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

Skip to comments.

Methanol: The New Hydrogen
Technology Review.com ^ | March 27, 2006 | By Chandra Shekhar

Posted on 03/27/2006 7:44:35 AM PST by aculeus

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-38 next last

1 posted on 03/27/2006 7:44:37 AM PST by aculeus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: aculeus
There are serious problems with a "hydrogen" fuel economy in terms of leakage when the hydrogen is in the form of gas.

Methanol is another good fuel. However, too often, we see promoters and people looking for the next "technological silver bullet" that will cure all of our energy problems.

Once upon a time in the US it was "hydro" (TVA, BPA, Hover Dam, etc.) At another time it was nuclear power. At another time it was central station coal fired power plants. Recently it has been natural gas fired combined cycle combustion turbines. Wind seems to be in vogue again as "the solution."

The point is that different technologies are promising. We should not over promote any of them and we should develop all of them that we can, but not put too much faith on any of them as "the single solution to our future."

2 posted on 03/27/2006 7:50:45 AM PST by Robert357 (D.Rather "Hoist with his own petard!" www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1223916/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aculeus
Methanol - Still a fossil fuel. Costs around $12/gal to refine. Crude oil is more abundant, safer to transport, and is easier to store than methane. Methane is more efficiently used as a natural gas than as a source for a gasoline alternative.

Methanol - not a good bet to be a viable motor fuel alternative.
3 posted on 03/27/2006 8:00:55 AM PST by Antonello (Oh my God, don't shoot the banana!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Robert357

Dear Robert357,

"...but not put too much faith on any of them as 'the single solution to our future.'"

Great point. However, mostly what I see here at FR and at other sites I see these questions discussed is that the naysayers of a given technology are usually the folks characterizing the technology as a potential "silver bullet." And then, after creating that straw man, they knock it down.

Thus, biodiesel from waste products, ethanol production, oil from ANWR, oil from shale, off-shore oil, expanded nuclear, etc., are all considered unrealistic answers to the problem of energy production because no one of these solutions appears to be the single answer.

However, if each of these potential sources can add modestly to our overall domestic energy production, we would greatly expand overall energy production, and be able, if we decided as a country, to reduce reliance on foreign energy imports.

Folks will point out that these alternatives are costly, certainly more costly than the production costs of Arab or Venezuelan oil. However, that's only when we're looking at the direct costs, and ignoring the externalities.

Who here thinks that the Middle East would play such an important role in our foreign policy if these countries didn't supply crucial world energy supplies? Who here thinks that Saddam Hussein would have ever become so powerful and dangerous without critical oil reserves?


sitetest


4 posted on 03/27/2006 8:02:26 AM PST by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Robert357
Wind seems to be in vogue again as "the solution."

As long as the windmills are kept out of the view of wealthy leftists' residences, and far away from birds.

5 posted on 03/27/2006 8:05:52 AM PST by sionnsar (†trad-anglican.faithweb.com† | Libs: Celebrate MY diversity! | Iran Azadi 2006)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Robert357
"problems with a "hydrogen" fuel"

Would you buy a car built by the Hindenburg Auto Company?
6 posted on 03/27/2006 8:05:54 AM PST by dblshot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: aculeus

One thing I noticed was the lack of any numbers as to the amount of land that would be required to grow the organic material, usually corn, as the basis for the fuel. It may look like a boon for the corn people, but i wonder just how much of the mid west would have too be put to corn to replace the gasoline used just in the US.


7 posted on 03/27/2006 8:07:43 AM PST by Bigs from Michigan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aculeus

So methanol is an element now?

What's its symbol - Mth?


8 posted on 03/27/2006 8:08:01 AM PST by freedomlover (This tagline has been pulled - - - - OK?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bigs from Michigan
One thing I noticed was the lack of any numbers as to the amount of land that would be required to grow the organic material, usually corn, as the basis for the fuel. It may look like a boon for the corn people, but i wonder just how much of the mid west would have too be put to corn to replace the gasoline used just in the US.

You sure you're not thinking of ethanol?

9 posted on 03/27/2006 8:09:58 AM PST by Antonello (Oh my God, don't shoot the banana!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: aculeus

Methanol is a tad too volatile, and also poisonous. One does not need to drink it - inhaling the vapors will do over prolonged exposure.


10 posted on 03/27/2006 8:10:39 AM PST by GSlob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry; b_sharp; neutrality; anguish; SeaLion; Fractal Trader; grjr21; bitt; KevinDavis; ...
FutureTechPing!
An emergent technologies list covering biomedical
research, fusion power, nanotech, AI robotics, and
other related fields. FReepmail to join or drop.

11 posted on 03/27/2006 8:11:30 AM PST by AntiGuv (™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedomlover

12 posted on 03/27/2006 8:14:35 AM PST by TexasCajun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: GSlob
One does not need to drink it - inhaling the vapors will do over prolonged exposure.

Oh... you mean just like gasoline.

13 posted on 03/27/2006 8:17:14 AM PST by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited

A bit worse. Methanol is both more toxic and more volatile [i.e. there are more vapors].


14 posted on 03/27/2006 8:23:25 AM PST by GSlob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: aculeus

bttt


15 posted on 03/27/2006 8:26:02 AM PST by bmwcyle (We got permits, yes we DO! We got permits, how 'bout YOU?;))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GSlob

Methanol is very soluble in water. If it starts to be used in motor fuel it WILL turn up in the ground water. MTBE, a substance used in small percentages and which isn't extremely soluble in water, has already been causing problems in people's water wells on a fairly large scale.


16 posted on 03/27/2006 8:31:14 AM PST by vvpete
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: sionnsar

Put windmills on the Mall in Washington DC. . .Congress will be able to power the entire CONTINENT for decades to come. . . (evil grin)


17 posted on 03/27/2006 8:31:20 AM PST by Salgak (Acme Lasers presents: The Energizer Border: I dare you to try and cross it. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: sionnsar

windmills = aviary cuisinarts


18 posted on 03/27/2006 8:31:32 AM PST by TheRightGuy (ERROR CODE 018974523: Random Tagline Compiler Failure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: aculeus

I regularly burn methanol..... best fuel for an accohol lamp.


19 posted on 03/27/2006 8:33:38 AM PST by bert (K.E. N.P. Slay Pinch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vvpete

One of my relatives used to be a physician-narcologist [treating alcoholics] in Vitebsk [Belarus]. Once he was called to head an emergency medical response team - in an industrial setting the workers found a 55 gal [200 liters]drum labeled "methyl alcohol" [i.e. methanol]. The word "alcohol" they understood, the word "methyl" they did not, skull/crossbones they did not believe - and so they [several hundred of them] drank it. Well, if I remember right, my uncle's team managed to save about a hundred of them - but they got blind.


20 posted on 03/27/2006 8:40:19 AM PST by GSlob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-38 next last

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.

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