Alternative Fuels for America

www.caranddriver.com ^ | 8-1-2010 | BY CSABA CSERE

[Red Badger]

Rest In Peace, old friend, your work is finished.....

If you want ON or OFF the DIESEL ”KnOcK” LIST just FReepmail me.....

This is a fairly HIGH VOLUME ping list on some days.....

[Red Badger]

Knock Ping!...........

[OneWingedShark]

If only we could harness the power of hot-air and bullshit that are constantly flowing out of DC...

[cripplecreek]

I’m all for privately funded research in this area.

[FrankR]

I'll probably take some pot-shots from the rabid environuts who visit here, but I don't think we need to replace the internal combustion engine. It is the most efficient engine they can come up with for now for the work that it does in America.

Even if a phenomenonally clean, inexpensive and plentiful power source was discovered, it wouldn't be long before the algore/chickenlittle types would start demonizing it to wedge their "fair share" of any profits derived from it.

It's not the gasoline, oil, or even cars that the lib enviro-nuts hate, it's the fact that it is in such demand that oil companies sell a lot of it, and the nuts want control of the energy sources in order to control the people.

Look around, anything that is in "demand", or necessary, (like healthcare) is what the progressives are wrapping their arms around. It's completely a control thing.

Internal combustion makes the world go round, and while the rest of the world is adding more cars and roads, the USA under progressives, wants to put us back in buckboards and stage coaches and then bitch about the horse$hi+.

[IamConservative]

I believe the long term answer to our alternative fuel is going to be provided by microbiologists. Biodiesel produced by algea or some yet to be discovered organism fed by the sun.

Personal transportation shouldn’t take more than a 3 cylinder turbo diesel. Made well, should haul you around for 500K miles or so.

[dusttoyou]

Its really difficult to understand the reluctance to promoting and using CNG (natural gas) especially considering how plentiful it is right here in the USA.

Back in the 50’s and 60”s I remember many people using CNG or propane powered cars, pickups and tractors. Other than difficulty in finding refueling stations, everyone running gas powered seemed OK with it.

There is something in the picture that is hard to see, it is WHY.

[thackney]

The miles per barrel comparison is very misleading. The are using the average gasoline/diesel production and portraying it like a limit.

Those ratios are only the result of current market conditions in the US. Process units like Catalytic Crackers and Hydrotraters are designed to maximize gasoline production because the US demand is so great.

In places like Europe and South America, more diesel is produced.

Brazil (Petrobras) is currently in the early engineering phase of two new refineries that will produce no gasoline and maximize diesel production. My company is being evaluated to provide some of the technology.

[norraad]

Go Algae GO!

Even the great Satan Exxon is going algae, why drill when you can pond scum(they can relate).

Fuel a movie I just returned to Netflix, explains much of this and more( by more , one example is some rare footage by one of the camera people of the Twins exploding, yes, they exploded).

In the meantime, good old hemp seed oil returns mucho BTU to our piston powered chariots for cheap, cheap cheap.

It also improves the soil.

Beside clean cheap power, the seed oil has the perfect amino acid profile for human nutrition.

They say the Bible says this in so many words.

[Red Badger]

Even if a phenomenonally clean, inexpensive and plentiful power source was discovered,...

It already has. It's called nuclear power....................yes, you can power a vehicle with nuclear power............

[Red Badger]

Diesel can be made from coal, which we have plenty of, as can gasoline..............

[IamConservative]

Diesel can be made from coal, which we have plenty of, as can gasoline..............

The diesel would have sulfur in it would it not?

[Red Badger]

Sulfur can be removed in the process, and there are low-sulfur coals than can be used...............

[Red Badger]

http://www.energyandclimate.org/synthetic-diesel.html

[FrankR]

Oh...I forgot to add “practical”...sorry.

[sitetest]

Dear thackney,

The author recognizes your point, but states that to get significantly more diesel per barrel, it would require replacing all our existing refineries. What do you think of that comment?

What's implied in YOUR post is that getting as much gasoline out of the barrel as we do is a result of using EXTRA refining equipment. Could refineries be re-tooled by removing that extra equipment from the process? Or is the author not too far off?

Thanks,

sitetest

[Red Badger]

The only two things that keeps nuclear power from being “practical” in everyday transportation are fear born of ignorance and government policies.........maybe one and the same...............

[SpaceBar]

There is only one fuel that will save America, fat made from boiled down liberals.

[thackney]

to get significantly more diesel per barrel, it would require replacing all our existing refineries

Portions of the refinery would be replaced but not the whole refinery. For example, typical Cat Crackers would be replaced with VGO units and the like but the desalter, atmospheric distillation and vacuum distillation units would be unchanged.

What's implied in YOUR post is that getting as much gasoline out of the barrel as we do is a result of using EXTRA refining equipment. Could refineries be re-tooled by removing that extra equipment from the process?

If you only removed the equipment, we would be left with a lot of low value product like residual oil (bunker fuel) that has little use and value. Instead, subsequent processing units downstream of the distillation units breakdown the low-value, high-BTU, heavy oil into more desired products. Different markets desire different ratios of products.

[FrankR]

I was only thinking of how many of said cars Iran would buy to get the plutonium...nuclear is nuclear....