ShirlGirl

Solar, wind, ocean and geothermal power and the future development of nuclear fusion all need to be given more attention. Like, yesterday!


For your interest...

Perth's hydrogen fuel cell buses

Vegetable oil car

Steve Crook

Doubtless. And if more research funds could be directed at them then they could be made more efficient and practical to use in a large way.

But it's difficult to carry an ocean or a nuclear torus around in a car

No bad once you've got the hydrogen. But the generation of hydrogen is quite expensive and inefficient at the moment. Hydrogen is also very dangerous.

And techniques that might be suitable for buses in busy areas aren't necessarily good for other vehicles or even for long distance buses. You can use things like regenerative braking in buses and make them very efficient.

Check the page about drawbacks. We'd all smell like a chip shop
Iit is only cost efficient at the moment because it isn't taxed as other fuels are. As soon as it's used in any volume the taxman will step in

Steve

homeguard

You can forget wind power to provide your electricity. That's a salve to the greens and can never replace a constant energy source. Added to that, if you ignore the cement needed for the bases (itself one of the biggest polluting processes), nothing else is made in this country, and the foreign manufacturers of turbines and blades have waiting lists running into years.
Also, the vegetable alternatives are beginning to suck-in food resources, thereby putting up the cost beyond the reach of those countries that have historically relied on them. The US in particular spent billions of dollars every year over-producing soya and maize. This 'surplus' was then 'gifted' as food aid to countries where the US needed some influence. Now it's being used as bio-fuel. Palm oil is going the same way, usurping cash crops that fed as well as earnt.
But you don't need to worry, or you wouldn't if we had invested in coal technology like the rest of our rich neighbours. No, I don't mean steam engines. Once again we should be looking back and, once again, it's the Germans we have to thank. If you're not too bored already, and would like to know why the price of oil is so high now, I've added some (some!) information below which you won't see discussed in the press. If you read it you will realise that the money markets and investors know that oil as we have known it is finished, so they've got to make as much as possible as quickly as possible. I speak, of course, about the Fischer-Tropsch process which was ignored for so long because oil was less than $35 a barrel, unless like South Africa you were subject to sanctions because of apartheid. Anyway, read the attached if you have the time and sleep a little easier. Oh, hang on, our government don't seem to have done anything about the fact that we still have 500 years worth of coal. But then, by 2010 they might have started thinking about it.
Fischer-Tropsch technology converts coal, natural gas, and low-value refinery products into a high-value, clean-burning fuel. The resultant fuel is colorless, odorless, and low in toxicity. In addition, it is virtually interchangeable with conventional diesel fuels and can be blended with diesel at any ratio with little to no modification. Fischer-Tropsch fuels offer important emissions benefits compared with diesel, reducing nitrogen oxide, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter.

For the past 50 years, Fischer-Tropsch fuels have powered all of South Africa’s vehicles—from buses to trucks to taxicabs. The fuel is primarily supplied by Sasol, a world leader in Fischer-Tropsch Technologies. Sasol’s South African facility produces more than 150,000 barrels of high quality fuel from domestic low-grade coal daily. The popular fuel is cost-competitive with crude oil-based petroleum products in South Africa. During the next several years, experts predict use of Fischer-Tropsch fuels will grow as a high-end blend stock in California.

By Chris Kjelgaard, Senior Editor
posted: 15 November 2007 06:57 pm
At this week's Dubai Airshow, Qatar Airways, Qatar Petroleum, Qatar Fuel Company and the Qatar Science and Technology Park signed an agreement with the three companies to study the feasibility of powering jetliners with gas-to-liquid (GTL) synthetic jet fuels created by converting natural gas to kerosene.
The conversion of natural gas to kerosene is performed using a variation of the Fischer-Tropsch catalyzed chemical process originally developed by Franz Fischer and Hans Tropsch at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute in Germany in the 1920s.

The Fischer-Tropsch reaction converts a mixture of hydrogen and carbon monoxide – derived from coal, methane or biomass – to liquid fuels. The US Department of Energy (DOE) refers to the coal-based process as Coal-to-Liquids. The Fischer-Tropsch process was discovered by German scientists and used to make fuels during World War II. There has been continued interest of varying intensity in Fischer-Tropsch technology ever since. Both iron-based and cobalt-based catalysts have been examined. SASOL in South Africa has produced liquid fuels from coal for approximately 30 years. Many oil companies such as Shell Oil, Chevron (Texaco), and ExxonMobil have been conducting research and have built pilot plants or smaller plants. In conjunction with several private sector organizations, NETL built and operated a pilot plant in LaPorte, Texas, focusing on the development of slurry-phase reactor technology.
The US Air Force has certified a 50:50 blend of Fischer-Tropsch synthetic fuel and JP-8 for use on all B-52H aircraft. The announcement by Secretary of the Air Force Michael W. Wynne marked the formal conclusion of testing on this aircraft. The Air Force plans to test and certify every airframe to fly on a domestically produced synthetic fuel blend by early 2011.
The B-52H was chosen as the test platform because of key advantages such as its eight engines. The fuel system can simultaneously isolate, carry and manage both a test fuel and the standard JP-8 fuel. (Earlier post.)
It causes angst to know that we’re faced with a commodity that some might use against us. We want to provide our nation a look forward to something else and to essentially join with numerous researchers who are looking for alternatives whether it is ethanol, switch grass, biomass or Fischer-Tropsch and finding the solution. I think it is going to be a tremendous partnership across the board.
—Secretary Wynne
The Secretary said that one of the things planners are looking for is a clean coal-to-liquids process.
It may involve several manufacturing steps to essentially neutralize carbon usage and get us to what we want. We want a synthetic blend that will not interrupt the flow of fuel in our aircraft and airfields and will be a viable substitute.
—Secretary Wynne


12 December 2007
Chinese chemists have carried out the Fischer-Tropsch (FT) reaction in water for the first time, bringing a greener route to hydrocarbon fuels a step closer.
FT produces short-chain hydrocarbons by hydrogenation of carbon monoxide over a metal catalyst - usually iron or cobalt. The catalyst is usually supported on carbon or silicon dioxide to optimise its activity.
Now a team from Peking University (PKU), China, has used a different approach - catalysing the reaction in water using 2nm clusters of ruthenium, stabilised by PVP, a water-soluble polymer. The unsupported catalyst is more active than conventional catalysts and so the reaction runs well at lower temperatures.
The researchers saw a 35-fold increase in activity over supported catalysts at a standard operating temperature of 150°C, and a 16-fold increase at only 100°C.

At the moment, FT-fuel is made from coal, which is obviously not so green. on the other hand, the feedstock for FT-Fuel could be any hydrocarbon-source, like agricultural waste, wood pellets, algae, plastic waste, manure, etc. If (nuclear, solar,...) hydrogen is added to the carbon-source, the yield of FT-fuel is greatly increased.
So if the actual FT-fuel is certified to be good enough for jet-fighters, the greener FT-fuel will also be good enough.
This is the first step to prove the practicality of FT-fuel in jet engines. Once proven and produced on an industrial scale, changing the feedstock is a relatively minor technical obstacle.
Financial incentives will probably be needed, but by then, the public will be ready for it. It's a good thing the technology is developed now, so that when the politics are done, a fast change of industrial practice can be obtained, since the technology will be ready.

Synthesis gas can also be created from natural gas - and this is less costly than from coal. Since 1993, Shell in Malaysia (Bintulu) and PetroSA in South Africa (Mossel Bay) have been operating industrial Fischer-Tropsch Synthesis facilities, which produce liquid fuels from synthesis gas which comes originally from natural gas (Gas To Liquid, GTL). A third similar plant is being built by Sasol and Qatar Petroleum in Qatar in the Persian Gulf. Last year nine more GTL-facilities were being planned world-wide; most of them are to use Fischer-Tropsch Synthesis.

If you've arrived here, I hope it was worth knowing.
Regards,
HG

donna

thanks steve but was a bit boring.

Third Man

Oil has started to come down as of tonight $2 on the barrel - it's a start!

I think this was as a result of Saudi Arabia starting to up their production.

Simon

David Brent

Why is it that as soon as the petrol prices go up by the barrel in the Middle East it instantly goes onto the current price of petrol at the service stations?
Even though the petrol at the service stations was purchased and delivered some time ago.

Yet when the price per barrel does fall (not often enough I know) it takes forever for it to be passed on to consumers - if at all.

Talk about robbery with violence.

Dave.

Third Man

It doesn't it does take quite a while to filter through, the prices have been rising since spring last year.

The actual reason for the Saudis upping the production is because they are worried about consumption - everyone is consuming less, this is in fact worrying for the producers beause they don't want everybody getting used to being more economical because that would mean less money for them. So on one hand we have a natural resurce that is going to eventually run dry but the message is don't be economical with it becaues we want you to keep spending the same amount of money with us - sounds like somethings gonna give to me!

Simon

funlover

Bloody well said David. 100% agree with that

If I knew were you were I'd buy you a drink [several in fact]

funlover

Sooner or later [sooner I think] the private motorist is going to be priced off the road due to cost. The powers that be will want the remaining oil for power stations, commercial vehicles and public transport as well as premise heating. Getting the private car off the road will have huge benefits IMO as the roads will be free for their original intention of carrying goods and commerce. Less roads will be needed and pollution would be reduced.

NOBOBY but NOBODY's car is essential except for the members of the emergency/health services, public transport employees. I have a neighbour who every day gets in the car, drives half a mile, buys a paper and cigarettes and a bottle of booze then comes home and parks the damn thing. If he goes further it's to the Gee-Gee or dog track. His poor little mite of a wife has to get a bus for shopping. Says it all really.

funlover

Regarding the staement by "Homeguard" about wind power I will quote a friend of mine who is in the power industry

"Wind power is the most inefficient method of generation coinceivable. The turbines are idle more often than not. They are only there as the moneygrabbers can get cash from Government for building them. One might as well use farts and fannywind"

Steve Crook

I'll make a guess that this friend isn't in the wind-power part of the power industry

Steve

ShirlGirl

Farts - maybe not such a bad idea. All that methane - but how to harness it, that's the question!

Maybe we should all be walking around with containers strapped to our backsides!

I read somewhere that cows produce about 10kg of methane each per year and there was talk about that contributing to global warming - not sure how serious it was meant to be. Sounds feasible to some extent, though. Erm... I think.

EHV_Emmetts

I don't own a motorcar and I never have. I did have a motorbike but I sold it a couple of years ago as it became too expensive to run. I do use a bicycle to go to work and back. Other than this I use public transport.

homeguard

It's already being done in Banbury, Oxon, and the Greater London Authority are embarking on an anaerobic digestor plant to turn human poo into electricity. Marks and Spencer also are considering it at their plant in Scotland.
So in the short term, and if you live in Banbury, keep going to the toilet - you're helping win the war against pollution.
Regards,
HG

davidb

thanks for that ! theres no other reason for the price hike weve had recently ,its not like theres a shortage of oil or anything .its a shame there isnt a shortage of greedy city speculators though !