Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
fleebut

Why is ethanol a better fuel?

Recommended Posts

Trend line- advantage ethanol

 

As we know, petrol's cost of production is increasing over time. Biofuel is experiencing the reciprocal cost of production as compared to petrol. New and powerful technology improves the plight of both. As one example I will present a possible future for corn ethanol.

 

The most recent invention of gardening is the Genesis practice. There is to much to cover here, but will say you could have a wonderful garden on gravel road with this system. All of the biological empowerment appears to be maximized. Watering and weeding not a concern. To my amazement the system maximizes carbon sequestration within soil. Think of the rapidly implementing technology of robots and drones. It is unquestionable that this technology will be wholly exploited upon agriculture. Dovetail this with accurate positioning systems and the magnitude of computing power. It doesn't take a genius to understand the pinpoint accuracy of farming will develop. That the giant heavy equipment will be a thing of the past since they work so hard to trample the earth. Soil compaction is poison to plant life. I would guess the technology would progress to the point where a purchase at Amazon would enable a small parcel land owner to obtain a farm in a box solution.

Do the math. Most capable farmers compete in corn yields presently and the winner usually north of 600 bushel per acre. Consider GMO will have a major impact and know the future could look mighty productive. Know that current farming harvest sits at 160 bushel/acre and at max they take 20-25% of stover. So, given the Genesis method requires no stover and the extra corn to be utilized for fuel production. That the processing technology yield will steady improve and that it will be a given that the transport sector will drastically improve mpg. It would be an easy task to fuel the entire transportation sector with no increase in farmland and do so with corn plant feed stock. But adding to the math the steady deployment of battery car that may take over metro personal transportation per the need to minimize emissions. Factor in the hydrogen solution. Jeff Broin did suggest the potential of corn ethanol being this capable back a few years.  I just wonder if the oil Sultans consultants had informed them of this future? If so, it would make sense to pump, pump, pump to delay such progress and realize income while the getting is good. Exxon stock may be overpriced. Talk of disruptive technology. The future can be so cruel to the losers. Let's not attempt to make the U.S. a loser.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gasoline additive that improves carbon rating-   Advantage ethanol

 

Ethanol is wholly under rated per value of lowering carbon within fuel supply. For the moment let us forget the ILUC penalty unfairly attached to ethanol and evaluate ethanol per additive status. The best example to date, the E30 fuel evaluation per Oak Ridge Labs. Their testing points to value of E30 fuel and the benefits to optimize the fuel character for efficiency. In general the E30 optimized engine would be 40% downsized and operate more efficiency with low RPMs. A 1.2 L engine for midsize sedan. The engine would develop 2x the torque compared to 87 AKI gas. Because of ethanol's high octane boost to the fuel and lower carbon intensity, E30 provides a 2x reduction in carbon potential. Some of ethanol's fuel character advantages include molecular, high compression operation, high heat of vaporization, work that can be extracted per higher yield i.e. expansion psi, and the higher rate of egr blending within intake air.

 

So, the comparison would be a gasoline car operating at 65 mph, medium four door sedan, achieving 39 mpg, 135g/km vs E30, 44 mpg, at 102 g/km. I played around with the numbers. Attributing the 30% ethanol side with the increased efficiency of carbon. It roughly doubled the improvement for carbon rating of ethanol. Ethanol ratings should receive a huge bump up per the fuels ability to make gasoline run more efficient. For example the RBOB blend stock isn't even up to fuel standards and would make a horrible fuel if not for ethanol blend stock. Shouldn't ethanol receive a better rating to make this possible? You see how ethanol gets thrown to the back of the bus. Compare the rating to ethanol with that of EV, that merely rates the electric motor efficiency for mpg. It's just not proper evaluations, nor science. Ethanol should be valued per it's ability to improve mpg, not per the loss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read up on the efficiency of the C4 plant kingdom and realize the feed source = advantage ethanol.

 

These are grass plants such corn, sugar cane, sorghum, and the cellulosic grass feed stocks. From what I read they appear to be top tier for conversion of sunlight and CO2 to seed, sugar, or biomass. They out perform woodland per pound of cellulose per acre/yr upon similar siting. Remember the satellite or space station data that had corn field growth top photosynthesis activity upon the planet. Even above tropic jungle growth. Well, did you read of DOE funding continued research at U of Illinois with cooperation from neighboring Universities that are engineering Sorghum to achieve improved water utilization. That's nice, but what are the probable results? Unlock nine million western acres to biofuel plant feed stock growth. That would be to take relatively semi arid low growth land mass to maximum plant growth and ensuing benefit to environment and wildlife. Non the least of benefits would to increase yearly average harvest 30% for farmland with such crops. The genetics could be transferred across the C4 line of plants. So, again we realize the increasing magnitude of the biological solution to global warming and energy needs. Do you think most of the country is unaware of this growing cost efficient potential?             

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hybrid technology = advantage ethanol fuel

 

Hybrid efficiency is accomplished by improving the engine torque curve and thus allowing a smaller engine. The smaller engine will operate more efficiently per utilizing more of the engines rated hp upon the more fuel efficient low RPM range. Throttle plate will be open a larger percentage of time improving pumping efficiency. Also, increases upon heat and chamber pressure a larger percentage of time improving thermal efficiency at the slower RPMs. The hybrid technology improves the most desirable low speed torque range. We all know ethanol fuel is the champion for low speed torque. Utilizing a higher blend of this fuel will allow the engine, if engineered properly, to operate in similar fashion. Ethanol fuel is as valuable as hybrid technology per carbon engine efficiency. 

 

Update this efficient hybrid technology to modern development within auto industry. Realize that the current hybrid carries a extra weight burden that lowers efficiency. That the cost of hybrid option is steep and may not be worthwhile per economics. The regenerative braking efficiency gain wasted per extra weight burden. The mild hybrid will minimize these burdens and achieve similar or improved mileage. This cost effective technology will be quickly adapted within very near future. This is the 48v system you've read about. The car achieves fuel off coasting, stop/start, higher torque at lower RPMs, low speed battery power maneuverability, and most importantly hybrid turbo. The use of the hybrid turbo will eliminate need of extra batteries and again improve low speed toque of engine. Realize that improved ICE achievements, put the efficiency of fuel combustion above that of steam power grid. Notice that again the higher blend ethanol fuel could be easily utilized to compound the benefit and do so with a fuel that is upon a steep curve to decrease carbon emissions. Per the current ratings of GW emissions of hybrid efficiency vs grid power BEV, one can establish the superior alternative of the E85 mild hybrid auto transport. This solution is readily available as compared to the grid improvement. Shouldn't this be job number one for investment dollars. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Hybrid technology = advantage ethanol fuel

 

NONSENSE!

 

Ultimate fuel economy and more than a decade of cradle to grave studies demonstrate hybrid-electric vehicles are more efficient and have a smaller green footprint than conventionally fueled vehicles of similar size/capacity.

 

 

That the cost of hybrid option is steep and may not be worthwhile per economics.

 

. . . if you ignore higher resale prices and fuel savings. Used hybrids lose less value via depreciation than the typical car. Mechanically, hybrid engines last longer due to the lack of wear and tear. Engines are operated in optimum ranges for longer and are rarely stressed.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I don't know about, nonsense, but I'm a proponent of hybrid technology as most. It is a trade off of extra cost vs value. You have rationalized the purchase, probably of Prius? A lot of soft and hard information goes to such decisions. Auto analysis claim the hybrid vehicle will gain popularity, but marginally. They claim the most cost effective 48v mild hybrid will be popular in near future. Even that technology is a sliding scale of technology adaptation. Meaning minimal to maximum. The maximum would utilize the hybrid turbo and achieve better mileage than current hybrids.

 

The hybrid = ethanol advantage heading was directed to the engine torque. Hybrid technology improved engine torque per additional power. This facilitates a smaller engine that will operate within a more efficient manner. Ethanol optimized engine does the same. As you know an engine better suited to the fuel quality of ethanol will greatly improve torque, especially valuable low RPM torque. The present day auto utilize an over sized engine per the need for acceleration. Hybrid will allow similar acceleration with a smaller gas engine. E85 does the same.

 

It would be interesting to compare E85 non hybrid with hybrid per carbon efficiency.

 

A gasoline '16 Ford Focus 2L rated at 40 mpg vs 29 mpg for E85. Now we know the EPA merely knocks down E85 mileage per the -28% less BTU content of E85. We also know that car engine technology have various capabilities to exploit E85 high octane and minimize the mileage loss i.e. spark advance.  Most claim -17% on average mileage loss. That would be a realistic E85 rating of 33 mpg. EPA also rates ethanol as 28% less carbon per gallon as compared to gasoline. Gasoline sits at 95 Co2/mega Joule and ethanol 28% less or 68 Co2/MJ. Note that ethanol receives a ILUC penalty of 19.8 Co2/MJ penalty. Other fuels go unpenalized for indirect environmental costs and besides the penalty is unproven, theoretical, and the real accounting of such a variable is impossible. Also, consider the vetting of EPA carbon rating of ethanol has been made per up to date information such as allocating corn oil co product. The rating for dry grind corn with natural gas dried distillery grains should be 50% of current value. This is an industry average with up to date ILUC penalty applied. Wow, the hybrid would need to (roughly) double the fuel mileage of gasoline car to compare with plain E85 car. I think E85 wins. Imagine the contest if the E85 fueled car was actually optimized for the fuel.  

 

But, that is besides the point because hybrid technology can be and should be utilized with E85 fuel. Consider the recent GW analysis of automotive technology that recently rated hybrid more powerful for most of the country as compared to BEV per grid power. BEV proponents will quickly claim the grid power will improve the carbon rating, but the same can be said of plain ICE, hybrid technology, and ethanol fuel. The California grid even with green energy is rated at 124 CO2/MJ. It is nice the battery car can convert the electric power 2x more efficient, but the optimized ethanol engine with hybrid technology appears to be a more capable GW choice. A choice that doesn't require near the taxpayer or rate payer investment. Consider cellulosic fuel is just starting to impact carbon rating of ethanol. Same with technologies of improved plant growth for root sequestration of carbon and more feed stock per acre. Cellulosic ethanol will probably dip to negative carbon rating. Powerful technologies headed down the pike to improve growing feed stock and processing feed stock.  These practices magnify the biological capability to sequester carbon. Something a solar panel can't do. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Wow, the hybrid would need to (roughly) double the fuel mileage of gasoline car to compare with plain E85 car.

 

My 2001 Prius achieves 38 mpg CITY in the summer months on E-85, 51 mpg CITY on E10.

 

 

 Imagine the contest if the E85 fueled car was actually optimized for the fuel.

 

Don't we all wish!

 

Hybrid technology improves the efficiency of all vehicles, regardless of fuel.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However, hybrid technology makes the design of flex vehicles difficult. You can see by your mpg that the Prius makes no attempt to improve efficiency of higher blend ethanol. Since, the hybrid technology must match so carefully to specifics of engine, very difficult to flex. . 

 

Much can be done within tradition gasoline built engine to improve efficiency of ethanol blended fuels and much can be done with hybrid technology. Currently, not much incentive for automotive manufactures to spend the resources for the effort. I think U.S. companies have an open door to displace the competition as this country produces such a large supply of the ethanol fuel. However, the EPA won't change the rating of real world ethanol mileage. Every car rated the same. If ever a manufacturer decided to take one engine, such as a current diesel engine block, and built a Prius type technology around E85 fuel. An dedicated engine with hybrid technology commissioned to maximize the fuels advantage, it would be a game changer to the image of ethanol and propel the fuel to top respect of superior choice for both the pocket book and environment. It looks that the hybrid technology would be even more powerful within such an engine as compared to gasoline.

 

This would be the optimal solution, but, the E30 super premium fuel has a larger potential. The testing and analysis of this fuel with maximized traditional automotive technology, as posted below, improves auto mileage as compared to plain gasoline. The ethanol portion is empowered to 2x the environmental benefit. Since, we have a limited production of ethanol it would best be place the fuel use upon the sweet spot of advantage. Improving gasoline.

 

The benefits of the E30 class of vehicle is indeed large. Cheaper fuel with better mileage. Since, ethanol carbon rating present day should be twice the 28% reduction even if unfairly applying the ILUC penalty, the E30 class of vehicle with hybrid or mild hybrid technology should be the car of choice for consumers. The car would not suffer increase in production cost. No cost penalty to receive top tier environmental and lower cost benefits. The environmental rating of such a vehicle would currently surpass even the present day situation with costly and limited range BEV. Also, the E30 solution would not be limited to extremely light duty passenger transport. E30 fuel could be utilized across the entire transportation fleet. So, what is going on within our market place to choose the best solution? Who is controlling the open market of ideas and solutions?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A simple solution is to upgrade the octane rating of "regular" pump gas from 87 to 91 make "premium" 94/95 octane.   This act could and should encourage the automobile companies to boost compression ratios in their engines, thus further enhancing the engine's efficiency/usage of ethanol blended fuels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is so true, but the RVP EPA regulation is a conundrum. With each increase in standard fuel ethanol mix, the EPA sets in motion to certify the fuel and then EPA requires the new mix to adhere to old gasoline vapor pressure standards. Then the "new" ethanol mix is held hostage per petrol industry unwilling to create a new blend stock that will conform to vapor pressure standards.  The desired result appears to place ethanol industry between a rock and a hard spot such as to offer E15 for full year in metro zones.

 

The 87 octane at the pump is internationally known as 92 Ron rating (+5 points). Europe gasoline 98 a common fuel and Japan offers 100 readily. Our Western states offer 91 for regular.  

 

The problem of EPA regs and Petrol blend stocks for oxygenate, they work to eliminate ethanol advantage to improve fuel quality.

 

http://www.energyresourcefulness.org/Fuels/refineries_and_octane_levels.html

 

Ethanol additive has a remarkable ability to improve combustion efficiency, even within current fleet of auto technology. Most cars have knock sensors and adaptive control that will automatically advance timing of higher octane fuel. The spark advance decreases exhaust temps, and decreases enrichment. Also, exhaust temp sensor input per algorithms computing minimize fuel waste per enrichment. DI achieves the most respect per cooling effect that ethanol has suburb rating for. E50 decreases intake temps by 30 deg C. Ethanol will naturally decrease NOx emissions.

 

The U.S. EPA is conflating vapor pressure per ethanol additive with more emissions. I think this is a misjudgement as the additive empowers more engine efficiency. Ethanol decrease carcinogens within fuel supply, improve carbon efficiency, and decrease particulates, and non the least smog. So, the federal agency should regulate to maximize the usefulness of this additive per its legal mandate. Sure VP is important and rated one of the emissions to be concerned with, but the solution is not to regulate inferior fuel, but to require inventive infrastructure to control the emission. The natural gas industry appears to be on top of the air emission technology. Don't let the petrol industry claim it can't be done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×