The Methanol Alternative

What is the procedure for producing ethanol from wood?

What is the procedure for producing ethanol from wood?

I am coming to the conclusion that making ethanol from wood(cellulosic ethanol) is far more expensive than making methanol from wood and other cellulose sources. Ethanol at this point is what gets made when certain bacteria(yeast) eat sugars. Methanol is what gets made when other bacteria eat cellulose. Getting cellulose into a form that can be eatin by yeast takes several added steps that cost a lot of extra money that methanol production doesn't have to worry about or pay for. From wiki:

Cellulosic ethanol (also called lignocellulosic ethanol) is a type of biofuel produced from lignocellulose, a structural material that comprises much of the mass of plants. Lignocellulose is composed mainly of cellulose, hemicellulose and lignin. Corn stover, switchgrass, miscanthus and woodchip are some of the more popular cellulosic materials for ethanol production. Cellulosic ethanol is chemically identical to ethanol from other sources, such as corn starch or sugar, but has the advantage that the lignocellulose raw material is highly abundant and diverse. However, it differs in that it requires a greater amount of processing to make the sugar monomers available to the microorganisms that are typically used to produce ethanol by fermentation. Switchgrass is the major biomass material being studied today, due to its high levels of cellulose. Cellulose, however, is contained in nearly every natural, free-growing plant, tree, and bush, in meadows, forests, and fields all over the world without agricultural effort or cost needed to make it grow. Whether distilled from agricultural crops such as corn, wheat, barley or created from celloluse, ethanol is ethyl alcohol; it is identical in chemical composition regardless of the source. Calling it cellulosic ethanol is misleading because it (cellulosic ethanol) is no different physically from corn ethanol or wheat ethanol. The ground of North American forests is littered with tons of cellulose-containing wastewood branches fallen from trees, which could be harvested and converted into ethanol automobile fuel. The processes that produce lumber and lumber products also generate cellulose waste that is discarded that could be used to produce cellulosic ethanol.

There are at least two methods of production of cellulosic ethanol (see "Production methods", below):

Cellulolytic method: hydrolysis followed by fermentation of the generated free sugars.
Gasification, which produces synthesis gas that can be converted to ethanol by fermentation or thermochemical catalysis (e.g., the Fischer-Tropsch process).

Neither process generates toxic emissions when it produces ethanol.

Cellulosic ethanol production currently exists at "pilot" and "commercial demonstration" scale, including a plant in China engineered by SunOpta Inc. and owned and operated by China Resources Alcohol Corporation that is currently producing cellulosic ethanol from corn stover (stalks and leaves) at a continuous, 24-hour per day rate.

Wood...Methanol can be made out of Algore?

Yes.

Unfortunately, the resulting volume of methanol equates to only about 25% of US's gasoline demands, and only for a brief 5-year period.

Worse, Al Gore is a finite resource. Consumed in this fashion, he cannot be considered "renewable," and hence is not very "green."

On the other hand...

If you could efficiently harness all of his hot air (and tailpipe emissions -- God help us), and use it to pressurize compressed-air powered cars, you could satisfy half of America's transportation needs indefinitely!

The only question is "with what shall we replace him?" when he inevitably beaches himself. That will be a dark day for our economy, indeed.

>Compared to such misguided alternatives, the competence and rationality of The Methanol Economy is refreshing.<

Actually, methanol is just another “misguided alternative”.
It’s MORE expensive than petro-based gas to produce.
Pretending we can harvest plants at a rate sufficient to offset any significant percentage of oil consumption is pure fantasy.

When the world gets serious about solid energy alternatives they will turn to nuclear power and hydrogen power.
They we access low sulpher coal reserves and oil where we know it exists.

Yeah, what #121 says. There are actually 2 ways. One way uses bacteria similar to what a termite does in it's stomach. The hold back there is the bacteria must be manufactured and multiplied. Another similar method just manufactures the enzyme that digests the cellulose into ethanol. Very expensive to manufacture tons of it and it can't be used over and over. Making ethanol from sugars just requires yeast to continue to multiply.

The 2nd method is to make syngas from the feedstock( coal, cellulose,etc) and then change it into ethanol. The big variable here is the energy input to make syngas. There are several companies that manufacture the equipment to do method #2. If you have 5-10 acres, a source of saw dust or wood chips, or coal,( or for that matter nat gas), and a power source, you too can make your own ethanol from wood, trash, coal, etc. The problems still remain, how much is the feedstock, how much does the energy input cost, and how much is the going price of ethanol? When ethanol was $4 a gallon, this was very positive. Now corn is high and ethanol is low which is the same problems oil refiners have at the moment. They call it "the crack spread". The answer, of course, is to get a cheaper feedstock, like sawdust or switch grass. And maybe some type of solar or coal powered energy source. As long a pols from Iowa control the process, this will be unlikely. They insist corn is the ONLY way America will go. They also still insist on subsidies when corn is at an all time high. We can buy 200 proof ethanol from Brazil for about $1.50 dollars a gallon,RIGHT NOW, But the US tacks on about 57 cents a gallon tax to keep it out of our market. We also give sugar subsidies to US farmers to keep the price of sugar propped up when it could be produced much cheaper and, ergo, make ethanol from sugar for less than $1 a gallon. Ethanol is workable, right now, but there are so many competing forces working against it, it looks bleak. Also, American ignorance on the subject is beyond belief. If we don't crack the corn cabal soon, ethanol as fuel, will die and Brazil will keep moving forward past oil independence, to oil exporter. Ethanol is the fuel answer, but corn ethanol from US farmers, is killing the idea. What if we bought corn from Russia, or Brazil? The farmers here would still pitch a function and you still have a tight energy profit. We must move on or ethanol will die.

Hmmm, if they can make ethanol directly from coal or natural gas, then what they should do is convert all electricity generation over to nuclear and save the coal for ethanol production. We’d be energy self sufficient easily. To keep the farmers from having fits, we could produce a deisel alternative from crops. This would save our petroleum for producing plastics, lubricants, adhesives, fertilizers, etc.

It’s not a matter of bathing in it. It is a matter of spilling it on yourself or you clothes.

I posed a question about the toxicity of Methanol versus Gasoline. Apparently you have never accidentally spilled gas while filling a tank or working on machinery.

Thanks for the kind, insightful and intelligent answer just the same.

Warm Regards,
Boiler Plate

“Don’t get it on your skin and breathe it either.”

I have heard that as well. How does it compare to gas and ethanol in term of toxicity?

“Don’t get it on your skin and breathe it either”

You are both correct, of course. And the ethanol game is indeed a political one. Agricultural waste is a much more logical feedstock for ethanol than is corn. Using corn is STUPID. Wanna go blind...expose yourself to methanol; and there are many other serious side-effects to methanol exposure.

One of these days we should be seeing energy alternatives that do not require any of these fuels. No polution, no dollar cost for fuels. No grid. Scary for THEY. But it will happen. I have seen some of these solutions. They work.

Well, poison is poison, so it’s sort of a mixed bag what happens with methanol. If you drink it, you can go blind and all kinds of nerve damage happens. It does penetrate the skin, so how long you absorb it is the key there. The area is measured in square inches vs. the length of time before you wash it off. The damage would be slight unless you bathed in it or left it for a long period. But it’s like the question, “ How much mercury is too much?” If I worked at a plant that manufactured methanol, I would want a space suit and breather. Slight spills and breathing daily would have to take it’s toll over the years. There are wino’s that drink Sterno and develop “Jake leg” and other problems. You will generally go crazy and die if you do it too much. I just know that to switch to methanol instead of ethanol would be a mistake. I don’t want to breathe it or touch it or breathe the burnt fumes. All this and it has less BTU’s than ethanol. When this was first talked about in the ‘70s, the selling feature was making it from garbage and scrap wood products. Now that we can make ethanol, I don’t see ANY advantage.

As far as comparing to gasoline, I'll plead ignorance. I washed parts and my hands in gas as a kid growing up( and I built cars and engines). It was later in life I was warned of benzene and other cancer causers in gas. I would leave it on my hands and arms until it started to burn my skin before washing it off. Back then there was also tetra ethyl lead in gas. We all knew of the lead, but figured as long as we didn't drink it, so what? My dad was a mechanic and a car painter for most of his life, and did the same as I did, and died at 85 with a heart attack. He never had cancer, but worried about it. He did have lead in his system from painting most likely. He took chelation treatments for that. I'm 56 now, and my biggest problem is fatness and severe ugliness. I don't think gasoline did that though. Maybe my baldness, who knows. I have stopped drinking Sterno and coke toddies though. I'm sure there are more chemicals to know about in gas, but I haven't studied it that much. Back in the 1800's, they drank petroleum for "miracle cures". The house I live in used to belong to a doctor and I found several bottles of medicine in a box in the attic that has turpentine and oil in it. The human body seems to be tougher than we give it credit for.

Remember that everything is a poison, the question is dose.

Water is a poison at a very high dose.

Ethanol is a poison at a lower dose.

Methanol is a poison at a lower dose. Interestingly, the antedote to methanol poisoning is ethanol. If you drink a six-pack after filling your car, you should be okay.

(note, this is joke, not a professional recommendation)

The big advantage to methanol is that it is not made by fermentation. You do not need alot of fresh water to make the ethanol and then use alot of energy removing the water from the final product.

True, but it is a cheap and clean source of power that can feed biofuels & etc.

Beam me to Planet Gore !

A fuel suitable for central station electrical generation is not the same as a fuel suitable for transportation energy. At this point in time, we have a shortage of one of these, and not the other.

Bookmark