please rate
this thread
  •  
  • Subject
  • Author
  • Date
Posted by Rob Dekker on August 14, 2008, 9:09 pm
 



vehicles

braking), zero-pollution at the tailpipe (it has none), and

water cooling system, with emission control (incl

differential and exhaust system and a massive amount of

benefits of the current gasoline (or another fuel)

plan for)....

and cheap, and the engineering advances made are

this planet) have created for ourselves.

apparent, increasingly difficult and pressing as well as

eco systems.

control unit.

cheaper to produce than ICEs.

efficient solution wins. But big changes take time.

oil and towards electricity), but only for the last

fuels) has not been there.

towards electricity).

I hope so. But there is a lot of work to do.

The promising biofuel segment of fuel production from biomass is very, very
small right now.
Here is an example plant (in Germany) :
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/3938#more
Unfortunately, this process in still not cost effective (even though the biomass
is free, the plant still looses money).
With that free enterprise will not jump on it....

And remember that it would require a monumental increase (think hundreds of such
$100M+ plants) to even compensate for 1 million
barrels/day of oil.

So I don't see how biofuel can compensate for the adsurtly immense requirements
of the US ICE engines.


right now.

Even at current low-volume prices.

know it).

The problem  (with algae oil or another liquid biofuel) is also that it needs to
be burned in an ICE before it powers the wheels.
That goes with an efficiency of 20% (or maybe 30% for diesels).

But 30% of 8% is an overall photons->wheel power efficiency of less than 3%.

It's going to be very difficult to make that process cost-effective.


We talked about this. Algae plants will not be much more efficient than open
ponds, around 2,000-3,000 gallons/acre/year. Maybe up
to the Dimitrov limit of 5,000 gallons/acre/year.
That means that a cost-efficient algae plant thus needs to be very cheap
(open/closed ponds of plastic foil tubing).
Did you see any large-scale algae experimental plant already that matches that
criterium ?

We are gonna need a LOT of these plants (the ones that are currently not there,
and not cost-efficient in their pilot versions) to
make any dent in the 20+ million barrels/day that the US uses. Maybe we should
do something on the 'consumption' side (with EVs and
PHEVs) ?


Try http://www.freepatentsonline.com
Or simply google for a search string of interest and include the 'patent'
keyword.



Posted by B Richardson on August 15, 2008, 11:26 pm
 

["Followup-To:" header set to sci.energy.]

small right now.

biomass is free, the plant still looses money).

My opinion is that the best near term use for cellulosic biomass is
for applications that need low grade heat. Displacing high quality
fuels like heating oil and nat gas for residential heating. You can
displace a quad of heating oil and nat gas with a quad of switchgrass
pellets, that same quad of switchgrass nets at most .7 quads of liquid
fuel (probably more like .55 in practice). Pellet presses are much
cheaper than FT reactors.

My $0.02.

  • Subject
  • Date