Posted on 10/19/2016 7:39:21 AM PDT by Brad from Tennessee
OAK RIDGE, Tenn.,—In a new twist to waste-to-fuel technology, scientists at the Department of Energy’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory have developed an electrochemical process that uses tiny spikes of carbon and copper to turn carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, into ethanol. Their finding, which involves nanofabrication and catalysis science, was serendipitous. Video follows.
“We discovered somewhat by accident that this material worked,” said ORNL’s Adam Rondinone, lead author of the team’s study published in ChemistrySelect. “We were trying to study the first step of a proposed reaction when we realized that the catalyst was doing the entire reaction on its own.”
The team used a catalyst made of carbon, copper and nitrogen and applied voltage to trigger a complicated chemical reaction that essentially reverses the combustion process. With the help of the nanotechnology-based catalyst which contains multiple reaction sites, the solution of carbon dioxide dissolved in water turned into ethanol with a yield of 63 percent. Typically, this type of electrochemical reaction results in a mix of several different products in small amounts. . .
(Excerpt) Read more at wattsupwiththat.com ...
Great idea now how do you put them I’m your vehicles liquid fuel tank? grinding them up to a fine powder and mixing with water or even solvent won’t work. However the Chinese have come up with a way to convert any plant material directly into aromatic hydrocarbons which are identical to fossil hydrocarbons. Thus ending the fuel food debate. for corn take the kernels feed the cows,chickens and pigs and take the cobs and stocks and make fuel with that. researchers have shown that no plow under is needed with a winter cover crop like winter rye or alfalfa. The root process has been known since the 1970s south Africa uses it to make petrol to this very day from coal syngas but biomass syngas has a better CO/H ratio and actually is more efficient because of that fact
This is the DOI of the relevant scientific paper.
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2016.08.108
I’ve had lawn mowers run OK on E-10 also. Other small engines may not fare so well, as in the case of the power washer I got back from fuel system repairs last week. The guy that did the work diagnosed the problem via e-mail, and had it fixed in a couple of hours. His advice: avoid E-10 in this particular small engine, because in the local environment (Houston), where the ambient atmosphere consists of 78% liquid water, all of that water will end up in your gas tank just as surely as if you had filled the gas tank from the garden hose. So, if your advice to me is to use E-10 in my newly repaired power washer, you’ll forgive me if I politely decline.
Everyone should read the study about one billion tons of waste biomass and municipal wastes produced each year. That is enough btu to power 1/3 of all our vehicles even after conversion to alcohols or synthetic hydrocarbons.
The open fuel act would require auto makers to include the programming for wide range O2 sensors to recognize the btu content of the fuel mixture being burnt. No vehicle since the 1990s has used natural rubber seals EVERY car made today uses neoprene or nitrile seals and are immune to alcohols any of them from methanol to propanol and all in between.
All OBDII vehicles have at least two onboard wide lamba O2 sensors as required by existing federal laws these sensors along with proper programming are all that is needed to make any existing OBDII vehicle fuel agnostic. since the elimination of leaded fuels all vehicles have hardened exhaust valve seats this too is industry wide and mandatory.
I work in oil and gas and am all for the open fuel act it frees Americans to uses any domestic produced fuel, methanol being a huge plus given the shale gas revolution. Methane to methanol is an easy industry process, coal to alcohols via syngas, coal to synthetic hydrocarbons via syngas like the south africans. mixed alcohols like Texas A&M mixhol process for agricultural wastes, landfill sites and flare gases.
The list goes on and on we could eliminate ALL oil imports in less than a decade just with normal vehicle turn over this says nothing of reprogramming existing vehicles which is currently a federal offence.
Houston), where the ambient atmosphere consists of 78% liquid water,
That statement is so not correct.
Well, you can, but it's a lot of work (methanol) or you could run it off methane and CO with a gasifier, but that's also a lot of work.
the Chinese have come up with a way to convert any plant material directly into aromatic hydrocarbons which are identical to fossil hydrocarbons.
Along those lines, WE have a couple of devices parked at turkey processing plants that convert the guts and heads of the slaughtered turkeys into usable fuel in a couple of hours.
On another note, Pennzoil Platinum synthetic motor oil is made from natural gas, not petroleum nor alcohol.
Similarly, I understand there is an outfit related to one of your colleges (maybe A&M) who developed a field GTL process (not Fischer Tropsch) and a portable refinery, designed to convert otherwise flared NG in the field to usable liquid fuels.
What do you know about this?
Well, maybe when it's raining straight down.
“Actually this process is already more efficient than photosynthesis...”
Perhaps, but plants already do the work anyway, which saves us half the effort.
I guess you buy pre mixed oil gas then? Bagging a carb? What kind of engine owner does that ? You’re an idiot willing to go to green extremes. Just stop it. Arguing with you is pointless
I see that you are impervious to invisible [sarc] tags. Probably some kind of unbelievable super-power, exclusively reserved for comic book heroes and the like. ;-)
Or, alternatively, we could just let automakers make whatever the market demands.
As a consumer, I would like an uncomplicated car that runs on the most cost effective fuel available.
Why should I pay for hardened valve seats and programming and 02 sensors that I do not want, will never use, and do not need? Wouldn’t I be better off with a cheap car that starts every time I turn the key and runs on inexpensive and widely available fuel?
I don’t want E85. If I had a car that ran on E85, and there was a local station that offered it, I would still prefer gasoline, because of the better performance, better stability, and lower cost.
Of course I do, you think I want to frig up my saw?
Bagging a carb?
No, Einstein, the gas cap.
What kind of engine owner does that ?
One that doesn't want to needlessly work on his fuel systems, and then whine about it. It's actually no trouble at all.
From the sound of you, when you work on your carburetors, you're probably ruining them yourself, because you don't know what you're doing.
You’re an idiot willing to go to green extremes.
There you go again....invecting!
Arguing with you is pointless
You REALLY DO have big problems with reading comprehension, doncha....Maybe....if....I....was....to....type....more....slowly...
Just stop it.
Heh heh heh...
You’ve never heard of 2 cycle oil additive for gas It seems. Gotta buy yours from the “I’m too dumb to mix my own” store. One winter snow blower makes you an expert.
Your car already has those O2 sensors and hardened exhaust seats if it is newer than 1996. Those were mandatory to met tier II bin one EPA regs. Your car’s ecu computer also runs a mixture calculation several thousand times a minute. The open fuel act mandates that the software running that ecu be able to recognize and properly maintain the air fuel ratio for varying density of fuels and also use the existing knock sensors to adjust ignition advances for various octane ratings something you car also already does. No additional cost to the user is necessary. what is necessary is to break the monopoly on a government mandated single fuel namely gasoline. When cars using equipment they already posses can use any fuel with the required minimum octane ratings regardless of source or.density then the competition can enter. Methanol on a btu for btu basis is half the cost of retail petrol can be made from natural gas , garbage,coal,biomass,and synthetic via electrolysis. your car with a reprogram could burn it just fine the fuel lines and seals are already neoprene the only thing needed is software,which the fed gov prohibits aftermarket from doing. My Volvo has a moded firmware it can run on E85,M100,and any mix between it gets almost the same mpg on E85 as E10 because the turbo can push more psi on 116octane ethanol than 87octane petrol. higher effective compression ratio raises the carnot eff of the motor compensating for 1/3 less btu gal. plus I never need fuel.system cleaners e85 is a powerful carbon build up cleaner.most of your retail fuel system cleaners use isopropanol as a solvent btw. E85 In a car that can use its higer octane offers more performance ,cleaner engine parts and here the cost per mile is cheaper than running premium petrol.in the end it is cost per mile not cost per gallons.if I can get 21mph on e85 and 26 on E10 but E10 91 octane is 70 cents more per gal E85 wins in cost per mile.
So, you are saying that water melts plastic line. Aquarium owners need to be warned. They are going to have to replace the lines in their tanks.
I wonder why ?
I have been letting you get away with your nonsense, but there is a limit.
Are you aware that the plastic you put over the fuel tank opening will melt and then clog the fuel filter ?
The small engines I have been 'fixing' have had only ONE PROBLEM.
The fuel line OUTSIDE the tank turns hard as a rock. The fuel line INSIDE the tank turns into (freshly boiled) spaghetti noodles. This did not occur before they started putting ETHANOL into the GASOLINE.
I am replacing the plastic (they were never rubber, so I don't know where your are getting that) fuel lines with TYVEX fuel lines. They last longer, but eventually they turn out the same way.
It is not the WATER itself that melts TYVEX nor even the original fuel lines.
Then why don’t we use pure Ethanol in our cars ?
Ethanol Edit
In 2005, driver Paul Dana brought the sponsorship of the Ethanol Promotion and Information Council (EPIC) to his IndyCar team. EPIC is a consortium of ethanol producers that advocate the increased use of ethanol. EPIC was anxious to address public concerns that ethanol use led to engine damage and poor performance when used in street cars. As a marketing effort, it was believed that sponsoring an IndyCar could be used as a tool to promote education and awareness of ethanol use, and to curb the spread of erroneous information. Dana was killed in a crash in 2006, but the IRL already begun a transition to ethanol fuel.
For the 2006 season, the fuel was a 90%/10% mixture of ethanol and methanol. Starting in 2007, the league advertised “100% Fuel Grade Ethanol”, the first competitive series to utilize renewable fuel. The mixture is actually 98% ethanol and 2% gasoline for races held in the United States. It was provided by Lifeline Foods of Saint Joseph, Missouri. The additives satisfied the U.S. government’s requirements that the alcohol be unfit for human consumption, and added visible color in case of a fire. The 2010 São Paulo Indy 300, held in Brazil – outside of the U.S. regulations – utilized a full E100 mixture, the first instance in the sport.
To compensate for the gain of power due to the use of ethanol, the displacement was reverted to 3500 cc. Since ethanol gets better fuel mileage than methanol, the fuel tanks in the car were reduced in size (30 US gallons to 22 US gallons).
Compared to methanol, human contact with the current IndyCar fuel is much less harsh, and the fumes much less irritating. The fumes are often compared with the sweet smell of apple cider or apple cobbler. Unlike methanol, ethanol is not caustic and does not cause chemical burns when it comes in contact with skin.
Wiki
Of course, I could be wrong, but I ASSUME you use the thing once in a while. I also assume you're smart enough to remove the plastic when you run the engine. (a lot of assumin there) I've never had any degradation of the plastic bags, but then again, it depends on what the plastic bag is made of. If that bothers you, try duct tape over the vent hole, or a neoprene plug, or a nitrile glove...anything to keep the humidity out of the fuel tank.
they were never rubber, so I don't know where your are getting that
Other guys were complaining about alcohol eating rubber parts. Maybe older cars, and including fuel pump diaphragms. I said neoprene.
I am replacing the plastic, they were never rubber...
I don't know what you're working on, but my lawn mowers, rider and snowblowers either have no fuel line (tank on the carb) or 1/4" black fuel hose, and none inside the tank.
If you're working on small two strokes...why the HELL would you use ethanol gasoline? I said they were fussy. Why create a problem?
That's why they make Trufuel.
DUH!...I sell it.
However, you admit you're mixing it with ethanol gas, not real gas.
the “I’m too dumb to mix my own” store.
Apparently you are. It doesn't have any ethanol in it. I'm smart enough NOT to put ethanol in my two strokes.
One winter snow blower makes you an expert.
No, I've worn out a couple, but they've lasted well into their obsolescence....decades. The fuel systems have not failed. I've been using Briggs and Tecumseh engines all my life.
I also have a Sears twin cylinder lawn tractor...with the variator drive, used as a snow blower and mower. How old is that? It still runs fine. (although I added electronic ignition)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.