How expensive is gas?

Gene DeMambro · Post by **Gene DeMambro** » Sun May 23, 2004 6:54 am

Awe, come on Bill! Someone's got to teach us how to make really good fries. After all, we're gonna need the cooking grease after petro runs dry!

Gene

Gene DeMambro · Post by **Gene DeMambro** » Sun May 23, 2004 7:10 am

Interesting article in the May 2004 issue of Scientific American. Entitled "Questions About a Hydrogen Economy", it reviews the positives and negatives of fuel cell technology for cars. Read it when you get a chance. But here are two charts from that article that tell part of the story:

This one compares the efficiency of the entire energy chain, called "wells to wheels". Notice where the gasoline internal combuston is, and compare it to diesel, hybrids and the various types of fuel cells. Interesting. But no matter how we slice it, no energy source is terribly efficient in transportation. But there are better options than gasoline from an efficiency point of view.

This chart compares the total emmissions of various energy sources, from the pollution from refining, making the hydrogen fuel, making ethanol or what-have-you. Notice where gasoline internal combustion is: almost the top of the heap. Look where hydrogen fuel cells are: THE top of the heap. So while fuel cells might save gasoline, they are more polluting than gasoline engines in cars, when the emissions from the power plants used to power the technology to make fuel cells are accounted for.

Gene

Bill Glasheen · Post by **Bill Glasheen** » Sun May 23, 2004 2:03 pm

Gene

Interesting about the efficiencies. The efficiency plots show why I (and the Europeans) have embraced diesels, and why fuel cells are the end game.

Can't seem to get your second plot. That being said, I'm wondering about the final message here. The beauty of fuel cell technology is you can use any energy source to produce the hydrogen (wind, water, petroleum, bio, coal, fission, fusion, etc.). It becomes a kind of liquid asset of energy, ready to be consumed w/o pollution at the place of use. Thus you could produce it from whatever resources are available at the time, and continue to refine the mass production process.

I'll have to get that article.

- Bill

Gene DeMambro · Post by **Gene DeMambro** » Sun May 23, 2004 2:42 pm

Hi Bill,

The idea that hydrogen fuel is non-polluting is a misconception. Sure there's no pollution at the point of use, but using electricity from the current electrical grid to produce hydrogen fuel is more polluting than a gas IC engine - all the emissions come from the power plant.

Sure hydrogen fuels may be the end-game, but their inefficient energy loss during conversion and the high pollution when the hydrogen is actually made may make then unsuitable for transport uses.

The final message? While fuel cell technologies seem to be driving the future of energy research, comparing their efficiency vs. gasoline IC is complicated. And comparing their emissions harm is equally as complicated, barring any change in the number and type of power plants we have in the US and elsewhere.

Notice how small the emissions are from ethanol. If you can see the caption on the left, it says that the DOE considers ethanol to be almost non-polluting. "The carbon emitted by ethanol use is reabsorbed by new corn", it says. Kinda like dividend re-investment!

Gene

Gene DeMambro · Post by **Gene DeMambro** » Sun May 23, 2004 3:09 pm

The beauty of fuel cell technology is you can use any energy source to produce the hydrogen (wind, water, petroleum, bio, coal, fission, fusion, etc.).

True. Consider that just over half of the energy produces in the US is from coal-fired plants, 20% from natural gas and the rest from solar, wind, hydroelectric, nuclear and whatever else is there. So if we really want to decrease pollution, we should eliminate coal fired plants.

Gene

RACastanet · Post by **RACastanet** » Sun May 23, 2004 6:08 pm

This is a great discussion. Personally I'd like a dual fuel capable IC engine so I can run on the best available fuel. Diesel/Gasoline or some such combo is not difficult to do. Many military vehicles are set up that way.

Coal as a fuel source will not go away until the US accepts nuclear generation. The coal is readily available and reletively inexpensive, and not subject to the whims of the world.

The beauty of coal or any other combustion type power generation is that the emissions are centralized and can be dealt with much more efficiently and reliably than having the millions of pollution sources we have today.

About 30 years ago that was one of the ecologists dreams... all electric battery powered vehicles powered by the electrical grid at night by charging during off peak hours. Even GMs California EV1 died though as battery technology did not advance and left coast driving habits just would not change.

Rich

Bill Glasheen · Post by **Bill Glasheen** » Sun May 23, 2004 9:12 pm

Problem with having either gasoline or diesel is that it may not get you away from your dependence on petroleum - unless we get serious about biodiesel. But you are right that having options is key.

Again, that's why I like the fuel cell. End game is a nonpolluting source of energy easily stored and delivered via conventions similar to what we have today with "gas stations." The beginning can be whatever we want. Let the marketplace decide, and improve technology so that we pollute as little as possible.

Rich is right about the centralized energy production thing. Do the energy conversion in a single place and it's easier to work on the whole issue of pollutants, greenhouse gases, etc. Or, master fusion and maybe our whole energy problem becomes a thing of the past. Generate it at the plants and convert the energy to H2. Or maybe there's a source of energy (tides, etc.) that we haven't yet tapped or thought of.

Or maybe dilithium crystals... If you push 'er much harder, Cap'n, the engines w'll blow!

- Bill

Gene DeMambro · Post by **Gene DeMambro** » Mon May 24, 2004 3:30 am

The energy industry then can't whine when the Feds tell them to clean up their act.

Gene

Valkenar · Post by **Valkenar** » Mon May 24, 2004 4:21 pm

RACastanet wrote: Coal as a fuel source will not go away until the US accepts nuclear generation. The coal is readily available and reletively inexpensive, and not subject to the whims of the world.

Nuclear power has gotten a bad rap because of well-publicized disasters in the past. What doesn't tend to get much publicity is amount of nuclear waste that coal plants generate.

http://www.ornl.gov/info/ornlreview/rev ... lmain.html

===
Releases in 1982 from worldwide combustion of 2800 million tons of coal totaled 3640 tons of uranium (containing 51,700 pounds of uranium-235) and 8960 tons of thorium.
===

Bill Glasheen · Post by **Bill Glasheen** » Mon May 24, 2004 4:58 pm

Year ..... Price/gallon (in 2004 $)

1950 ............. $2.08

1960 ............. $1.97

1970 ............. $1.72

1980 ............. $2.83

1990 ............. $1.61

2000 ............. $1.61
2003 ............. $1.58
May 17 ......... $2.02

- Bill

Bill Glasheen · Post by **Bill Glasheen** » Mon May 24, 2004 10:02 pm

This is a neat piece on Biodiesel.

Environmentalists to cars: Drink your veggies

Etta Kantor had a vegetable oil conversion kit installed in her VW Jetta.
By Douglas Healey, AP

THIS is why I want that 5-liter V10 TDI engine shipped over to this side of the pond! Drive on veggie oil, and kick bootie too!

Environmentalists have been using the fuel alternative for years as a way to cut back on sooty emissions, but as gas prices soar above $2 a gallon, they say their "veggie cars" are also a great way to save some cash.

That was part of the attraction for the Healing Waters, a San Diego-based rock band that recently had a conversion kit installed in its bus for a seven-week cross-country tour.

The band left its hometown on a full tank of vegetable oil and then filled up again at a Chinese restaurant in Missouri before buying 500 gallons during a stop in Massachusetts.

"We only spent $200 that would have normally cost us about $1,200, and we probably could have done it all for free if we kept stopping (at restaurants)," said Tony Thorpe, 34, a bassist and vocalist for the band.

Every two weeks, Etta Kantor drives to a local Chinese restaurant to fuel her blue Volkswagen Jetta. She calls ahead and the owner knows to put aside a few buckets of used oil just for her. At home, Kantor uses a colander and a bag filter to remove water and any food particles.

The vegetable oil is then poured into a 15-gallon tank that sits in the back of her Jetta, where a spare tire would usually be kept. With a touch of a button, located above the radio, Kantor can switch from diesel fuel to vegetable oil in seconds.

"Oh, I zip around town, go fast on highways. It's not any different," said Kantor, 58, of Weston.

Restaurants have to pay to get rid of their old vegetable oil and are happy to give it away.

"It saves us a couple of dollars and it helps to save the environment a bit so I thought, 'Why not?'" said Shawn Reilly, a co-owner of Eli's On Whitney, a restaurant in Hamden, Conn.

Reilly estimates that it otherwise costs between $40 and $60 a month to have the oil removed.

No more OPEC! Zoom, zoom, zoom...

- Bill

Gene DeMambro · Post by **Gene DeMambro** » Tue May 25, 2004 2:49 am

Rudolph Diesel (1858-1913) developed a theory that revolutionized the engines of his day. He envisioned an engine in which air is compressed to such a degree that there is an extreme rise in temperature. When fuel is injected into the piston chamber with this air, the fuel is ignited by the high temperature of the air, exploding it, forcing the piston down. Diesel designed his engine in response to the heavy resource consumption and inefficiency of the steam engine, which only produced 12% efficiency.

This engine stood as an example of Diesel's vision because it was fueled by peanut oil - the "original" biodiesel. He thought that the utilization of a biomass fuel was the real future of his engine.

Fueled by peanut oil.... Great! Now even Pres. Jimmy Carter can become an "oil tycoon", just like Pres. Bush and VP Cheney!

Gene

Bill Glasheen · Post by **Bill Glasheen** » Tue May 25, 2004 1:19 pm

There is one caveat... Take a bottle of oil, and throw it in the refridgerator. Olive oil will solidify like Crisco. Only the highly polyunsaturated oils (like canola) will stay liquid in the fridge.

So one must either go to the healthy eating places AND in warmer climates, or come up with some additives if you want to drive in the winter.

But I'm thinking this is something that modern chemistry can overcome. They already have additives to help with petroleum-based diesel in the winter.

- Bill

f.Channell · Post by **f.Channell** » Tue May 25, 2004 4:05 pm

There's a presidential hopeful right now who would like to see cars run on ketchup.

F.

Bill Glasheen · Post by **Bill Glasheen** » Wed May 26, 2004 2:20 pm

Interesting article here today, which highlights some discussion and paper napkin calculations Rich and I were throwing back and forth. Hey Rich, we beat USA Today to press!

Car buyers are high on hybrids

Again, there are caveats:

* Calculations are based on 10,000 miles per year. Many folks (myself included) travel as much as 20,000 miles per year, and so the figures balance more towards a 2 year payoff.

* Calculations are also based on gas being a little less than $2.00 per gallon. Right now gas is higher than that, and climbing. For the Lexus crowd that uses premium gasoline, the savings come even quicker.

* Calculations are based on today's gas taxes, and tax deductions. Government policy can change that on a dime. We pay 33 cents on the dollar for gas taxes in this country. In Europe, it's about 75 cents on the dollar (Euro, whatever...). So the payback for an efficient vehicle can be almost immediate (with gas at 4 to 6 dollars per gallon), and government could choose to put that money into highway improvements, subsidies for the working poor, or research on alternative fuels that would quicken the pace towards energy independence.

* These calculations assume that every vehicle purchase requires that you pay the difference between hybrid and no hybrid. Not exactly... You have some equity left when you sell your vehicle. If you sell it every few years, you get most of that difference back. If you hold onto your vehicle for the price of the average loan (5 years) or longer, you are more than going to make up the difference - even with the time value of money factored in.

* There is peace of mind (insurance) in knowing you won't get slammed in the pocketbook if some major clusterf*** in the Middle East causes the price of a barrel of oil to skyrocket. Good thing the Middle East is a stable place these days...

- Bill

How expensive is gas?

DATA FROM U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY