Which alternate fuel/technology is the most realistic for the future?

[emanunet]

which fuel/technology do you think will propel the future??

[curtis73]

I didn't vote because a few of those apply.

I think that fossil fuels will stay on top as long as we have them. Biofuels are very exciting because it requires zero change to the infrastructure. We already have flexfuel gas cars, and biodiesel is completely compatible with conventional diesel. Plus, all of the fueling can remain the same. The same fuel stations and pumps can be used for bio fuels. The problem with biofuels is that there is no way to keep up with production at our current consumption.

If biofuels are to replace fossil fuels, we will all have to give up some serious luxuries and start living more European. Instead of 14-mpg SUVs and a 30-mile commute, we might have to limit ourselves to a small 50-mpg diesel sedan and using public transportation, a carpool, or a bike to go to work. There is just no way our current agriculture can support the energy consumption that America uses. I think that includes another one of your options; a drastic turn toward diesel. It is uncanny the hatred most americans have for diesel, even though they usually provide twice the torque, the same horsepower, and 30% more MPG. Plus the fuel is safer since it is very difficult to ignite and doesn't evaporate easily. Not to mention, biodiesel is a much more viable fuel than ethanol. biodiesel can come directly from oil crops yielding 85-90% return, then the pressed crop can still be used as livestock feed. Ethanol must be brewed, then expensively distilled, and we only get about 15% of the total brew as ethanol, and the crop is mostly wasted. 85% of what you put in the brew is waste. Its time consuming and expensive. Not to mention, the ethanol fuel itself only contains 2/3 the BTUs as gasoline. Biodiesel has about 20% BTUs than gasoline, so the return on your energy investment is much higher with diesel and biodiesel.

So, after that I see a large possibility for hyrdrogen fuel cells. The only problem there is cost to produce hydrogen. The easiest way to get hydrogen is cracking hydrocarbons; specifically crude oil. Once crude oil is exausted we'll have to resort to other more expensive ways of collecting hydrogen.

After that, I can forsee that electronic technology may expand to a point where solar power might be feasible. At this point solar cars are not practical. The only ones that exist are experimental cockpits surrounded by bicycle tires, batteries, and solar panels, and even they can't operate for long without the sun. Possibly a solar/electric with a large bank of batteries that get charged overnight, then a supplemental solar panel to extend the charge.

Another thing we need to do before using electric cars is change how we make electricity. Over half of our electricity in the US comes from burning fossil fuels. Charging an electric car right now doesn't save the atmosphere, it is responsible for many times more pollution since the source of the electricity is someone burning coal to produce the electricity.

[J-Ri]

You only need to post once!

It's multi-choice, so I voted for fossil fuels staying on top as long as we got em, as long as the price is somewhat reasonable (or perhaps I should say affordable)

I also voted for hydrogen fuel cells. I think the key to this isn't having huge tanker trucks bringing it in, but rather local production. Most hydrogen is presently produced using fossil fuels (which is the most cost effective). The solution would be for everyone to install solar panels on their roof (house, not car) and produce hydrogen from electrolysis. Not only could it then be transferred into a vehicle, but it could be used to heat the house at night rather than using natural gas, propane, or electricity (much better than batteries because a tank can't wear out or discharge over time). We would still need "gas stations" for travelers to fill up at, but with the majority of people filling up at home there wouldn't be a huge demand.

OTR trucks would be a different story... although with all the surface area on top of the trailer, they could certainly get a lot of assist with solar panels.

Bio diesel would also be a solution for the big trucks, but all the fertilizers and pesticides aren't a good thing. I live in Iowa, and there was a story on the news a few nights ago about how almost all county water supplies have high levels of nitrates and other chemicals, and some are above the acceptable ("safe") limit. I also heard that all the runoff into the Mississippi river is killing plants in the gulf of Mexico. If a more pest-tolerant soybean plant were developed that didn't need to be fertilized... biodiesel would be great

[KiwiBacon]

I think compression engines (diesel) running on a variety of different fuels will power the future.
Scania have buses with a compression ratio of 28:1 (plus turbo boost) which run on ethanol at an efficiency slightly better than normal diesel.

Maybe we'll see flexifuel diesels which can run on dino-diesel, bio-diesel, vegeoil and ethanol. All exist at far greater efficiency than you'll ever get from a spark ignition engine.

[emanunet]

i think Hydrogen Fuel cell is a good idea, yet it is simply not practical (at least not in the near future). true that it's clever and efficient but the costs are way too high. they say that a fully functioning car costs about 1million$ to build and that in order to create a world-wide infustructure ridicules amounts of money needs to be spent. it is a good solution yet it is just not realistic.
untill i hear of a car develoption that a low-class family could purchase, it is just Sci-Fi. i see the future in Diesel, Hybrids (Diesel-Hybrids would be a realistic solution to reducing green-house gasses in my opinion like the all new VW Golf BlueMotion) and EV's. i know that electricity needs (in most cases these days) the use of fossiled fuel, but mass production of 'clean' electricity is already available today and with enough funding - it could work (look at Holand and Germany). unfortunatly, bio-fuels/diesels are just too much of a fuss - they take long time to manufacture and they are not very efficient (low mpg). i am actually hoping for a major development from the direction of CAV (compressed air vehicles) - it is something which i have seen in action (in France if you wanna know) and with a bit more "polishing" it has a lot of potencial.
it is important though, to mention again that i really think that hydrogen fuel cells are a waste of time. as good as they are (and they are not that good atm) they are just too expensive.
EA

[Moppie]

Originally Posted by KiwiBacon

Maybe we'll see flexifuel diesels which can run on dino-diesel, bio-diesel, vegeoil and ethanol. All exist at far greater efficiency than you'll ever get from a spark ignition engine.

They get my vote.

I just read and article at work, there is a guy in the states useing duramax diesels in big GM cars, hummers etc, and getting 400+ hp and 40-50mpg.
There was an ausie who worked on mixing LPG and Diesel and Hydrogen and Deisel, and this yank is following on from that, and proving it works, and works very well.

[KiwiBacon]

Originally Posted by Moppie

They get my vote.

I just read and article at work, there is a guy in the states useing duramax diesels in big GM cars, hummers etc, and getting 400+ hp and 40-50mpg.
There was an ausie who worked on mixing LPG and Diesel and Hydrogen and Deisel, and this yank is following on from that, and proving it works, and works very well.

You'd need a very aerodynamic vehicle to get 40-50mpg with an engine the size of the duramax. Bigger engine with more internal friction than necessary and all that.

LPG fumigation of diesels works by accelerating the diesel combustion, effectively advancing the injection timing.
Unfortunately it does this by preigniting, so it's not a good thing for your engine.
Efficiency measurements for such systems are notably absent. Saving diesel by substituting lpg might be economic in Aussie, but here LPG costs double per kg what diesel does and has nowhere near the energy content.

[Steel]

I chose diesel/biodiesel and electric vehicles. Im hoping that people will smarten up and allow nuclear power to gain a foothold again, and I'm also hoping that nuclear fusion reactors will be invented soon, as well as someone discovering room temperature superconductors, which will solve our battery needs.

[KiwiBacon]

Originally Posted by Steel

as well as someone discovering room temperature superconductors,

I'm rooting for zero friction lubricants.

[UncleBob]

that is a horrible list. I'd have picked something if I could figure out what the vague categories defined

[GreyGoose006]

look, im sick and tired of hearing about the "hydrogen economy"
its a MYTH.

hydrogen comes from water, through a process called electrolysis.
this requires huge ammounts of energy, as you are actually separating water into hydrogen and oxygen.

then the hydrogen is compressed, which again, requires a lot of energy.

then the hydrogen is shipped to you in a truck (burning diesel most likely)

then you put the hydrogen in your car, where it is burned, which creates... WATER!!!

its a big circle.
ignoring the fact that hydrogen leaks out of every container we can put it in, hydrogen still sucks because no process is 100% efficient. most are around 75% or so. IC engines are about 30% efficient.
if you add it up, you realize that hydrogen SUCKS.
the only Possible good that could come out of large scale hydrogen production is the creation of lots more oxygen, which then gets burnt to make water, instead of fossil fuels using oxygen to create co2.

[/rant]



i voted for biodiesels, drastic turn to diesel, and hybrid tech.
i should have also voted for electric cars powered by nuclear generated electricity, and smaller, lighter cars in general.

['97ventureowner]

Anything that doesn't cause shortages or cause producers to divert production to fuel. For example, the use of corn for fuel. More and more farmers are planting corn to be sold to processors for fuel. As a result they are switching crops in the process and not planting their usual crops that are still needed, causing shortages. And to add to that the supply of corn for human consumption/animal feeds is being diverted to fuel production in larger numbers causing ,more shortages driving up the cost of the product which trickles down to the rising cost of such items as beef, pork , poultry, eggs, anything that uses corn as an ingredient.I think the farmers should open up more land to the production of corn while still planting enough to keep our supply steady and allow others to continue to plant other needed crops.

[j cAT]

Originally Posted by emanunet

which fuel/technology do you think will propel the future??

because the united states can produce huge amounts of natural gas from a variety of materials and the cost to produce and the cost to convert vehicles this would be a good fuel to use within the next 2 years before gasoline raises to 10.00 /gallon...


if there were more availability i would convert... my state has their vehicles on it...


alcohol is a poor fuel.....natural gas would be extremely clean burning....

['97ventureowner]

Originally Posted by j cAT

because the united states can produce huge amounts of natural gas from a variety of materials and the cost to produce and the cost to convert vehicles this would be a good fuel to use within the next 2 years before gasoline raises to 10.00 /gallon...


if there were more availability i would convert... my state has their vehicles on it...


alcohol is a poor fuel.....natural gas would be extremely clean burning....

Going off of this idea,(which is a great one IMO,) would be to use the gases that are emitted from the hundreds if not thousands of landfills scattered across the country. There are programs in place at many sites currently that do such a thing and I think it could be expanded to meet other needs. You can even set up commercial composters or similar type technology to create gases from the composting of materials that we produce as waste. We could also use livestock waste and use the gases from that which would also leave an end product (pun intended) that could be used as fertilizer for crops.
In our county we have an incinerator that burns all of our trash and the steam produced is sent to be used for other purposes, ( generate electricity I believe.) This technology could also be used to produce an energy source to power vehicles as well.

[KiwiBacon]

Originally Posted by '97ventureowner

Going off of this idea,(which is a great one IMO,) would be to use the gases that are emitted from the hundreds if not thousands of landfills scattered across the country. There are programs in place at many sites currently that do such a thing and I think it could be expanded to meet other needs. You can even set up commercial composters or similar type technology to create gases from the composting of materials that we produce as waste. We could also use livestock waste and use the gases from that which would also leave an end product (pun intended) that could be used as fertilizer for crops.
In our county we have an incinerator that burns all of our trash and the steam produced is sent to be used for other purposes, ( generate electricity I believe.) This technology could also be used to produce an energy source to power vehicles as well.

Such a setup works excellently for stationary heat and power. Being used to heat local swimming-pools, shopping malls, run water pumps etc.
It's hard to compress natural gases enough to get a decent energy density for road transport.