mixing with gasoline than ethanol, and both
of which have many uses in the lab. And fatty acid methyl esters are another great fuel, we might need to use many sources of fuels as the oil
deposits are used up. Nature does not seem to be making fuel as fast as we are using it, so it will eventually run out, and I would like to think up
some good alternatives for when that happens.
|
|
|
Varmint
Hazard to Others
Posts: 264
Registered: 30-5-2013
Location: Near Atlanta, GA
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Blogfast:
My comments regarding jail are predicated on the FACT that these people know ethanol creates more CO2 start to finish, yet force us to subsidize
ethanol production. Then they turn right around and discuss "carbon credits", taxes for carbon output, all the while enforcing the production of food
to fuel.
So, if you know what you are legislating is a lie, then you absolutely do belong in jail.
You know people were willing to discount the East Anglia data because it was "gotten via illegal means" (idiots)!, but with the latest revelations,
any one still clinging to global warming as a man-made disaster in the making are either incredible unobservant or willfully ignorant. Or both.
|
|
|
blogfast25
International Hazard
Posts: 10562
Registered: 3-2-2008
Location: Neverland
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Varmint:
I'm not willing to discuss anything with someone who advocates politically motivated imprisonments.
Go watch some more Faux Noise.
|
|
|
Varmint
Hazard to Others
Posts: 264
Registered: 30-5-2013
Location: Near Atlanta, GA
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
You assume way too much bucko. R, D, it does not matter, legislate a lie, loose your job and your freedom.
Regardless, thank you for solidly identifying yourself as a mindless drone of the left. Your thoughts no longer carry any weight whatsoever, you
discounted yourself to the point of no return.
|
|
|
Zombie
Forum Hillbilly
Posts: 1700
Registered: 13-1-2015
Location: Florida PanHandle
Member Is Offline
Mood: I just don't know...
|
|
I don't want to distract what the thread was based on but as far as energy contained per sample Yes gasoline is higher BUT Ethanol can produce more
power in due to a higher octane rating ie: advanced timing, higher boost pressures.
To be fair I did state in a different thread here (same op) that ethanol is a poor option for running internal combustion engines for most of the
reasons stated here. If IC engine must persist however renew-able fuels are a must.
Dino will only last so long, and the energy required to attain it far out weighs that of ethanol if you combine the start to finished product.
Combine that with environmental impact in harvesting... Ethanol is a wiser choice than gasoline.
For Carbon impact: The fermentation carbon dioxide can be captured, and used. It need not be allowed to escape into the environment
The E85 Alternative
"E85 is an alternative fuel comprising 85% denatured ethanol and 15% gasoline. Because fuel
ethanol usually comprises about 5% gasoline (added as a denaturant to make ethanol
undrinkable), summer-blend E85 actually contains about 80% ethanol and 20% gasoline (2). As
with gasoline, the volatility of E85 is seasonally adjusted to ensure adequate vapor pressure for
engine starting in winter, and to ensure against the occurrence of engine-stopping vapor lock and
excessive fuel evaporation in summer. To meet winter fuel volatility requirements, winter-blend
E85 will typically contain about 70% ethanol, as per American Society of Testing and Materials
(ASTM) Designation D5798-96: Standard Specification for Fuel Ethanol (Ed75-Ed-85) for
Automotive Spark-Ignition Engines. Real environmental benefits are realized when using E85 in
place of conventional gasoline. A key benefit derives from the fact that ethanol is made from
renewable biomass, and biomass growth utilizes carbon derived from CO2 pulled out of the
atmosphere, which means that burning ethanol results in a near-neutral impact on atmospheric
CO2 level."
http://www.cleanairchoice.org/fuels/E85C02Report2004.PDF
Carbon Dioxide is only an issue to an environmentally crippled eco system. We have seen to that. De foresting is only one tied in topic. Much of it
done to strip resources into money hungry hands. Be it coal / lumber / gold / or more oil.
One more little tid bit. I live on the coast of Florida on the Pan Handle, and the resulting issues from the BP spill here are much greater than
anyone in the rest of the world are being told.
Levels of ethylbenzene in everything from plants to humans are at alarming levels. So yes I do have a biased opinion on this.
While I agree an end to IC engines is the real cure to many issues I stand strongly on re-newable fuels such as Ethanol, Methanol, Butanol in lieu of
fossil fuels.
If they come to lock me up for that... There will be resistance.
They tried to have me "put to sleep" so I came back to return the favor.
Zom.
|
|
|
Varmint
Hazard to Others
Posts: 264
Registered: 30-5-2013
Location: Near Atlanta, GA
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
What is it with you people. Does every word have to be laid out before you understand? Legislator means law maker, as in elected official.
If you are an elected official and are using "global warming" as a means to introduce laws to help your corn as fuel contituents make taxpayer dollars
by force of law, you nee to be in jail.
Similarly, if you are a law maker and have ever given the concepts of "carbon credits" or "carbon taxes" serious thought and or instituted laws even
loosely based on them, you belong in jail.
Now, either one of you still missing the point?
|
|
|
blogfast25
International Hazard
Posts: 10562
Registered: 3-2-2008
Location: Neverland
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
The moment you brought up 'Left' you lost the argument. This isn't about left or right.
|
|
|
Varmint
Hazard to Others
Posts: 264
Registered: 30-5-2013
Location: Near Atlanta, GA
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Listen buttercup, you brought up Faux Noise, so quit trying to deflect your impotence onto me.
Since you are decidedly dense, what I'm saying is I wouldn't have had to mention your bewildering adherence to leftist tenents had you not tried to
impune my character by assuming I watch Fox News. Truth is, Fox isn't right enough for me, but they look wildy right to you because you have signed
up for a lifetime of uninformed bullshit at the hands of the leftstream media.
"Bush Lied!", but if you research the Iraq liberation act of 1998, you will see Clinton (both actually) Kerry, basically all the big mouth lefties of
the day screaming about the slam dunk Saddams WMD programs were. On the news, constantly being recorded trying to up the rhetoric, they finally
succeeded in convincing the Us and many other nations that to think Saddam had no weapons was akin to not beliving in global warming. They were so
effective at it, the passed, again, The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998.
Yet you leftist drones let them completely off the hook for making it a LAW, then disparage Bush for having "lied".
As if that wasn't good enough, getting out of Iraq and closing GITMO were the cornerstones of the useless "community organizer's" election, yet he
doubled down on Iraq, and when was it that GITMO closed? Oh, that's right, it hasn't changed a bit. But did the community organizer lie about those
cornerstones? Of course not, your only objection was a "R" was in charge! LOL.
You tools are worthless, but we righties have to hand it to you, you will die for your party's ideals, defend the indefensible, and generally shun
anything that even causes you to begin to reconsider your beliefs as cooked up for your consumption.
|
|
|
blogfast25
International Hazard
Posts: 10562
Registered: 3-2-2008
Location: Neverland
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Varmint | Truth is, Fox isn't right enough for me, but they look wildy right to you because you have signed up for a lifetime of uninformed bullshit at the
hands of the leftstream media.
|
Fox not right enough for you?
This:
http://alternative-right.blogspot.com/
... more your cup of tea, perhaps? 
|
|
|
Varmint
Hazard to Others
Posts: 264
Registered: 30-5-2013
Location: Near Atlanta, GA
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Zombie:
You have it wrong again. You say ethanol allows higher compression and higher boost for turbos (blowers too), and while this is correct, what that
means is you can burn more fuel to achieve that power. The bottom line is, there is a certain amount of energy available in a given unit of fuel.
For ethanol, it is 21.2 MJ/liter. Compression won't change that by itself, what does change is the ability to force more of the appropriate F/A ratio
into a given volume to be compressed prior to ignition.
The big problem with ethanol emissions is the high volume of ozone. Unfortunately this is ground level ozone, not the upper atmosphere sort that
helps mediate solar UV flux. In any event, the previously mentioned LPI is a graduated scale where the various step are demarkated by level of
severity and which groups of people most affected by said level. The primary constituent of the LPI polution, the major concern, happens to be ozone,
both of which are produced in copious amounts by burning ethanol, and it is made significantly worse as the static compression (swept
volume/compressed volume) of the engine, or dynamic compression (forced induction) increases.
This leads to something of an ozone runaway, you need more fuel and more compression (static, dynamic, or both) to match the power of straight
gasoline, but you are pumping out more and more of the primary "offensive" pollutant in doing so. In case it wasn't clear, upping the compression ups
the emissions outright, adding more fuel compunds the increase.
Now consider something. The LPI for gasoline is 1.0. With alcohol at 1.7, it's pretty clear that "cleaner" is a misnomer, the correct verbiage is
"puts out less hydrocarbons and NOX, but pumps out vast quatities of the most closely monitored pollutant that causes human distress.
|
|
|
Zombie
Forum Hillbilly
Posts: 1700
Registered: 13-1-2015
Location: Florida PanHandle
Member Is Offline
Mood: I just don't know...
|
|
Ok, I can handle that.
So in real world terms, and taking everything from finding the oil to what comes out the tail pipe, which one is more harmful in the long term to the
planet?
Keep in mind I mean it takes machinery, and parts made from oil, and so on. Right down to the plastic pen or credit card that pays to go find more
plastic making stuff.
[Edited on 16-2-2015 by Zombie]
They tried to have me "put to sleep" so I came back to return the favor.
Zom.
|
|
|
Varmint
Hazard to Others
Posts: 264
Registered: 30-5-2013
Location: Near Atlanta, GA
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Hey bloggo, no justification for the Iraq Liberation Act, staying in Iraq, closing GITMO, or even a word about "Bush Lied" as the left's favorite
meme?
LOL. The funny part is the left can see their most deeply held tenents torn assunder in absolutely irrefutable fashion, yet they still cling to them
without even a hint of reflection or remorse.
Kill those unborn babies, but save the lives of those murderers and rapists on death row, because all lives are worth saving!!
It would be funny it it weren't so ridiculous.
|
|
|
blogfast25
International Hazard
Posts: 10562
Registered: 3-2-2008
Location: Neverland
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Varmint | Zombie:
You have it wrong again. You say ethanol allows higher compression and higher boost for turbos (blowers too), and while this is correct, what that
means is you can burn more fuel to achieve that power. The bottom line is, there is a certain amount of energy available in a given unit of fuel.
|
Unfortunately not in Zomb's World. Zomb's World is one where everything is particular and nothing is universal.
That different fuels have different Enthalpies (of combustion), no matter what, doesn't apply in Zomb's World.
In Zomb's World you don't let the facts stand in the way of a good story.
[Edited on 16-2-2015 by blogfast25]
|
|
|
Zombie
Forum Hillbilly
Posts: 1700
Registered: 13-1-2015
Location: Florida PanHandle
Member Is Offline
Mood: I just don't know...
|
|
Zombies rock!
They tried to have me "put to sleep" so I came back to return the favor.
Zom.
|
|
|
blogfast25
International Hazard
Posts: 10562
Registered: 3-2-2008
Location: Neverland
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Let the Undead Rule! (NOT!)
|
|
|
Zombie
Forum Hillbilly
Posts: 1700
Registered: 13-1-2015
Location: Florida PanHandle
Member Is Offline
Mood: I just don't know...
|
|
I'm working on a linoleum based brain reducer.
Keep your feet in the air, and your head on the ground. You'll hear us coming.
They tried to have me "put to sleep" so I came back to return the favor.
Zom.
|
|
|
Varmint
Hazard to Others
Posts: 264
Registered: 30-5-2013
Location: Near Atlanta, GA
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Zombie:
If you believe in global warming, ethanol is a death sentence for the world. It's obvious. It's so bad that the fact that we are using even small
amounts of it now (having to subsidize it to boot) flies in the face of any concern for human health or the environment.
If you don't believe in CO2 as being anything other than a way for swindlers to get more money out of people, then there ought to be vast amounts of
research in getting alcohols LPI down to, or preferably below gasolines.
Again, obviously we will end up consuming all the petro fuels that are cost effective to collect, so alternative research is required. The odd thing
about petro fuels is how it was put into play so early on, almost as if the perfect fuel was found FIRST, only to be followed by poor substitutes.
How often is it that the premiere solution is nearly (comparatively) the first?
My core belief is eventually completely synthetic gasoline will be engineered. The premise is just because it took millions of years of biologicals,
heat, and pressure to make raw crude, does not mean the millions of years is the key element. Ergo, I suspect we will find a way to engineer the
exact long chain molecules we need to exactly replicate the constituent elements of gasoline, and in doing so be able to avoid those that don't
"help", and include only those that do.
In other words "gasoline" is not a fixed chemical formula currently, it is a blend of various lenght molecules that together create "gasoline". But
using chemistry we can formulate only what is needed, perhaps even reducing "gasoline" into a single stand alone molecule. If not, we should be able
to create all of the individual "contributors" and create a truly engineered substitute that is indistinguishabel from the "real thing".
|
|
|
Zombie
Forum Hillbilly
Posts: 1700
Registered: 13-1-2015
Location: Florida PanHandle
Member Is Offline
Mood: I just don't know...
|
|
I agree that more is needed. More research, more forethought, more truth as to what, and why.
I personally would rather see magnetic pulsed hydro dynamic engines put on the playing field, and combustion fuels done away with altogether.
I still don't see your point on oil vs ethanol. I would have to believe if it were one or the other ethanol would be the clear choice (sorry for the
pun). Like I said... Looking at the big picture.
Granted neither is ideal. I came here to learn, and learn I will!
They tried to have me "put to sleep" so I came back to return the favor.
Zom.
|
|
|
Varmint
Hazard to Others
Posts: 264
Registered: 30-5-2013
Location: Near Atlanta, GA
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Ethanol is poison curretly because of it's ozone emissions alone, not to mention it's other shortcomings.
Gasoline has more individual "bad" emissions, but ethanols score of 1.7 should make it clear that it has a VERY long way to go before being considered
as a viable subsitute or even a blend.
You also have to be very careful with combustion alternatives. A friend here at work has a Nissan Leaf. It says Zero Emission right on the side of
it. Trouble is, the electricity he uses to charge it comes from where? Coal, natural gas, nuclear?
Nuclear seems to be the answer if you can eliminate containment and shielding as issues. Something runaway-proof like a pebble-bed reactor might be
the final answer, but how long until we all have reactors on our blocks or in our back yards? Beyond pebble bed, you are into "traditional" steam
turbine reactors, and frankly the design is not foolproof and can never be so.
(Pebble bed, as part of it's fundamental design is thermal cutout. Past a certain high (yet still safe) temperature, the physical core geometry
changes such that no higher temperature can be achieved. You could disconnect all cooling, monitoring, and even shielding, and it won't get hotter
than it's design limit, and it cannot be forced into a condition to override that physical limitation)
So, "Zero Emission" is the next biggest lie after "global warming". What of carrying around a couple hundred pounds of lithium in each car? What is
the environmental impact from havesting the ore, purifying it, forming the cells, and putting them all together? How much energy was used just for
those steps? Currently electric and hybrid vehicles are heavily subsidized, what happens when the taxpayers are no longer on the hook for their
chest-thumping "I care more about the environment than you do, thanks for the subsidy!" neighbors to drive their "Zero Emission" deathtraps?
Again, just like gasoline being the ideal fuel right out of the gate (relatively speaking) , internal combusion is also quite remarkable in its
"fitness for the job". Imagine, 1 gallon of a comparatively light liquid moving as much as 2 tons or more down the highway, at speeds of perhaps
70MPH, and going for 25 miles or more on that gallon. And now consider that without federal, state, and local taxes, that gallon could be as low as
25-50¢ were it not for artificial price gouging. Even at $2 with all those taxes and profits for the supply chain, that is a tremendous amount of
work to be done by one gallon.
Imagine any other fuel trying to match that. Imagine any other engine configuration that matches the total net efficiency. Now if we could store the
heat exiting the tailpipe and reuse it (even elsewhere), and store the valuable combusion byproducts in an efficient manner, then it would be
untouchable in efficiency.
|
|
|
Zombie
Forum Hillbilly
Posts: 1700
Registered: 13-1-2015
Location: Florida PanHandle
Member Is Offline
Mood: I just don't know...
|
|
What are your thoughts on Hydrogen cells? Running magnetically pulsed pistons. Not in a conventional style engine but more in line with a hydraulic
ram.
Hydrogen cells are the main question tho.
Or is this getting too far off the thread to discuss here
They tried to have me "put to sleep" so I came back to return the favor.
Zom.
|
|
|
Varmint
Hazard to Others
Posts: 264
Registered: 30-5-2013
Location: Near Atlanta, GA
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Hydrogen is great.
Getting it is problem #1.
Transporting it is problem #2.
The extreme temperatures of the reaction raise NOX emissions to new levels when reacted with air for the oxgen supply. So, store both H and O
onboard?
The unforgiving nature of an odorless leak and colorless flame make plumbing a daunting task, gasses are much more difficult to control and monitor
than liquids.
I think the natural feeling is since internal combustion engines use gasoline, that somehow the design itself is flawed. Instead, you might consider
how ideal the engine is, and reconsider going back to what amounts to a steam engine expansion cylinder. Because I can pretty much guarantee you the
natural progression with go from the linear ram (steam expansion cylinder) to the V design before long anyway. So why not start with what is
currently the most optimal configuration and rework it?
|
|
|
Zombie
Forum Hillbilly
Posts: 1700
Registered: 13-1-2015
Location: Florida PanHandle
Member Is Offline
Mood: I just don't know...
|
|
This is all about to rupture a vessel in my eye. I need a ham, and cheese sandwich, while I can still find the kitchen.
I'll have to give this a lot of thought, later.
They tried to have me "put to sleep" so I came back to return the favor.
Zom.
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2 |
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
