Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: thackney

Why not just use nat gas as a motor fuel ?


6 posted on 05/02/2011 6:43:25 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (Eh ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]


To: Eric in the Ozarks
The Alaskan North Slope problem is there is a lot of Natural Gas without a delivery system, and difficult economics in building a delivery system.

And there is an Alaskan Pipeline that has surplus capacity along with an expected growing production of the heavy oil. The methanol would help thin the heavy oil and make pumping easier.

7 posted on 05/02/2011 6:54:17 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer (biblein90days.org))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: Eric in the Ozarks
Why not just use nat gas as a motor fuel ?

Too difficult to transport, store, and refuel a car with natural gas. CNG (Compressed Natural Gas) has its supporters, but it is very low energy density compared to liquid gasoline, so your range is severely limited. Having to compress it to a very high PSI makes it slow to refuel.

It is used in some fleet vehicles, but not something that grandma can do herself at the filling station.

8 posted on 05/02/2011 6:55:40 AM PDT by Yo-Yo (Is the /sarc tag really necessary?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: Eric in the Ozarks
...."Why not just use nat gas as a motor fuel ?"....

Nobody likes to carry a tank pressurized to 5k-6k lbs pressure. CNG works fine, but there is always the "bomb" factor. LNG has the temp problem also. If we are going "green with solar and wind, use that juice to make the gasoline from coal and nat gas to save money. If we could cure the fuel problem for 200-300 years, we must use coal and NG and whatever the cost would be better than depending on the ME for fuel. Having a stable cost and supply for fuel would trump any costs involved over the long haul.

9 posted on 05/02/2011 7:03:08 AM PDT by chuckles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: Eric in the Ozarks

Because even when pressurized to 3600 psi, the storage energy per unit of volume is roughly 1/3 that of gasoline. Heavy, dangerous high pressure tanks, short driving range.


10 posted on 05/02/2011 7:03:16 AM PDT by Jack of all Trades (Hold your face to the light, even though for the moment you do not see.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson