[aahala]

About one in eight bushels of US corn production is used in order to
produce ethanol equal to about 2-3% of gasoline consumption. The
math isn't very encouraging.

The price isn't much better. For the last 20 years, the wholesale price
of pure ethanol has been higher than the wholesale price of gasoline
about 90% of the time. This is on a gallon to gallon basis. Adjusted for
mileage, $1.75 ethanol equals about $2.60 gasoline.

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('aahala', 'A')bout one in eight bushels of US corn production is used in order to
produce ethanol equal to about 2-3% of gasoline consumption. The
math isn't very encouraging.

The price isn't much better. For the last 20 years, the wholesale price
of pure ethanol has been higher than the wholesale price of gasoline
about 90% of the time. This is on a gallon to gallon basis. Adjusted for
mileage, $1.75 ethanol equals about $2.60 gasoline.

[jmacdaddio]

It will be interesting to see the ethanol game play out. There will be enough ethanol to power cars, but there won't be enough for everyone to continue living the way we do now. Also meat prices will skyrocket if more corn goes away from feeding livestock and towards liquid fuel production. Gasp ... will we have a healthier population, eating less meat and walking and biking many more times that they do today? Budget woes solved .... fitter not fatter Americans makes health care costs go down and leaves us more money for military campaigns against corn-producing countries.

[The_Virginian]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jmacdaddio', ' ') fitter not fatter Americans makes health care costs go down and leaves us more money for military campaigns against corn-producing countries.

[thegrq]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'G')WB just happened to mention corn-based ethanol in his address last Tuesday .. conicidence?

[ThunderChunky]

I dont know much about this other than what this articles states. Anyone here read the book or know any glaring problems with methanol as an energy source? I expect it to be good seeing as how its written by a nobel-laureate chemist.

[b]Book offers a viable alternative to fossil fuel[/i]
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/ ... 031506.php

[ThunderChunky]

Found some other links.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methanol_economy

http://www.technologyreview.com/BizTech ... 96,p1.html

[backstop]

TC -

many thanks for the link.

Yes, methanol is potentially a critically important liquid fuel option since, as this Nobel laureate author makes clear,

it can be produced from sustainable forestry and other biomass sources,

&/or from so-called "Stranded Gas" (reserves to small &/or isolated to be worth piping out),

&/or from recycled power station CO2,

and methanol can be stored, piped and pumped with a tiny fraction of the problems that hydrogen poses,

and is less prone to explosion than petrol and its fires can be put out with water,

and is exceptionally clean-burning with excellent combustion characteristics,

and can be used in spark ignition ICE, compression ignition ICE (90% cut), numerous gas turbines, and "Direct Methanol Fuel Cells."

My interest is in its evident potential to fund widespread sustainable reforestation, which would offer a range of serious secondary benefits.

While I know a bit about methanol, the index of this book shows that it's an overview that has been long awaited.

When it's arrived & I've had time to study it I'll try to do a review.

Regards,

Backstop

[Caoimhan]

There are some good plusses with methanol, and some minuses, too.

No solution is perfect, but methanol production seems like a good idea on the whole.

I wonder how the CO2&Water method of methanol production compares to the electrolysis method of producing H2, in terms of electicity use. If the EREOI is much better for methanol, I can't see a reason to use H2.

[EnergySpin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Caoimhan', 'T')here are some good plusses with methanol, and some minuses, too.

No solution is perfect, but methanol production seems like a good idea on the whole.

I wonder how the CO2&Water method of methanol production compares to the electrolysis method of producing H2, in terms of electicity use. If the EREOI is much better for methanol, I can't see a reason to use H2.

[Caoimhan]

One good thing about the methanol, is that it really won't require much in infrastructure changeover. Methanol can be mixed immediately into gasoline blends, even with ethanol, I believe.

At first, while NG is still relatively cheap, I'm sure that it will continue to be the main feedstock for methanol. But as NG gets higher in price, the CO2/H2O method may be able to scale up. That's the big question... how fast can non-NG methanol production scale and to what degree?

[EnergySpin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Caoimhan', 'O')ne good thing about the methanol, is that it really won't require much in infrastructure changeover. Methanol can be mixed immediately into gasoline blends, even with ethanol, I believe.

[Caoimhan]

The assumptions about H2 in that review assume that H2 would have to be transported either compressed (CHG), or liquified (LH).

It seems very likely to me, however, that CHG and LH will both be abandoned as Hydrogen storage, as metal-hydride storage is perfected. See
THIS PAGE for info about it.

If hydrogen can be produced without fossil fuels cheaper than methanol, this seems to be the best route to take.

I'm not sure how the math adds up.

[EnergySpin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Caoimhan', 'T')he assumptions about H2 in that review assume that H2 would have to be transported either compressed (CHG), or liquified (LH).

It seems very likely to me, however, that CHG and LH will both be abandoned as Hydrogen storage, as metal-hydride storage is perfected. See
THIS PAGE for info about it.

If hydrogen can be produced without fossil fuels cheaper than methanol, this seems to be the best route to take.

I'm not sure how the math adds up.

[backstop]

Caoimhan -

"The Methanol-Cycle" - Sustainable Supply of Liquid Fuels

The wide range of cogent objections to hydrogen as transport fuel seem to me to mitigate strongly in favour of methanol, particularly in view of the storage issue.

The metal hydrates storage plan is not only a lab-option at present, and shows no promise of being scaleable to the global tanker fleet capacity required, it also demands substantial energy inputs both for hydrogen insertion and extraction.

The still greater range of profound objections to unsustainable nuclear power would be exacerbated by the notion of building additional nuclear to generate methanol,
given the massive loss of primary energy involved. (The report above defines that loss from Hydro-power methanol as being around 56%).

Quite what the projected full-term full-spectrum £-costs of Nuclear methanol would be remains to be seen, but the fact that the nuclear lobby has never yet promoted this option doesn't add to its credibility.

Thus my expectation of whatever advances in transport fuels can be achieved globally rest on the spectrum of benefits of sustainable reforestation of non-arable land for methanol feedstock,
not least because even at this stage of development its costs are looking competitive with fossil oil.

regards,

Backstop

[whereagles]

wait a minute... isn't methanol rather.. ahem.. toxic?

[JoeCoal]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('whereagles', 'w')ait a minute... isn't methanol rather.. ahem.. toxic?

[Caoimhan]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('backstop', 'C')aoimhan -

"The Methanol-Cycle" - Sustainable Supply of Liquid Fuels

The wide range of cogent objections to hydrogen as transport fuel seem to me to mitigate strongly in favour of methanol, particularly in view of the storage issue.

The metal hydrates storage plan is not only a lab-option at present, and shows no promise of being scaleable to the global tanker fleet capacity required, it also demands substantial energy inputs both for hydrogen insertion and extraction.

[backstop]

Caoimhan -

I'm glad we seem to agree that the "complete replacement of oil" is a strawman argument.

Seems to me that "complete" here ignores the finite nature of the planet's surface area (for pie are squared) [4pi(R2)]
in assuming oil provides a continued exponential growth of transport energy. Plainly a non starter, i.e. unsustainable.

Yes I'm strongly in favour of reforestation of potentially vast areas of non-arable land for sustainable energy feedstock,
of which methanol may well be the most profitable output.

Yet in utilizing a finite area, once the technology matures it will predictably cease increasing its output,
and is never likely to supply the present level of transport energy, let alone an annual increase in perpetuity.

Clearly sustainability is about living within our means, rather than at our childrens' expense.

WRT the energy input for the conversion of woodgas to methanol, your assertion that nuclear power is the only option seems bizarre,
given that gasification is an exothermic process and the woodgas is also available for power generation.

On a technical note I would point out that nuclear power is itself a fossil energy and, given its 50-year contribution to nuclear proliferation,
is arguably by far the most perilous of the four classes of fossil energy.

Given that proponents of nuclear hydrogen are claiming a hydrogen yield at a mere $200 /bbl oil equivalent,
for nuclear methanol to be still less competitive than this would certainly explain why the nuclear lobby has not tried to use the latter
as yet another supposed justification for reviving the industry.

One critical advantage of Sustainable Forest Energies worth noting is their impact on excess atmospheric CO2.
This is not merely in potentially displacing fossil fuel usage (given an effective global treaty of the atmospheric commons)
but also both in banking significant quantities of carbon in the standing stock of trees and in ongoing soil growth,
as well as in halting and then reversing the present net global deforestation
that is responsible for about one third of annual man-made carbon emissions.

regards,

Backstop

[EnergySpin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('backstop', '
')The still greater range of profound objections to unsustainable nuclear power would be exacerbated by the notion of building additional nuclear to generate methanol,
given the massive loss of primary energy involved. (The report above defines that loss from Hydro-power methanol as being around 56%).