Jet fuel from coal to be tested.
09-15-2006, 08:00 AM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Sep 2005
Position: Retired
Posts: 157
Jet fuel from coal to be tested.
Does anyone have any additional information or imput on this technolgy?
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/060915/20060915005325.html?.v=1
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/060915/20060915005325.html?.v=1
09-15-2006, 02:37 PM
#2
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: FO, looking left
Posts: 1,060
The world's energy crisis will never be solved using natural resources. PERIOD. The cheapest known way to power a vehicle is using electricity (cheaper than coal, oil, etc...) Two things need to happen.
1. Someone needs to develop batteries that are 1) small enough, 2) inexpensive enough, and 3) can hold enough charge to power a vehicle for a reasonable range.
2. Someone needs to build a solar cell that is 50% efficient. If they did, they would win a nobel prize and change the world.
We are heading toward 100% electric vehicles. We can build electric cars; the problem is they need enormous batteries that take up literally the entire trunk. Even with those large batteries, their limited range seems to make them impractical for everyday use. Lithium ion batteries are becoming smaller and more potent. These type of batteries that can power cars over longer distances will be developed in the very near future.
Now that would free up the world's demand for oil, except electricity is also created from natural resources. Renewable energy is the key. We have already made good use of hydro-electric and wind power. The major development needs to be in solar power. The sun is an incredible energy source that powers our entire galaxy. We have solar panels, the problem is they are incredibly inefficient (6-7%). In order to power a 1600sqft, 1 story household, you would need to cover the entire roof with solar panels. Ugly and expensive!!! If someone could develop a 50% efficient solar panel, you could power entire households with a single small panel. Electric cars could be plugged in during the evening, when the power-grid is underused.
Two things. They would change the world. Our dependence on natural energy sources would drop drastically. The middle east would be the barron desert it once was. Oil prices would fall, fall, and continue falling.
1. Someone needs to develop batteries that are 1) small enough, 2) inexpensive enough, and 3) can hold enough charge to power a vehicle for a reasonable range.
2. Someone needs to build a solar cell that is 50% efficient. If they did, they would win a nobel prize and change the world.
We are heading toward 100% electric vehicles. We can build electric cars; the problem is they need enormous batteries that take up literally the entire trunk. Even with those large batteries, their limited range seems to make them impractical for everyday use. Lithium ion batteries are becoming smaller and more potent. These type of batteries that can power cars over longer distances will be developed in the very near future.
Now that would free up the world's demand for oil, except electricity is also created from natural resources. Renewable energy is the key. We have already made good use of hydro-electric and wind power. The major development needs to be in solar power. The sun is an incredible energy source that powers our entire galaxy. We have solar panels, the problem is they are incredibly inefficient (6-7%). In order to power a 1600sqft, 1 story household, you would need to cover the entire roof with solar panels. Ugly and expensive!!! If someone could develop a 50% efficient solar panel, you could power entire households with a single small panel. Electric cars could be plugged in during the evening, when the power-grid is underused.
Two things. They would change the world. Our dependence on natural energy sources would drop drastically. The middle east would be the barron desert it once was. Oil prices would fall, fall, and continue falling.
09-15-2006, 06:15 PM
#3
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: BE-20, RA390
Posts: 644
For airplanes?
What about airplanes? I don't think we can do a battery powered jet engine. Possibly a feasible battery powered propeller airplane someday. Airplanes have flown on fuel derived from coal in the past, so it could be done. Germany flew coal powered airplanes in WW2
http://www.technologyreview.com/read...650&ch=biztech
We could grow corn and make fuel from alcohol. I have wondered about extracting pine resin. Throw some pine needles on a fire and you will see what I mean. Corn and pine trees grow back, and clean the air while they grow.
Before you go on a coal bashing rampage, the power running your computer right now more likely than not came from the efforts of a coal miner. Coal provides over 50% of the electric power in the US. The electric transportation solution would reduce the demand for oil, but still rely on energy from coal at present rates.
http://www.technologyreview.com/read...650&ch=biztech
We could grow corn and make fuel from alcohol. I have wondered about extracting pine resin. Throw some pine needles on a fire and you will see what I mean. Corn and pine trees grow back, and clean the air while they grow.
Before you go on a coal bashing rampage, the power running your computer right now more likely than not came from the efforts of a coal miner. Coal provides over 50% of the electric power in the US. The electric transportation solution would reduce the demand for oil, but still rely on energy from coal at present rates.
Last edited by GauleyPilot; 09-15-2006 at 06:30 PM.
09-16-2006, 12:06 PM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: FO, looking left
Posts: 1,060
Drop in demand from cars --> MUCH cheaper jet fuel. So cheap that it may be almost as cheap as electricity.
We could grow corn and make fuel from alcohol.
And plane and simple... By using ethanol for energy, you are trying to solve one of the worlds big problems (demand for energy), but hurting the world's BIGGEST problem, and that is world hunger!!
In order to make enough ethanol for the United States energy needs, we would have to use 75% of our farmland. Not an option. Ethanol will not work.
Before you go on a coal bashing rampage, the power running your computer right now more likely than not came from the efforts of a coal miner. Coal provides over 50% of the electric power in the US. The electric transportation solution would reduce the demand for oil, but still rely on energy from coal at present rates.
And then the price of jet fuel would drop drastically and all us pilots would live happily ever after (not really, but it would help!)
09-16-2006, 03:13 PM
#5
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 40,031
I have a little bit of experience in energy...
Our energy issues are divided into two problems
1) How to generate what we need. This is easy, after you account for coal and methane (natural gas) we probably have enough fossile fuels for hundreds of years. In the long term nuclear actually works great, the french (of all people) have a terrific nuclear program. Theirs is better than ours not because of technology, but because of management. Fortunately the NRC has seen the light on that, and our next generation of nuclear plants should less problematic. Throw in a few renewable sources, and we really are in pretty good shape here.
2) How to deliver it in useable form where we need it. This is where it gets complicated...
-Almost every point of energey consumption in our industrial society is technically flexible as to how it is delivered. Cars and trucks can use batteries or alternative fuels, trains can use electric, and large ships can burn almost anything (including peanut butter).
-The one major point of consumption that has essentially NO flexibility is, you guessed it, large commercial aircraft:
Kerosene has a fairly unique combination of low weight, high density, high energy/mass ratio, low volatility, and ease of handling. There simply is no obvious substitute.
To make matters worse, airplanes and their engines are designed for kerosene, and due to the inherently tight integration of aircraft systems, it would be essentially impossible to modify (and then certify) an existing airplane for another fuel source. You would have to build NEW airplanes from scratch $$$$$$.
Even if you build new airplanes, you will take a huge hit on performance due to the relatively poor energy energy/mass/density relationship of non-kerosene fuels. Some of these fuels, and why they suck for airplanes:
Gasoline: Also petroleum based, very volatile.
Methanol/Ethanol: Low energy density. A 747 would barely have enough range to do PHX - LAX. Trans-oceanic flights would be out of the question.
Methane: Low energy density, requires either high-pressure or cryogenic tanks.
Hydrogen: EXTREMELY corrosive, volatile, explosive, and cryogenic. It is easy to make from tap water though. Very good energy/weight ratio (think space shuttle), very poor energy density (imagine a space shuttle external tank attached to your airliner)
Batteries: Ridiculous. The technology needs to improve by a factor of 1000 to even think about it. And after you spend all that money on batteries, you still have to buy electricity to charge them.
Nuclear: Required shielding is too heavy(yes this has been tried
)
The only really practical solution for airliners as we know them is to find an economical and practical industrial process to make kerosene out of coal, methane, or raw carbon and hydrogen. This can be done in the laboratory now, it just needs to be scaled up (a lot)... Othewise our airliners will be replaced by blimps and bullet trains in 70 years or so.
Our energy issues are divided into two problems
1) How to generate what we need. This is easy, after you account for coal and methane (natural gas) we probably have enough fossile fuels for hundreds of years. In the long term nuclear actually works great, the french (of all people) have a terrific nuclear program. Theirs is better than ours not because of technology, but because of management. Fortunately the NRC has seen the light on that, and our next generation of nuclear plants should less problematic. Throw in a few renewable sources, and we really are in pretty good shape here.
2) How to deliver it in useable form where we need it. This is where it gets complicated...
-Almost every point of energey consumption in our industrial society is technically flexible as to how it is delivered. Cars and trucks can use batteries or alternative fuels, trains can use electric, and large ships can burn almost anything (including peanut butter).
-The one major point of consumption that has essentially NO flexibility is, you guessed it, large commercial aircraft:
Kerosene has a fairly unique combination of low weight, high density, high energy/mass ratio, low volatility, and ease of handling. There simply is no obvious substitute.
To make matters worse, airplanes and their engines are designed for kerosene, and due to the inherently tight integration of aircraft systems, it would be essentially impossible to modify (and then certify) an existing airplane for another fuel source. You would have to build NEW airplanes from scratch $$$$$$.
Even if you build new airplanes, you will take a huge hit on performance due to the relatively poor energy energy/mass/density relationship of non-kerosene fuels. Some of these fuels, and why they suck for airplanes:
Gasoline: Also petroleum based, very volatile.
Methanol/Ethanol: Low energy density. A 747 would barely have enough range to do PHX - LAX. Trans-oceanic flights would be out of the question.
Methane: Low energy density, requires either high-pressure or cryogenic tanks.
Hydrogen: EXTREMELY corrosive, volatile, explosive, and cryogenic. It is easy to make from tap water though. Very good energy/weight ratio (think space shuttle), very poor energy density (imagine a space shuttle external tank attached to your airliner)
Batteries: Ridiculous. The technology needs to improve by a factor of 1000 to even think about it. And after you spend all that money on batteries, you still have to buy electricity to charge them.
Nuclear: Required shielding is too heavy(yes this has been tried
)The only really practical solution for airliners as we know them is to find an economical and practical industrial process to make kerosene out of coal, methane, or raw carbon and hydrogen. This can be done in the laboratory now, it just needs to be scaled up (a lot)... Othewise our airliners will be replaced by blimps and bullet trains in 70 years or so.
Last edited by rickair7777; 09-16-2006 at 03:17 PM.
09-16-2006, 04:09 PM
#6
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: BE-20, RA390
Posts: 644
You can make a battery powered "jet" engine. Personally, I don't think it is likely to happen. The reason why energy prices are so high are cars and electricity. When cars stop requiring gasoline, and energy can be produced from solar cells, the price of oil would drop so drastically that jet fuel would be dirt cheap.
Drop in demand from cars --> MUCH cheaper jet fuel. So cheap that it may be almost as cheap as electricity.
Drop in demand from cars --> MUCH cheaper jet fuel. So cheap that it may be almost as cheap as electricity.
BAD IDEA. Trust me. Ethanol/Methanol are not a solution. E85 is a blend of 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline that has been hyped up recently. The fact is that you get about 60% of the BTU's you would get from normal gasoline (basically, you need more gallons of E85 to get the same kick as gas), eliminating any cost savings.
And plane and simple... By using ethanol for energy, you are trying to solve one of the worlds big problems (demand for energy), but hurting the world's BIGGEST problem, and that is world hunger!!
In order to make enough ethanol for the United States energy needs, we would have to use 75% of our farmland. Not an option. Ethanol will not work.
And plane and simple... By using ethanol for energy, you are trying to solve one of the worlds big problems (demand for energy), but hurting the world's BIGGEST problem, and that is world hunger!!
In order to make enough ethanol for the United States energy needs, we would have to use 75% of our farmland. Not an option. Ethanol will not work.
. (Kidding--ethanol fuel has a posion added)
First off, I am in California so the chances are 30% that my power is coming from hydro/wind/sun energy. Second, you failed the realize the purpose of my post. If cars could be electrically powered, they would drastically lower the demand for oil. However, now more electricity will have to be generated (likely by the same oil that is not being used for gasoline). Electric powered cars will not solely reduce the demand for oil. But if electricity could be generated by a renewable source (solar power), the demand for oil would drop!
And then the price of jet fuel would drop drastically and all us pilots would live happily ever after (not really, but it would help!)
And then the price of jet fuel would drop drastically and all us pilots would live happily ever after (not really, but it would help!)
Solar would certianly be worth looking into developing.
As far as missing your point, I didn't really. Skywriting wanted to know about airplanes being powered by a coal based fuel. While it won't solve the world's enviromental problems, there are other benefits. The US has a lot of coal reserves. It would be nice to reduce our dependency on energy from other countries.
Imagine a time where by using your electric cars, and flying airplanes on Skywriting's coal fuel, we could tell a certian not-friendly-to-America part of the world we really didn't need their oil so much anymore.
Last edited by GauleyPilot; 09-16-2006 at 04:19 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
