Outlook for Alternative Fuels

I have written a couple of papers for an English Composition class that i'm in, and in these papers, i addressed the idea of alternative fuels. I first wrote a paper on hydrogen fuel and why it is better than gasoline. I later disputed the practicality of hydrogen fuel when i wrote a paper supporting E85, E95, and Ethanol fuels.

I am wondering what people think the pros and cons of each fuel system would be, and what fuel will take the role of gasoline as the fuel of the future. I am by no means limiting this debate to strictly hydrogen and ethanol however.

The only guidelines i would like to impose are:
1. No ignorant comments (blatant)
2. No ridicule of other posts without opposing information (no opinion posts)

I would like to start by saying that after all of the research i have done, i would rather look towards ethanol as the fuel of the future for a few reasons.
1. Rudimentary piston engines can work on ethanol with only minor changes in fuel tanks and gasket materials.
2. Fueling stations will operate the same as they do now, since ethanol is basically the same type of fuel as gasoline. Hydrogen fueling requires high pressure couplers and superinsulated fuel tanks that can hold 10000-20000psi at -413 F.
3. Ethanol will eliminate dependency on foreign sources of fuel. The United States would actually control most of the corn supply (main component for making ethanol) and would therefor boost the economy and make farming more profitable.

That should be a good start for everyone.

well the problem with ethanol fuel is its BTU factor which as about half that of gasoline which means your going to consume twice the ammonut of fuel you did befor if you want the same power. ethanol will eat though rubber seals commonly used in current engines.

id see propane as a good alternative fuel which has a compairable BTU factor its non toxic and evaporate if spilled burns clean enough to be used in doors(not that it matters). it has some Octane rating around 120 so you can run some good boost :iceslolan

although using ethanol would help our over grow food market and help the farmers.

but i suppose though cracking you could break down pretty much any fuel down to a propane...iso-butane..what have you.

I don't know what the pressure butane has to be kept at to stay liquid, but that may come into account as well. Butane may also freeze at a certain temp, which is one thing that ethanol doesn't have to worry about.

LPG can be stored in a liquid state as low as 90 psi or so and freezes at a point below where a person could survive.

hum with 120 octane you could bring up CR to about 14:1 and probley increase thermal efficiency to match the power from gasoline you could buy at the pump.

the cost of Propane is about half that of gasoline...you might also (depending on whcih state) get a tex rebate.

I wonder what comes out the end of the exhaust Co2 H2O..not shure what else and particulate matter output is lower than gasoline or ethanol.

Well, I agree with you that Ethanol does pose a very attractive future alternative. The problem at this point is making enough to support the demand. Right now, all the corn in the world couldn't support enough alcohol production to power the cars we have, let alone the number of cars we may have 10 years from now. It also still puts out some not so happy emissions. I would say that if we switched to Ethanol it would be evolutionary as opposed to Revolutionary. It is also incredibly caustic to lubrication systems. In a typical synthetic oil engine, often times the service interval goes from 7500 miles to 50 or 100... literally. The stuff that Ethanol (and even moreso with Methanol) gives to the oil are something that would have to be re-engineered completely.

Methane is a pretty clean burning fuel, but again there is no real way to produce enough.

In the meantime, I think the real answer is diesel. It still requires foreign oil, but if we all switched to diesel engines right now, the oil market would crash. Overnight, fuel consumption would drop by about 34% (those are 2003 numbers). That is a huge impact. Diesel is cheaper to produce, transport, holds more BTUs than gasoline, cheaper to store, creates fewer emissions during refinement, and the new diesels are creating fewer automotive emissions than even CNG.

Combine that with the fact that Biodiesel is closer to reality than widespread ethanol, and I think diesel is a huge step in the right direction. Unfortunately public opinion has been swayed by rampant misinformation and gross mistruth from the EPA and CARB. It bothers me so much that I won't even get into it lest I jump up on the soap box.:banghead:

Biodiesel has its problems, but they're being solved rapidly. The nice thing is that diesel engines run on several fuels. Gasoline is a kind of fuel. It is regulated by law and gasoline describes a certain solution of chemicals. Diesel is a class of fuels and can be anything that burns with the same characteristics. It gets its name from the engine. Diesel fuel is therefore anything that burns with the same qualities in a diesel engine. In the case of gasoline engines, the fuel determines the engine design. In the case of a diesel engine, the opposite can be true. You can design a diesel fuel for a diesel engine. The possibilities are endless, and fueling a vehicle can literally be as easy as using recycled motor oil, cooking oil, and fuel oil. Run low on fuel? Stop in at the local airport and get some Jet A or Jet B. The technology is there with minor variations in injector timing and variable valve timing. The government won't allow it. Again, I refuse to post the facts I've learned because no one chooses to accept it, even though its written law available at your library or on the internet. Staying off the soapbox.

I just never understood why people wouldn't want to triple their torque, double their fuel mileage, possibly triple their engine's life, increase reliability, all but eliminate the risk of explosions and fires from accidental spills, help the environment, reduce foreign oil consumption as well as consumption in general by driving a diesel vehicle. If nothing else, diesel can extend the time we have to design something that will work on a long-term basis. Maybe Ethanol.

Corn isn't the sole source of Ethanol, for example, a significant quantity of Ethanol could be manufactured from forest biomass through hyrolysis of the carbohydrates in the biomass into sugars, and then fermentation. I am just pointing out that though corn alone may not be able to supply the Ethanol demand, there are many abundant sources of fermentable sugars.

Good point, Sluttypatton. Are those resources combined renewable on a fast enough scale to keep up with demand? There are environmental downsides to agriculture, too. Not nearly as great as fossil fuel combustion, but land management can be very stressful to the atmosphere as well.

Curtis, Diesels are not readily accepted in the U.S. due to past experience: smoke and smell. It's changing, but people are slow to accept change. Wait for it...it'll come. BTW: I love my diesel. :)

Unfortunately the figures I have on hand are quite dated, so they are of little use, however from the paper I have that was prepared for Environment Canada in the mid 80's, it is clear that even today fuel derived from forest biomass could account for a significant portion of the energy demand in Canada. I say Canada because this paper was produced pertaining to Canada, however I am sure that in many aspects it is true as well for all of North America. While the figures in this paper may not be accurate today, the breifing on environmental impact and sustainability very likely is. The impact on soil, water, macro-climate, micro-climate, vegetation and fauna, were analyzed and the basic conclusion was that the impact was highly based upon forestry practices. Impact could be large or small, depending on whether the technique was clear cutting or selective logging for example. In short, the paper concluded that through certain logging practices, a significant portion of Canada's energy supply could be met environmentally and sustainably.

So, while forest biomass certainly cannot be the sole supply of Ethanol, in conjuction with other sources it could supply a great deal of it. I will try to dig up some more current figures.

Other promising sources of fermentable sugar would be potatoes, sugar beets, sugar cane (not really applicable here but in Brazil it is tremendously important), etc. The list goes on and on, and together I am sure they could make a significant contribution to supply North America's energy requirements.

Ethyl alcohol is a reasonable fuel. It works well in most engines with only minor modification - it is easy to make, and can be made from almost anything (even weeds! in the seventies a specific weed was bred just for the sake of alcohol production, it had high sugar content, and a field could be grown in just a couple of weeks - much faster and cheaper than corn) for a fraction of the cost of what it takes to produce gasoline. It burns cleaner than gas, and can afford more power than gas in exchange for lower fuel efficiency.
The only REAL drawback to alcohol is that it doesn't work well in cold climates, and that oil companies WILL crush any attempts to start an alcohol fuel industry (as they have done repeatedly, in the U.S. and elsewhere).
You can make your own still (it's really very easy) and produce your own fuel grade alcohol, for surprisingly little.
It's tried and true - it works - there's no experimenting or taking risks with it. It's cheap, simple, reproducable, and relatively clean compared to gas.

The particulate matter emitted from a diesel is safer than that emitted from a gasoline engine because of the size of the particals which stop it from being absorbed by the lungs but trapped by the mucus unlike a gasoline we're the particulates are small enough to reach the alveoli and cause more damage.

But LPG fuel is as i see it cleaner and easier to implement than a diesel engine that needs to run under much stricter conditions to achieve the same results. Seeing as its a gas in its natural state you can expect a more homogenious mixture in the combustion chamber. also the smaller chemical chains also means a lower likely hood of environmentally damaging emissions.

although i wonder.. with the higher octane rating of LPG could you make up the BTU difference of power between gasoline or even diesel? and how high can a engine running on LPG rev? because diesels are just too slow for me :P

Fractional distillation is a remarkably simple process and with the right knowledge, just as simple to carry out. It is quite simple to produce drinking quality ethanol, up to around 95% pure, with the remaining 5% being water which forms an azeotrope with the Ethanol, requiring addition of Benzene and redistillation for removal. For fuel purposes it would make sense to remove the 5% water, however for consumption it is fine to leave the 5% water and dilute it to 40%, resulting in Vodka (or drink it undiluted if your brave enough). It would also be unwise to break the azeotrope in Ethanol destined for consumption since Benzene would remain in the ppm, posing an extreme health hazard. Anyways I have gotten a little off topic here, but basically what I'm saying is that it would be simple for someone to produce Ethanol for fuel and consumption in their own home, where the law allows one to do so, of course.

prolly wouldn't be good with taking 4 gallons for them selves and their friends :P

The particulate matter emitted from a diesel is safer than that emitted from a gasoline engine because of the size of the particals which stop it from being absorbed by the lungs but trapped by the mucus unlike a gasoline we're the particulates are small enough to reach the alveoli and cause more damage.


Curtis, Diesels are not readily accepted in the U.S. due to past experience: smoke and smell. It's changing, but people are slow to accept change. Wait for it...it'll come. BTW: I love my diesel

Thank you!! Other people who understand!!! Evil Result... I bet you wouldn't say diesels are slow if you drove my friend's powerstroke; 600 RWHP and 1000 ft-lbs of torque on stock injectors. Twin turbo, 40 psi, LPG injection. Its a crew cab dually that did a best of 12.13 in the quarter. He takes the duals off and puts custom made 16x17" wheels on with huge slicks that fill the wheel wells.

He literally flips a switch, switches back to the dual wheels, and drives home getting 24 mpgs. Of course, once he flips that switch he's down to a measly 475 hp and 800 ft-lbs :D

Just wanted to "bump" for biodiesel, and diesel too.

I've read if we had as many diesels here as they do in Germany- about 50% -that would be enough fuel saved that we could (theoretically) stop importing oil from Saudi Arabia over night. Then change all that to B20 and you have about 20% reduction again.

I've used biodiesel in the past, but I was buying it from a guy 25 miles away. I would go up there, put in about 5 gallons(the rest normal diesel), then fill two 5gal cans for the next couple times I needed to fill up. It worked out pretty good, but then I left town for 4 months, and never got back into contact with him when I returned because I didn't think I would be back for long- well I've been back for over 7 months and I wish I had been burnin' the bean the whole time. When I used it before, the exhaust smelled better, was cleaner, the car ran more quietly, no smoke(although I rarely see smoke anyway). I don't think it affected my mileage at all.

Biodiesel is just so easy to make, can be made from so many sources- waste vegetable oil or animal fats, soy bean oil, jojoba oil, rapeseed, algae... the list goes on. It doesn't really require any new infrastructure at all, it's basically just diesel fuel. And no changes at all to the engine itself.

As for diesels being slow, check out the BMW 535d- 272hp and 400lb-ft from a 3L straight six. :) I've heard that Ford also has a diesel engine now (maybe for Jag in europe?) that makes 280hp and well over 400lb-ft from a 3.6L V8.

Take the average person off the street and put them in a modern diesel and they wouldn't even know it- until they notice the trip is showing 350mi and they still have 1/2 tank left.

I hate that everyone does nothing while we're waiting for some pie in the sky dream like Hyrdogen. It will be decades before hydrogen is anywhere near diesel or even gasoline in terms of efficiency, and we can't afford to just sit and do nothing in the mean time.

Ok, I'll leave it at that. Time to see if I can find some biodiesel in Yuma(fat chance).

My bad i was vague on the diesels being sow part... i know that diesels can be damned fast but the engines just don't rev enough to please me :P something like 9500 RPM is what i like to see lol.

although yes i would love to have a small get up and go diesel car with great gas milage and HP :)

9500 RPMS is music to my ears too, man. I'm hopelessly in love with classic american iron, so I guess I'm limited to about 6500 :)

Is it a breathing problem with diesels or the fuel burning rate that limits diesels putting out high HP in the upper RPM range say 7500-9500?

Its a compression and fuel burn rate issue that keeps it lower. Some of the older Chevy 6.2/6.5 non-turbo diesels that were in the 16.5:1 range could go 3800 or more.

Its also a factor of the high-pressure hydraulic fuel pumps. They can get damaged after a certain RPM based on their individual designs.

Ethanol production from corn and other cash crops will also help the farmers who need more areas to market their crops. I agree it is not the final solution, but when you can clean up the emissions and help out the farming industry; it seems like a good place to start !!!

Fractional distillation is a remarkably simple process and with the right knowledge, just as simple to carry out. It is quite simple to produce drinking quality ethanol, up to around 95% pure, with the remaining 5% being water which forms an azeotrope with the Ethanol, requiring addition of Benzene and redistillation for removal. For fuel purposes it would make sense to remove the 5% water, however for consumption it is fine to leave the 5% water and dilute it to 40%, resulting in Vodka (or drink it undiluted if your brave enough). It would also be unwise to break the azeotrope in Ethanol destined for consumption since Benzene would remain in the ppm, posing an extreme health hazard. Anyways I have gotten a little off topic here, but basically what I'm saying is that it would be simple for someone to produce Ethanol for fuel and consumption in their own home, where the law allows one to do so, of course.
Actually, leaving a small ammount of water in the alcohol helps the fuel burn smoother, 160 to 180 proof burns smoother in engines than pure 200 proof alcohol, however the remaining water means that it will not mix with gasoline (it's also easier to produce fuel grade 160 proof alcohol at home with a very basic still, than it is to make pure 200 proof alcohol).
Legally, you can produce alcohol in any home, so long as you have written the ATF for an experimental alcohol liscense (which means that you cannot sell the alcohol you produce, or drink it) the more you produce the more expensive the liscense is - but if you just want to experiment with a small still to make ebough to run your lawnmower, it's not too expensive - and you supposedly get your money back if you dismantle your still and stop making alcohol.

I have a couple questions, but I have practically no knowledge of the scientifics of fuel so if these are completely ignorant forgive me.

first one guy posted that his deisel got 24 mpg's but alot of cars now get way better gas mileage than that so how is it actually more fuel effecient other than burning cleaner?

second at just about any gas station I go too diesel is always substantially more expensive than gasoline so to fill up the same size tank you would still be paying more with deisel.

my last questions is on the several statements on being able to make fuels in your own home with like motor oil and vegetable oil and so on how is this done and if it is diesel or biodiesel that can be put straight into your deisel engine and you would be ready to go there is no fancy modification to the fuel needed?

Once agian, sorry if these are dumb questions but I know nothing of deisel and was curious. thanks

Diesels Can Make Amazing power. Because of the fact that Diesels are always running "lean" all you have to do to make more power is add more fule. I support the diesel movement because when you need the power it is there and when you need the fule economy it is there. All you need to add serious power to any diesel is more boost (if it is turbo or supercharged) and more fule (via larger injectors). Gasoline you have to worry about alot of other things.
Another reason people dont like diesels is because more often than not they are alot louder than gasoline engines.
as far as Ethnyl. Would you have to be 21 to fule up at the gas station?

I have a couple questions, but I have practically no knowledge of the scientifics of fuel so if these are completely ignorant forgive me.

Not ignorant at all, they are very valid questions.

first one guy posted that his deisel got 24 mpg's but alot of cars now get way better gas mileage than that so how is it actually more fuel effecient other than burning cleaner?

I was comparing trucks. There was a diesel truck that was running low 12s in the 1/4 mile. It got 24 mpgs on the street which is pretty impressive compared to a gas engine of the same output. That might by a 6 or 7 mpg truck if it were gas. While 24 MPGs isn't great, when its in a 4300-lb truck that gets low 12s, its amazing.

second at just about any gas station I go too diesel is always substantially more expensive than gasoline so to fill up the same size tank you would still be paying more with deisel.

In general yes. It tends to dance around in price, but in general diesel is cheaper to produce, ship, store, and the taxes are often lower per gallon. When a gallon gasoline costs $1, a gallon of diesel SHOULD cost about 60 cents. Demand for diesel in the commercial industry and the taxes that the DOT/DMV imposes on commercial trucks help keep them high. Its also partly the fact that diesel vehicles only comprise a small percentage of non-commercial vehicles.

The real smack in the face is that the Volkswagen TDI diesels when compared to the Hybrids presents an interesting contrast. The TDI cars typically get near 50 mpg, while the Hybrids are turning in less than ideal 35-45 mpgs. The TDIs have more power, and that power is just as available after a climb into the rockies, unlike the Hybrid which would drain the batteries leaving you to fend with the engine alone... all 32 hp of it or whatever it is. The TDIs have 90 hp. Its a painful comparison for most, but I've thought Hybrids were a waste from the beginning. I won't go into it because for some reason I have trouble conveying my ideas without ruffling feathers. :)

my last questions is on the several statements on being able to make fuels in your own home with like motor oil and vegetable oil and so on how is this done and if it is diesel or biodiesel that can be put straight into your deisel engine and you would be ready to go there is no fancy modification to the fuel needed?

For the most part, diesels will burn anything close to diesel fuel within reason. Its important to note the gasoline is gasoline; federally mandated to conform to a specific chemical makeup. Diesel refers to a class of fuels that burn in diesel engines. It just so happens that all diesel fuel was universalized since what we commonly find at diesel pumps was the most stable, easiest way to make a reliable fuel. Since things like vegetable oil, kerosene, jet A, jet B, and fuel oil share many properties in common, they will all burn very comparably in diesel engines. You can't just pour some Wesson in your tank and expect it to work, but I don't know the finer points of how its refined into fuel. Someone has posted on the net how to do it, but its not something that a home-brew operation could adequately support.

In general, all things considered, diesel engines of the same output can experience twice the mileage of their gas counterparts, with fewer parts (no ignition system), and often more streetable manners. They do make a touch more noise and tend to have slightly shortened maintenance periods, but I've actually talked to people who drove a diesel and didn't even know it. Often times the TDI volkswagens are so transparent that drivers don't even know they're driving a diesel.

This is progress.


http://www.wheels24.co.za/Wheels24/Geneva_Motor_Show/0,,1369-1782_1671370,00.html

Diesel engines must have a specific fuel much like gasoline engines. For example, you can't burn ethanol in them without modifying the engine or the fuel.

Diesels are better engines than SI engines, the reason SI are still used is because of:
1. They run of a different fuel fraction.
2. They are cheaper to buy/produce.
3. They are lighter/smaller.
4. Exhaust emissions can be cleaned with a catalytic converter.

The modern diesel is however turbocharged and intercooled which decrease their size/weight in comparison to their power output, it together with modern electronic fuel systems also makes them cleaner and with the particle filters availible they are a better option than hybrid cars except in inner cities where the traffic can stand still for long periods of time.

Diesel engines can also be made so that they last longer, so even if they are more expensive to buy the savings done later is more than enough to make them more economical.

As for engine speed that was usually limited by the fuel system, today higher engine speeds is possible but it's still limited by the combustion in the cylinders but a max speed of 6000 rpm as with most gasoline engines is possible if one wants to. Power is hoever mostly extracted by using turbocharging, since very high boost pressures can be used without having to worry about engine knock.

As for hydrogen fuels, there is today no good options for a massproduction of the fuel. Hydrogen is today usually produced from petroleum by cracking of the hydrogen atoms. That means that keep using gasoline and diesel will be better than using hydrogen.

Ethanol can be used on the cars currently in production with modifications done to the fuel system and engine management system. Today most ethanol runnign vehicles are of "flexifuel" type which means that they can run on normal gasoline, E85 or any blend in between. This does however offer a drawback, since we can't optimise the engine for the higher octane E85. Ethanol does also seem better than it actally is (I blame the lobbyists for that), there are problems with some of the exhaust emissions caused by it, and not all of them are tailpipe emissions but evaporative emissions and emissions from the ethanol production. Another problem with ethanol is the current production methods based on corn; with the current corn production methods fossil fuel must be used in the production so that the gains from the ethanol are small. For example so do current production ethanol only decrease greenhouse gas emission by around 20%. These emissions gains can however be increased to over 100% with a better fuel production methods. However, I would say that methanol is a more interresting fuel if we want low emissions, the problem with methanol is that it's very hard on the fuel system and engine.
Making your own fuel as some people has mentioned is not cost effective, its actually cheaper to buy massproduced fuel.

E85 has an energy content of about 31 MJ/kg, compared to 43-44 MJ/kg for gasoline or around 42 MJ/kg for diesel. This results in a fuel comsumption increase by around 35-40% when going from gasoline to ethanol. That is however not that big of a problem unless we talk airplanes and helicopters where the extra mass of fuel would mean a reduction of cargo capacity. But that was also one of the reasons why it wasn't introduced around 1920.

Cold start problems of some fuels can be solved with addetives, a separate fuel tank for a special cold start fuel or higher compression ratios. Preheating of the engine is also a good method, but it has the drawback that you must plan your trip so that you can set the heater.

As for fuel cells, I think it will take some time until they become a real option. Some say that it will just take a few years know; well that was what they said 100 years ago too...

As for fuels based on petroleum I don't think they are a good option in the long run, but they can be used as addetives. These fuels can also be made on a syntheic way, but that is associated with high costs and low volume production.

In hybrid veihicles gas turbine engines should also be a possible option. They are light and small, can offer a low fuel consumption, a lot of money on developement is already spent by the manufacturers of airplane and marine turbines and it should be possible to make an engine that can run on a lot of different fuels.

As I see it, the best near future fuel option for engines would be diesel engines running on some sort of biological based fuel, or methanol burning spark ignited engines.

When you say that people can drive a diesel car with out even realizing it does that mean that the noise of the diesel engines are dampened on cars that run diesel cause I hate the sound of a diesel truck they are nothing in contrast to a good v8. But either they are able to silence it in cars or I can't say that I've ever come across a diesel car before.

When you say that people can drive a diesel car with out even realizing it does that mean that the noise of the diesel engines are dampened on cars that run diesel cause I hate the sound of a diesel truck they are nothing in contrast to a good v8. But either they are able to silence it in cars or I can't say that I've ever come across a diesel car before.
As technology improves, they are able to do amazing things to find out what makes engines work. In the case of diesel engines one of the main problems was the noise created by injecting fuel directly into the superheated air. What makes old diesels so loud is the fact that they are basically operating completely on the premise of "ping". One of the big discoveries made in the last couple decades is how the flame front acts under certain circumstances.

In the past, diesel fuel was injected into a swirl chamber adjacent to the cylinder. The mass of fuel used this chamber, the swirling air, and the heat to create combustion. Now that the functions of the explosion have been studied and the technology is available for direct injection, the swirl chamber is a thing of the past for most diesels. Instead of injecting all the fuel at once, it injects it over a longer period of time. This prevents the loud explosion that makes the diesel noise. It also prevents overloading of fuel that can create the black smoke. As a by product of this more accurate injection, the burn rate is also extended slightly. One of the reasons diesels make so much torque is that they provide pressure on the piston longer than a gasoline engine. In a gasoline engine the gas explodes and lasts about 15 degrees of crank rotation. With a diesel, it lasts 20-40 degrees of crank rotation, meaning that there is still significant pressure on the piston at a point where it has its greatest advantage on the crank; in the 30-50 degree range.

They've also gone to great lengths to use sound deadening in the cabins to make it almost inaudible inside the vehicle. I had a 95 Ford with a Powerstroke. It was the cheapest possible version with no carpet, just rubber floors, no A/C, the analog AM/FM radio, and nothing else. Just a truck, a 'stroke, and rubber floors. The 95's were also known for their noise levels, but inside the truck at highway speed you couldn't hear the engine at all.

I'll bet you've seen a thousand Duramax trucks but couldn't tell they were diesels until you saw the badge on the fender. Just this past thursday I passed a VW TDI beetle and I couldn't hear the engine at all with the window down going 45.

To answer your question, most of the noise reduction has come from internal technology. They're also getting much higher output from much smaller displacements which tend to make less noise. The other dead giveaway that its a diesel is how it drives. Older (80's and earlier for example) diesels were torquey, but sluggish and had a different "feel" to them. The advancements in how we get diesel to burn have made them all but transparent to the driver who is used to gasoline.

well i shouldnt have said all diesels are loud. SOme newer diesels are decently quiet and others are still pretty loud. example being.
My grandathers 2005 GMC Serria 2500HD is diesel. nearly as quiet as his 2002 GMC serria 1500 that was gasoline.
However. My friends dad has a 2003 Ram 2500 with the Duramax or w/e dodge has. loud as the old diesel ford F series.
Also, Smaller diesles are not near as loud. The old diesel Benz where prety quiet, not as quiet as gasoline cars of their time but still pretty quiet, quieter than alot of these "Sport" compacts ridding around with walmart 3" exausts and glass pack mufflers.
With enough dampening and a good muffler i'm sure smaller displacement diesel could be as quiet as the cadilacs that are so quiet you dont even know they are running from the inside.

Thats cool. The reason I asked is because after reading all the posts I've become interested in maybe getting a diesel car if the mileage is as great as everyone says that would be great for getting around town and long trips then I would just drive my camaro on the strip and 3000gt when I go rallying to save gas. Do all manufacturers make diesel cars I'm not a truck person I don't like trucks my self out side of going mudding with I do in my 3000gt anyway but if not which manufacturers do I saw a lot of vw tdi being mentioned but is that the only choice. Plus I don't really want to pay on it for the rest of my life so examples of cheaper models would be apreciated.

what is biodiesel? What fuels can you make at home? How expensive is it to produce? If your vehicle can't run on pure ethanol or whatever you can produce at home, can you use it as a fuel additive and reduce emissions and increase gas mileage even a little bit? I was also wondering if you can make fuel from compost, my family has a huge compost (we recycle everything we can either through recycling or compost) and if not from compost how about from fruits and vegetables that would be composted otherwise?

If the fuels you can produce at home can't be used in cars or lawnmowers and such, can it be used instead of natural gas in a stove, a kerosene lamp, or a heater? My home is heated by natural gas and in canadian winters we use (I'm just speculating here) alot, even though we keep the house at around 15-20 degrees celcius (60-70 degrees farenheit) and it would be great to save some money on fuels and maybe create cleaner emissions (although i think natural gas burns pretty clean).

How cost effective would it be to produce fuel from an otherwise wasted source? Someone said it wouldn't be worth it but is that because you would have to actually buy the engrediants for cars to run solely on that or that the cost to produce it would be greater than the money saved?

Does anyone know the laws about producing alcohol in Canada (the greatest country in the world) and I assume you need to be 19 (18 in Quebec, thank goodness I live right at the border, in a year I can drink legally) to produce alcohol or am I wrong and you only need to be of drinking age if it's for consumption?

Ethanol already is used as a fuel additive to increase octane cheaply and decrease emissions. You could produce Ethanol at home, or even Methanol if you so desired, but they wouldn't really be cost effective to produce on such a small scale for fuel, and it is quite time consuming to operate a small scale still. I don't know much about diesel fuels so I will leave those to someone else. It would, however, be cost effective to produce Ethanol at home to drink, and could be done for somewhere around 1-2 dollars per liter once the still has been built. I have no idea what the laws on creating alcohol are here (Canada), but distilling it is distinctly illegal. It's a dumb law, and based solely upon the myth that distillation is dangerous, but it is still the law. However, if you are interested in the theory of distillation and how you would go about doing it, I would be happy to explain it.

thank you slutty patton, I would like some details (of course i will research the laws on such things) because it would be an interesting project

p.s. you live in canada to? sweet.

To buy pure ethanol for the purpose of drinking it would have been cheaper instead of producing it home if it wasn't for the taxes, but question is who actually buy that stuff clean with the purpose of drinking it.

When making your own ethanol for drinking purposes there is also a danger that it will contain methanol which means that in worst case you can end up killing yourself.

If you are producing fuel at home there is a fire risk, and with some fuels you can also end up poisoning yourself.

Making your fuel at home will also likely not be environmental friendly as you would have no control of the emissions of the fuel production, the energy need of your production will also likely be high (what's the advantage of making your own fuel if means that you needs to buy a lot of electricity for the production).

Very true, but I think it would work quite well for burning things... J/K, not really but how much fuel economy would it give you to add a bit more ethanol to your fuel and how much would it cost to produce that fuel (I need numbers, I just think that way)

Ethanol would increase fuel consumption on an EFI car and it should remain the same in carbed cars.

Ethanol carries some of its own oxygen, so to retain 14.7:1 ratio by the O2 sensors, it needs to inject more fuel. That is why winter fuel is called "oxygenated." It contains up to 14% ethanol which carries it own oxygen. Great for HC and NOx emissions, but bad for fuel economy and rubber fuel line parts.

Ethanol is a great fuel, but with its 5% water content and high oxygen content, it burns a lot of fuel to make its stoich mixture. Something like 6:1 or 8:1... I forget. It also makes your oil a joke in a matter of a few miles. Ever see an alcohol-burning car's oil after 1/4 mile? It is a white frothy soup with very little of the qualities of its origin. Plus the alcohol washes the cylinder walls excessively causing rapidly accelerated ring and cylinder wear.

Just some more hurdles that we need to overcome with alcohols as fuels.

so no to home-blending ethanol with fuel and yes to burning things with it. Got it.

what is biodiesel?

Biodiesel is a diesel fuel made from vegetable oil or animal fats. Most of the biodiesel in America is made from soy bean oil, but some is made from waste vegetable oil. In Germany, it is mostly made from rapeseed. There are many other sources, including jojoba and algae(most promising IMO).

The emissions are quite a bit cleaner than normal diesel fuel, although NOx emissions are a little higher. The engine will definitely be quieter, and exhaust smells better too. One drawback is that it gels at a relatively high temperature. Normal diesel fuel gels around 0F, but straight biodiesel gels closer to 32F. I don't think it's really a big deal though, because you can just add an anti-gel additive like you would with normal diesel- you just have to do it at warmer temperatures.

No modifications are required to use biodiesel. If you have a really old engine with natural rubber fuel lines, the biodiesel will destroy them- but odds are if your fuel lines are that old, they need to be replaced anyway. Any diesel engine made in the last 10 years or so should require no modification at all.


What fuels can you make at home? How expensive is it to produce? If your vehicle can't run on pure ethanol or whatever you can produce at home, can you use it as a fuel additive and reduce emissions and increase gas mileage even a little bit?

Biodiesel can be made at home, and from what I've read, it sounds like you can do it for about 50cents/gallon. You can run pure biodiesel, called "neat" biodiesel or B100, or you can run any mixture of biodiesel and regular diesel. A mixture of 20% biodiesel and 80% diesel would be called B20. A mixture of 45% biodiesel and 55% diesel would be B45, etc.

Biodiesel has a slightly lower amount of energy in it than regular diesel, however it burns slightly differently, and also provides a lot of lubricity, so usually mileage is about the same. If you run a high percentage of biodiesel, you might see a 1 or 2% loss in mileage. Some people use it in small amounts, say B5 or B10, and actually see an increase in mileage. Small amounts make a big difference in cleaning up emissions as well.



I was also wondering if you can make fuel from compost, my family has a huge compost (we recycle everything we can either through recycling or compost) and if not from compost how about from fruits and vegetables that would be composted otherwise?
I don't think you can do it at home, but I've heard of a process called transthermal depolymerization(spellcheck!), or TDP for short, which sounds like it can turn just about anything into oil which could be used for fuel.




If the fuels you can produce at home can't be used in cars or lawnmowers and such, can it be used instead of natural gas in a stove, a kerosene lamp, or a heater? My home is heated by natural gas and in canadian winters we use (I'm just speculating here) alot, even though we keep the house at around 15-20 degrees celcius (60-70 degrees farenheit) and it would be great to save some money on fuels and maybe create cleaner emissions (although i think natural gas burns pretty clean).

I don't think it could be used as a direct replacement for natural gas, but many homes use home heating oil right now, which is basically diesel fuel. In that case, you can use biodiesel, although I think you might need to make some small changes.


How cost effective would it be to produce fuel from an otherwise wasted source? Someone said it wouldn't be worth it but is that because you would have to actually buy the engrediants for cars to run solely on that or that the cost to produce it would be greater than the money saved?
If you do a lot of driving, and want to run B100, you'd probably spend every waking second of your day making fuel. But if you drive maybe a hundred miles or so per week, and want to run B20, that should be fairly easy.

Or you can just some biodiesel already made. It costs more than regular diesel here in the States, but the prices are getting pretty close. Also, sometimes you can get a rebate which will make it cost the same or less than regular diesel. For example, the Maryland Soybean Board was offering a 50% rebate on biodiesel for a while, so it wasn't too expensive at all.

I'm not sure about the laws for making your own fuel, but remember you are still supposed to pay a road tax.

For more information, check out Biodiesel.org (http://www.biodiesel.org), Biodieselnow.com (http://www.biodieselnow.com), and Journey to Forever (http://www.journeytoforever.org).

Thats cool. The reason I asked is because after reading all the posts I've become interested in maybe getting a diesel car if the mileage is as great as everyone says that would be great for getting around town and long trips then I would just drive my camaro on the strip and 3000gt when I go rallying to save gas. Do all manufacturers make diesel cars I'm not a truck person I don't like trucks my self out side of going mudding with I do in my 3000gt anyway but if not which manufacturers do I saw a lot of vw tdi being mentioned but is that the only choice. Plus I don't really want to pay on it for the rest of my life so examples of cheaper models would be apreciated.

Right now, I think the only diesels being offered are in North America:

VW__ Golf, Jetta(and Jetta wagon), New Beetle, Passat(and Passat wagon), Touareg

Jeep__ Liberty

Mercedes__ E-class

In Europe you can get just about anything with a diesel- Mercedes even has a diesel SLK now with a 3.2L, 286hp, 465lb-ft tri-turbo diesel that gets 30mpg combined cty/hwy driving! I think we might see that engine in the ML suv in North America soon.

Check out www.tdiclub.com if you want more info on the TDI or just diesel information in general.


To be honest, unless you are looking for a car anyway, I don't think I'd buy a car just to save fuel. Unless fuel gets really expensive, I don't think it would ever pay off. But if you're looking for a daily driver that gets great mileage, I'd definitely check out diesels! :thumbsup: In a TDI with a manual transmission, it's pretty easy to get 40mpg in city driving and 50mpg on the highway.

I looked at fuel prices just the other day and saw diesel had jumped to $2.24, with unleaded being $1.91. Looks bad at first, but I did the math, and comparing to the same car with a gasoline engine, the cost of driving will be even when diesel reaches $3.18 and gas is still $1.91. ;) Of course there are non-diesel cars that good mileage too, but the only thing that come close to the TDI is an old tin-can CRX or a hybrid, and the hybrids aren't exactly known for getting the high mileage they claim.

don't forget the smartcar, apparently they're pretty cool. A co-worker got one about a month ago and just filled it up last weekend. Plus they don't cost too much, just like $16,500-25,777 with all equiped and has 73.8 lbs of torque at 1,800-2,800RPM, max power is 40.2 hp at 4,200RPM, and weighs what... 2lbs. Actually it weighs 730 kg(without the driver) so that's 55.1hp per tonne compared to the civic SiR with 129hp per tonne with less than half the gas mileage. Plus the smart car has all kinds of cool features. I'm not trying to sell the smart car (go buy one) but I just think it's really cool that someone has a cheap, non-sluggish, car with cool features and excellent gas mileage.

don't forget the smartcar, apparently they're pretty cool. A co-worker got one about a month ago and just filled it up last weekend. Plus they don't cost too much, just like $16,500-25,777 with all equiped and has 73.8 lbs of torque at 1,800-2,800RPM, max power is 40.2 hp at 4,200RPM, and weighs what... 2lbs. Actually it weighs 730 kg(without the driver) so that's 55.1hp per tonne compared to the civic SiR with 129hp per tonne with less than half the gas mileage. Plus the smart car has all kinds of cool features. I'm not trying to sell the smart car (go buy one) but I just think it's really cool that someone has a cheap, non-sluggish, car with cool features and excellent gas mileage.

I think the Smart is pretty cool, but I wouldn't buy one just for the mileage. For how small it is, I actually think the mileage sucks. It's too bad they don't sell the 3L Lupo here, that would rock for an economy car.

But it's a great little car for driving around the city, especially when you need to find parking and stuff like that. And I also think it's pretty darn expensive for what it is... but I guess it is sort of a Mercedes. ;) I've heard they're fun to drive.

Ethanol would increase fuel consumption on an EFI car and it should remain the same in carbed cars.

Ethanol carries some of its own oxygen, so to retain 14.7:1 ratio by the O2 sensors, it needs to inject more fuel. That is why winter fuel is called "oxygenated." It contains up to 14% ethanol which carries it own oxygen. Great for HC and NOx emissions, but bad for fuel economy and rubber fuel line parts.

Ethanol is a great fuel, but with its 5% water content and high oxygen content, it burns a lot of fuel to make its stoich mixture. Something like 6:1 or 8:1... I forget. It also makes your oil a joke in a matter of a few miles. Ever see an alcohol-burning car's oil after 1/4 mile? It is a white frothy soup with very little of the qualities of its origin. Plus the alcohol washes the cylinder walls excessively causing rapidly accelerated ring and cylinder wear.

Just some more hurdles that we need to overcome with alcohols as fuels.

Fuel consumption increase with both carbs and EFI, both systems must be modified for ethanol.

Lambda sensors measure the lambda by measuring free oxygen in the exhaust, lambda 1 is for ethanol 9:1, around 9.5:1 for E85.

Ethanol used as motorfuel typically contains less than .3% water by weight.

The oil hasn't that big problem with ethanol, there are ethanol driven cars availible today, don't know how the oil change intervals are affected but I assume that the difference isn't that big.

don't know how the oil change intervals are affected but I assume that the difference isn't that big.

This just reminded me of a comment I think I read in an earlier post in this thread, but couldn't find it. I believe someone stated that diesels had shorter maintenance intervals.

My 02 Golf, diesel, as listed in the operators manual, has an oil change interval of 10,000 miles. I've had my oil analyzed after 10,000 miles- half of which was highway driving at high speeds(frequently exceding 100mph), and the other half very short trips(sub 5 miles) in city driving. Probably the worst two duties for oil. The analysis showed the oil as being just fine. With a more conservative commute, I wouldn't be surprised to see a 20,000 mile service interval being ok. I'd still change the filter at 10k though.

Some newer EMS can calculate the oil quality dependning how you drive, so it can provide a warning that the oil must be changed. For this to work properly one must of course use the correct oil.

If we take a look on the larger diesels found in trycks thay have both longer intervals and a longer engine life.