Hi Hakan, I would counter what is "ready for use"? Seems to me there is quite a few CNG vehicles out there that would be able to run on producer gas without neary a hitch. As for Hydro, a gas conversion to a standard petro vehicle is possible now. The only thing that is missing on both is a fueling infrastructure. I believe there are now stand alone units for producing hydro at petro stations via natural gas and electrolysis. Well, unless one is in the midwest, E-85 really isn't an option, and to convert a standard engine would be about the same as converting to CNG or Hydro. The only true "ready for use" alternative fuel is BD.
Not to say there isn't room for all of the above in varying stages of implementation, which is what I think your getting at. James Slayden On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Hakan Falk wrote: > > Dear James, > > I will be happy to, if it is a "ready for use" technology and anyone > of us could start a bio fuel business around it. The concept of > my article is bio fuel business. With the demand of "ready for use" > technologies, the subject is surprisingly narrow and it says something > about the real stage of things, on short and medium term. > > Toyota and Honda have just leased fuel cell cars and they say that > production of the cars is planned to start in about 8-9 years. It will > take > at least 3-4 replacement cycles before it will have a major impact on > the fleets. Maybe I will still be alive and in this case I am 100 years > old, but I will remember it and include in the list at that time. If I > forget it, I am sure that you or Keith will remind me. (do not feel > offended by my joke, it is only their as a reminder of the time lines) > > It is however interesting and I have noted it down and will expand > the table on a more long term subject. > > Hakan > > > At 10:26 AM 12/5/2002 -0800, you wrote: > >Might you want to also provide a table with Hydrogen and producer gas > >also? Seems to me to be somewhat narrow, unless that is the intention. > > > >James Slayden > > > >On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Hakan Falk wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Keith, > > > > > > Thank you for your response and I am somewhat uncomfortable with the > > > second > > > table. I am not sure of that the presentation of political - > commercial > > > - > > > influencing points are suitable in a table. Need to think more about > it. > > > Therefore I like to discuss the basics first and the table > > > "Characteristics, comparing Ethanol, Biodiesel and SVO." first. > > > > > > I do think that the table "Characteristics, comparing Ethanol, > Biodiesel > > > and SVO." can be useful and ask you or others to suggest points that > I > > > maybe have missed. I must also underline that this is not a question > of > > > choice between them, they are all desperately needed and that is also > > > covered in the table. On those points we agree. > > > > > > I have marked the points we agree on, in table at, > > > > > > http://energy.saving.nu/biofuels/biofuelorg.shtml from yours at > > > http://journeytoforever.org/ethanol_compare.html > > > > > > The open points are: > > > Possible crops: > > > I changed this to "Possible raw material sources", to be sure that I > do > > > not > > > exclude trees and fruits. I like to have more discussions about this, > but > > > all that I have seen until now points to more source material for > > > vegetable > > > oil. > > > > > > Soil sensitivity: > > > Here I am in deep water and need your expertise. It is a very > important > > > point and I would like you to analyze it further. > > > > > > Crop rotation problems: > > > The same as previous point. But I thought with effective oil > producing > > > trees or more choices of crops, it would be easier to overcome. > > > > > > Fuel productivity per acre: > > > Again, the production numbers I have seen for oil are better than for > > > Ethanol. It is however a weak point, since we do not look at the > total > > > possible production of ethanol and veg oil from the same source. > > > > > > Possible bi-products: > > > The same as for previous point. Veg. oil do opens up for a larger > number > > > of > > > replacement applications, among those are many in the lubrication > field. > > > > > > Chemical altering or distilling: > > > I corrected this. > > > > > > Energy for production: > > > I read a lot and I seems that ethanol is the most energy demanding > > > process, > > > oil pressing definitely is the least. Biodiesel as I understand the > > > process, is much less energy demanding than alcohol. On producing raw > > > material they are all similar, but distilling is a very energy > demanding > > > process. > > > > > > Net energy gain: > > > The fossil fuel processes are also very energy demanding and not very > > > effective, but it is mostly conversion processes to marketable > products. > > > Some of the raw material for ethanol, do contain more or less veg > oil. We > > > can maybe add this aspect also, but as I see it, it becomes a part of > raw > > > material evaluation. > > > > > > Cost to produce: > > > See energy for production. > > > > > > End use efficiency: > > > Needed clarification and I changed heading to "End use efficiency for > > > fuel/technology", this to clarify that a change in fuel/technology > will > > > achieve substantial energy savings. I do not think we will disagree > with > > > this. > > > > > > Needed quantity to replace fossil fuel: > > > Water can be added to gasoline also, with similar energy savings. The > > > difference is that the water/air have to be added at injection. All > > > testimonies and technical adjustments point to more quantity use with > > > replacement of gasoline with ethanol and unchanged quantities with > > > replacements of diesel. > > > > > > Storage time: > > > I corrected this. > > > > > > I do not cover combined production of ethanol and veg oil from the > same > > > source and it would be very useful to discuss this. Maybe it is not a > > > biodiesel or ethanol business, it could be that you need to combine > both > > > for a good business. > > > > > > Hakan > > > > > > > > > At 12:33 PM 12/5/2002 +0100, Hakan Falk wrote: > > > > > > >Keith, > > > > > > > >Thank you, I will go through it and we will discuss > > > >the differences. > > > > > > > >Hakan > > > > > > > > > > > >At 08:02 PM 12/5/2002 +0900, you wrote: > > > > >Hi Hakan > > > > > > > > > > >It is difficult to make tables in mail, if you cannot use html. > > > > > >Therefore I also did the tables at the end of, > > > > > > > > > > > >http://energy.saving.nu/biofuels/biofuelorg.shtml > > > > > > > > > > > >Hakan > > > > > > > > > >Difficult too to discuss them by email, for the same reason, so I > > > > >copied your tables and did an alternative version for comparison, > > > > >here: > > > > >http://journeytoforever.org/ethanol_compare.html > > > > > > > > > >Best > > > > > > > > > >Keith > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >At 04:08 PM 12/4/2002 +0100, Hakan Falk wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > >Keith, > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Original draft for article at > > > > > > >http://energy.saving.nu/biofuels/biofuelorg.shtml > > > > > > > > > > > > > >You just posted several press releases from oil companies and > > > these are > > > > > > >quite telling. They touch very much the subject of my article. > The > > > > > > >situation in Poland and the "moonshine" argument, show the > > > relevance of > > > > > > >this discussion. David have already started to think about it > and > > > I hope > > > > > > >that we get more valuable views. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >To add to the discussion about centralization versus > > > > decentralization risk > > > > > > >for Ethanol and biodiesel/SVO, I have done the following > tables. I > > > is a > > > > > > >topic for discussion and I am not claiming that I got it right > on > > > the > > > > > first > > > > > > >time or on my own. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >The following table is a first attempt to map technical > > > feasibility of > > > > > > >fossil to bio fuel replacement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Biofuel at Journey to Forever: > > > >http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html > > > > > > > >Biofuels list archives: > > > >http://archive.nnytech.net/ > > > > > > > >Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. > > > >To unsubscribe, send an email to: > > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > > Biofuel at Journey to Forever: > > > http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html > > > > > > Biofuels list archives: > > > http://archive.nnytech.net/ > > > > > > Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. > > > To unsubscribe, send an email to: > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > > > > > >Biofuel at Journey to Forever: > >http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html > > > >Biofuels list archives: > >http://archive.nnytech.net/ > > > >Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. > >To unsubscribe, send an email to: > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ADVERTISEMENT > > Biofuel at Journey to Forever: > http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html > > Biofuels list archives: > http://archive.nnytech.net/ > > Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. > To unsubscribe, send an email to: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
