Study Says Ethanol Not Worth the Energy

There's a lot research going on in the area of hydrogen storage at lower pressures. Most of the research seems to be focused on storing hydrogen in solids.

One area of research is to use zeolites in the gas tank: http://www.firstscience.com/site/articles/rocks.asp

Another similar approach is to use carbon nanotubes or graphite nanofibers: http://www.cem.msu.edu/~cem181h/projects/9...lcell/chem1.htm

Carbon nanotubes would require about 1800 psi to fill the tank, and only 600 psi to contain the hydrogen.

Neither of these approaches are ready for production. For instance, in the case of zeolites, they would need to be able to produce zeolites that could store 6% to 7% of their weight in hydrogen, but they can currently only produce zeolites that can store 2% to 3% of their weight in hydrogen.

But you need to realize that this does not mean that it's not possible. Materials science has expanded exponentially over the past couple of decades, and still has a lot of room for growth.

The processor in the computer you are using was thought to be impossible just 2 decades ago. There was believed to be a physical limit in how thin you could etch a transistor on a silicon wafer. We blew past that limit a decade or so ago and have exceeded it by an order of magnitude or more. And they are still decreasing the size of transistors every year. There is definitely a limit, but we haven't reached it yet. The point is that as materials science knowledge increased, they learned how to create silicon wafers and manufacturing processes that allowed them to exceed the transistor size limit.

None of these storage approaches can be used today, but with 5 to 10 years of funded research, maybe they will.

 

has anyone seen any problems with the ethanol attracting water and a resulting alge/bacteria problem?? its driving alot of marine mechanics crazy. maybe due to the difference in the way marine fuel systems are vented to the air.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Marlin\";p=\"108553)</div>

That's what I meant by "hydride" I suppose I should have explained that a bit more. I do get wrapped up in the proper terms since I spend so much of my time doing this sort of work.

A common problem with hydrides, such as LaNi5H6, is their relatively low hydrogen content. Typical hydrides, at least those that are safe to handle and won't destroy a city block if they touch off, have H content of 1-5% at most.

The nice thing about LaNi5H6 is that is is relatively inert (Safe) and can dehydride/rehydride in around 10 mins max. No sense having a hydride if you need a chemical plant and 24 hours to do the dehydride/rehydride process.

I'm sure more research will uncover a solution, then we can figure out distribution issues too.

Carbon nanotubes promise huge gains for the process control and chemical industry too. I've seen some very exciting demonstrations and can't wait for practical solutions. It's still a bit off though.

In your example of IC, the biggest leap was going from film to x-ray. That took around 15 years of concentrated and expensive research, most of it funded by DARPA.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ross33\";p=\"108566)</div>

I'm not sure about bacteria, but ethanol *will* absorb water like crazy. That's why it needs stabalizers to prevent odd phasing in the tank.

Diesel fuel doesn't absorb as much in the way of water, but it's a good breeding ground for many algae and bacteria. For some reason the salt water environment contains a ready supply of algae and bacteria that thrives in #2 diesel.

In that situation, you need to add biocides and cosolvents to treat the fuel, or it will quickly turn into a nasty slimey mess. There have been documented cases of mechanics getting serious diseases from handling such components.

 

No one mentions Brazil, which is probably the largest net user of ethanol in the world. Obviously, they wouldn't be using it if some sort of resource economy didn't make it feasible. Perhaps the cost of importing oil to Brazil is so prohibitive that ethanol production becomes reasonable by comparsion. I don't know. I do think that whatever scarcity economics is going on in Brazil to make ethanol viable will unfold up here in the northern hemisphere as well.

We did a full 2.1kW solar photovoltaic system on our house, and a water heating system. We think it's great. It doesn't need to power the whole house with everything running in order to make a huge dent in your utilities. Seattle enjoys some of the lowest utility bills in the nation, and yet we still cut our winter electrical use by 40% and our summer use by over 60%, and that is in an all electric house (including heat!!). We aren't freezing in winter or baking in summer.

If you do a simple energy assessment of your house, including "phantom users" (anything operated by a remote or which has a standby feature), you will be amazed at how much energy is simply being pissed out into the ether. We found 200 watts of electricity being used by computers, television sets and internet modems.
By hooking them to power strips with mechanical on off switches, we are saving 4800 watts of energy every 24 hours. Multiply that saving by the number of households in this country......

Americans are delusional about energy. They've never really thought much about where it comes from, how it's produced or the consequences of its use. Because of they've never suffered a serious shortage of it, they can't imagine it not being there.

Very few of us would be willing or able to make the changes necessary to reverse the climate change we are inducing. I think most people sense that the changes necessary would be catastrophic and so (like Bush) pretend there is no problem.

B

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Bob Allen\";p=\"109994)</div>

Bob:

I couldn't agree more. For the sake of convenience we have all these standby devices running all the time. Those "cube" style plug in wall transformers (120 vac to 6-12 vdc) are also the worst offenders.

Whether the dc end is plugged into anything or not, if the cube is plugged in it's always warm. So if you have a half dozen of them in your home, you could be losing $5-$10 a month just with that.

Nationwide that level of waste is shameful.

Jay

 

i agree, i have all my transformers plugged into two different 6 outlet power strips so i can flip them off easily without having to unplug anything. i do have one strip that services about 15 items though so that one i just plug in what i need when i need it because i also have my alarm clock in there to so i dont turn it off. (my nightstand is a mess!!)

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(DaveinOlyWA\";p=\"110097)</div>

Dave:

Hey I'm a bachelor so you don't have to explain about messy nightstands or clutter!

Jay

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Bob Allen\";p=\"109994)</div>

That's because they fear them.

Brazil has an abundance of sugar cane, which is great source for making ethanol from.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jayman\";p=\"108526)</div>

Micheal:

Ah, "Jevons Paradox" has come back to haunt us:

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

The only way a "new" source of energy will work is if dramatic increases in demand don't outstrip the supply.

Jay[/b][/quote]

Jay,

Thanks for the link, I had never heard the term before.

By the way, I enjoyed reading about the construction of your house to be more energy efficient. It sounds like many of the things you mentioned could be easily incorporated into the building of new homes at little or no extra cost. Still, I guess that Jevon's paradox is still there, as then people could have the A/C set on 70 instead of 75 and have the same electric bill.

If we ever build our own home, I definitely want to try those techniques.

 

Does any one know how much water it takes to make a gallon of ethenol? I heard yesterday that it was 5 gallons to make 1 gallon.

 

I had heard that several outboard boat motors have been ruined by ethanol in the tank. Not sure if it is true though.

 

Interesting document here: Other thoughts

Near term concepts to limit oil needs:
Diesels and hybrid electric cars - improved mpg
Carbon composite - lighter cars with same strength lead to better mpg
Biomass ethanol - much more efficent use of the plant than normal ethanol
Biodiesel - basically diesel from turkey guts or trash

Does some simple math without explaining the details of how to reach 1000 mpg of oil. (Yes energy will have to be generated other ways).

The point is that we move away from oil! This allows use the flexibility to use coal, gas, nuclear, wind, hydro, thermo, solar, or anything else to power our cars.

We currently have no alternative for the use of oil in our cars, and that is a threat to our way of life. (I'd love to see the money flow to the M.E. dry up!)

Another thought in order to switch to hydrogen fuel cell cars, who is going to shift first big oil companies or big auto companies? (If you say that they can both work together to make it happen, think about that before you reply).

In full disclosure I saw James Woolsey speak last night about this, and he made some good points.


P.S. Nuclear got the R&D and solar didn't because you can't make a bomb or run a submarine on solar panels.

 

To: Jay
Re: Hydrogen production

What are the plans for dealing with the oxygen produced during water electrolysis?

 

AFAIK there ARE no plans to "deal" with the O2 produced during electrolysis.

In the industrial production - electrolysis - both oxygen and hydrogen are fully utilized. If unintended, oxygen can have many bad effects. Oxygen is actually dangerous as it's a powerful oxidizer, and it's also corrosive too.

In all the science fictiony dreams of producing hydrogen from electrolysis eg ocean water i've never read how they intend to deal with the O2. Like, how do you ensure the engine room is protected from exposure to oxidizers?

If a diesel engine managed to gulp pure O2 or high concentrations of O2, kaboom.

 

Thanks for the info, Jay.

Figures. None of our "best and brightest" have discussed how to handle the O2 produced during the process, at what levels of H2 production does the O2 side product become a problem, or how to dispose of it all.

All of us have to be educated consumers when it comes to our energy. In this case, "do the math" becomes "do the chemical equation". Make your eight grade chemistry techer proud and ask those who are pushing hydrogen technology to follow the waste products of all processes, including disposition of the cleaning rags, etc.

Just 'cause someone calls a process "green" or claims that it's "new" and "clear", does that mean no harmful side products? Hardly. There is waste in any process (hell, there's waste every time I make dinner...er, scratch that!), just be upfront on how it's going to be dealt with.

Another version of the old saying, "Don't pee down my leg and tell me that it's raining."

 

Maybe there's a "hidden plus" somewhere.

How much of the land devoted to ethacorn would have lain fallow, drawing Federal dollars under our ingenious system of farm subsidies, for NOT growing something?

 

Re energy cost of making ethanol:
From what I remember at a recent conference with lots of contributors from NREL, it ALSO takes more energy to make a gallon of gasoline than what the gasoline yields. So this issue is a red herring. Ethanol production cost is presently somewhere less than $3 per gallon, so it is already viable.

Re hydrogen:
One of the most practical ideas I've heard for hydrogen storage is as anhydrous ammonia. The hydrogen density is comparable to liquid hydrogen (and much more than compressed gas), there is already an infrastructure to manufacture and deliver the ammonia (as agricultural fertilizer), and it can be burned in an engine or run directly into an ammonia fuel cell. The nitrogen tends to create NOx in an engine, but this can be scrubbed with more ammonia. I think it was someone at PNL working on this, but I can't find a link to his research.

Kirk

 

You were either lied to, or misunderstood what you were told.

I mean, read what you just wrote - does that actually make sense to you? Too many people just parrot what they've heard without thinking, and end up repeating ridiculous statements. This is just like that statement that every 1000 Hummer owners who took that Section 179 deduction on their taxes cost the govt. one billion dollars. And people believed that, even though one billion divided by 1000 owners is 1 million dollars per vehicle, which is completely ludicrous.

 

This may sound really gross but we could biomass human waste. Most large cities already have a system in place to collect it. All that would be required is to finish processing it. The advantage would be that we don't need to use chemicals to process it, after processing it would reduce the biohazard and it would also produce a high quality fertilizer that could be used in place of petro fertilizer.

I have heard that some sewage plants use the gases produced for their energy needs.

It would make more sense also to biomass lawn clippings and other organic products produced in residential neighborhoods rather than growing corn. The justification of many that advocate corn --> ethanol is that the residue can be used for cattle feed, however I am willing to bet that there is much more energy in the stalks then in the corn. From my reading, I may be wrong, but only the corn kernals are used and not the whole plant.