Jump to content

Out With The Oil, In With The New


Recommended Posts

Posted

Below is from a trade paper I get. Some interesting reading. I think the first paragraph is off a little, but the rest is some good info. :lol:

 

Out with the Oil, In with the New

By Mark Louie

June 16, 2008

 

 

Corn ethanol does nothing but bring the bushel price to an all-time high, vaguely put a dent into our energy demand, pollute lands with pesticides and drink up a limited water supply… Bottom line is, corn is a food, not a fuel.

 

Well there's a new ethanol in town and by the looks of it, it's here to stay…cellulosic ethanol.

 

This technology will ultimately help environmental problems, diminish the U.S.'s dependency on oil, boost the economy, increase food supply and even put an end to controversial wars…

 

Cellulosic ethanol, made from cellulose — the most common organic compound on earth — is potentially produced from your lawn trimmings, switchgrass, wood chops, paper sludge, corn stalk, stems and even manure and sewage.

 

Cellulosic ethanol differs from corn-based in so many ways. It's by far much better in every aspect. The fact that it will be cheaper, more efficient, more abundant and environmentally cleaner than corn-based is enough to raise an eyebrow.

 

 

A Solution for America's Oil Dependency

 

Studies have shown that the maximum amount of corn ethanol the U.S. could possibly produce without completely taking over the food supply is 15 billion gallons as year. That's less than 10% of the crude oil America will use today.

 

The U.S. Departments of Agriculture and Energy did a joint study showing that the U.S. could grow 1.3 billion dry/tons of biomass while keeping forestry and agricultural lands sustainable. That could produce over 150 billion gallons of cellulosic ethanol, which has the energy equivalency to over 100 billion gallons of gasoline. That could drop total U.S. oil imports by over 80%.

 

With fuel-efficient cars and energy conscious attitudes, we can completely do away with all oil imports. We won't have to worry about OPEC jacking up prices and protests in Venezuela anymore.

 

 

Cleaner Than Corn

 

 

For the 21st century, it appears "green" is the way to go. It just so happens that cellulosic ethanol is environmentally sound.

 

Cellulosic ethanol emits 85% less CO2 than gasoline while corn-based only emits 30% less than gasoline. It has actually proven to have net negative emissions because the plants would absorb more carbon than they emit when used as fuel. It also emits less sulfur.

 

The leading candidate for cellulosic ethanol, switchgrass, needs 75% less water, 70% less fertilizers and pesticides than corn. On top of that, switchgrass is a cheaper and more abundant resource.

 

Switchgrass yields twice as much ethanol per/acre than corn, has a short growth time and requires a lot less maintenance while lessening erosion. It also easily adapts to its environment and is very resistant to droughts and disease.

 

Switchgrass already has amazing benefits… It's hard to imagine the capabilities of this plant will have once scientist start genetically altering the crop…

 

 

Following the Big Money

 

 

Switching to cellulosic ethanol will create thousands of domestic jobs and keep billions of dollars from jumping overseas for oil imports.

 

Currently, many U.S. farmers are struggling and relying on government subsidies for survival. Cellulosic production would increase rural incomes by 200%.

 

One economist estimated that cellulosic ethanol could increase the U.S. GDP (Gross Domestic Product) by $1.7 trillion from 2008-2022. With a majority of that money staying within the U.S., imagine the economic boom that we would witness…

 

The only draw back to cellulosic ethanol is that it's not commercially mass-produced yet. Cellulosic ethanol is still in its developing stage…

 

To make the fuel, you first extract the cellulose through a heating process. Then, you break the cellulose down into sugar using enzymes. After that, you ferment the sugar into alcohol. Last, distill the alcohol into fuel. On paper, the process sounds simple, but there are some important screws that still need be tightening…

 

 

Scientists have yet to find the most efficient and least expensive way to produce the fuel. The biggest problem is developing enzymes that could break down the cellulose rapidly on a large scale.

 

Currently, cellulosic ethanol can be made around $1.50-$2.50 per gallon depending on the process and type of material. There's estimates that ethanol will be able to be mass-produced at less than $1 dollar a gallon.

 

There are several pilot-plants running and proving to be successful. Range Fuels is currently constructing the first commercial plant estimated to produce 20 million gallons/year.

 

The U.S. Government is also getting highly involved. The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 mandates heavy increases of ethanol. Some states are requiring ethanol-mixed gasoline.

 

The Renewable Fuel Standard Program headed by the U.S. government is requiring the production of 36 billion gallons per year of biofuels by 2022. Even if the U.S. reaches the maximum corn ethanol prodcution of 15 billion gallons, the majority of the quota will come from celluloic ethanol.

 

The European Union, and countries like Venezuala, Brazil, Columbia, India and China are all instituting similar programs..

 

 

Profiting from the Cellulosic Revolution

 

 

Unfortunately, the cellulosic industry is way too premature to predict the biggest gainers.

 

Whoever discovers the most efficient way to produce ethanol or whichever chemical/biochemical company finds the best enzymes will be a winner.

 

Venture capitalists own a majority of the current cellulosic companies…but at the magnitude and potential of the cellulosic industry, it's likely we will see many of these companies go public. Those that already have are still small-caps.

 

Beyond these emerging ethanol companies, keep an eye on agriculture companies, chemical companies, equipment suppliers, transportation companies and even automobile companies that will be producing flex-engine cars that can run on ethanol.

 

Even industries such as cattle, meats, animal feed and various packaged food companies will all benefit because of much larger grain supplies.

 

When something has the potential to impact the world's governments, environments and economies…it's worth a look at…

 

Regards,

Mark Louie

Posted

Interesting read. What media is this from? I'm not familiar enough with the facts/figures that were thrown out, but I would like to pass along to my peers here at OSU to review just to make sure we're being objective on the topic. Would agree that switchgrass and the like has more potential, but the technology is years away yet. State of OK has budgeted $36 mil to get it off the ground with tech center, test plots, etc.

Posted

Here ya go stw08sierra

http://www.howestreet.com/articles/index.php?article_id=6679

 

I use only E-85 in my truck because I hate paying money to the Middle East.

 

I pisses me off knowing that Brazil is almost only surgarcane E-85 and they are doing great on it and the air is clean, and that gasoline is only like .25 cents in Venezuela. We're getting it up the a$$ with all the high gas prices.

 

OH Well......We'll all get through it.

Posted

I brought this argument up in another thread and was shot down. Good to see another article back me up. :thumbs:

Posted

I agree, corn ethanol is going nowhere. The future of ethanol will be cellulosic or sugar based ethanol.

  • 3 weeks later...
Posted

Here's some information I've gather this year about companies working on cellulosic ethanol.

 

Mascoma Corp, based in Cambridge, MA, is working with MSU & MTU on research. They plan on building plants in MI (2010), Rome, NY (2009), & Knoxville, TN (2009) to use cellulosic ethanol. www.mascoma.com

 

Also, Coskata Inc., based in Warrenville, Il, is open thier 1st cellulosic ethanol plant in 2010 with an estimated 100mill gal/yr. They are working on plans for a 2nd plant, to be anounced later. www.coskata.com

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    250.4k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    342,759
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    DM22
    Newest Member
    DM22
    Joined
  • Who's Online   4 Members, 0 Anonymous, 1,691 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Did have to make 1 modification because of the WeatherTech rear mud flaps and that was needing 3 longer screws than what came with the install package. 😄
    • Picked up the liners yesterday. Installed passenger side WITHOUT any modifications. All mounting holes lined up perfectly. Rain is interfering today with drivers side. Very Happy! Will add pics when finished
    • As a matter of amusement I’ll leave this conversation with this. Do you beat the government average fuel estimate? Statistics are a guide to me. Not a rule. Someone once said I have to have the last word. If true and possible may be. I’ll blame that on working in a family business.
    • That is a fair point, and I agree that trying to log “everything in the truck” would be the wrong direction.   There are a lot of modules and a lot of traffic. If the product became a full-truck datalogger, the amount of data would get huge very quickly, and most owners would never use it.   I think the first useful version would need to be narrow: - powertrain-side event evidence - selected high-value parameters - communication / voltage / reset events - pre/post event window - short report first, raw log only as backup   One distinction I should make is between active OBD/PID polling and passive bus capture. If you are polling PIDs through OBD, then yes: the more parameters you request, the lower the effective sample rate becomes, and you are adding diagnostic traffic to a vehicle that is already busy running itself. With passive CAN capture, the recorder is not asking all the modules for data. It is listening to traffic that is already on the bus. So it does not consume vehicle bus bandwidth in the same way that a scan tool polling hundreds of PIDs would. But your point still applies in a different way.   Even if passive capture does not add bus traffic, the recorder still has limits: - processing rate - storage rate - timestamp accuracy - decoder workload - event filtering - report size - user attention span   So the answer cannot be “log everything and let the user figure it out.” The product would need to store enough raw evidence to be useful, but only decode, graph, and present the important parts around the event.   A practical report should probably show: - what triggered the capture - how much pre/post data was preserved - which selected parameters changed - how those values compared to baseline - whether the same pattern happened before - whether any voltage, reset, bus-off, lost-message, or communication fault occurred - selected graphs around the event - raw data only as supporting evidence   So I agree with you. More data is not automatically better. The real product is the reduction from raw data into a useful event report.
    • That makes sense, and I agree with most of that.   I think the product would need both: 1. a default powertrain template, so it is useful out of the box; 2. user-selected priority parameters, so the owner or shop can choose what they want to see first.   Different users are going to care about different things. One owner may care about oil pressure and voltage. Another may care about misfire trend, AFM/DFM behavior, or U-codes. A shop may want communication events and repeatability first. Your baseline point is probably the most important one. Raw data is not very useful unless the report can show what normal looked like for that vehicle under similar conditions.   The way I would think about it is: - start with a basic known-good baseline - learn normal behavior for that specific vehicle over time - allow the event to be overlaid against baseline - show whether the event was a one-time spike or a repeatable pattern - provide a simple severity level, but with clear limits on what that severity means   For example, early severity could be something like: - Info: event captured, no obvious abnormal pattern - Watch: value moved outside baseline, but not repeated - Warning: repeatable abnormal pattern under similar conditions - Critical: communication loss, voltage drop, bus-off, reset, or severe repeated event   I would not want the first version to say “replace this part.” That would be overclaiming unless there is repair-confirmed data behind it. It would be more honest to say “this pattern deserves inspection.”   On the OBD port question, I think OBD absolutely has a role. OBD is probably the right place for: - DTCs - freeze frame - VIN - calibration information - normal scan-tool parameters - Mode 6 / enhanced diagnostic data if available The reason I am still looking at an ECM-side recorder is that the failure may happen before anyone connects a scan tool. If the owner plugs in a scanner after the event, the pre-event evidence may already be gone unless the ECU happened to save it. So I do not see this as “OBD versus ECM-side.” I see it more like: - ECM-side recorder: always armed, rolling buffer, event evidence - OBD/DLC companion: DTCs, freeze frame, VIN, calibration, normal scan data - phone/cloud: status, notes, upload, report generation, notifications   I agree that phone connection and push notifications would be useful. I just would not want the phone or cloud connection to be required for capture. The recorder should save the event locally even if the phone is not connected. The phone should help with event marking, download, notes, upload, alerts, and report viewing.   For a default GM V8 event report, would this list make sense? - RPM - calculated load / MAP - throttle position - vehicle speed - gear / torque converter state if available - coolant temperature - oil pressure - oil temperature if available - battery voltage - commanded AFM/DFM state if available - actual AFM/DFM state if available - misfire counters / roughness by cylinder if available - fuel trims - relevant U-codes / communication events - bus-off / lost periodic message / module reset / voltage drop events Which of those would you remove, and what would you add?
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...