Coal-To-Oil

Calabrio said:
Can't you just call a truce and start over?

That's been tried. I can't trust anything he says, because he talks out of both sides of his mouth. He talks nice in private and then slams in public soon after. He cuts lots of people to pieces behind their backs, Vitas for example.

You said it yourself, you can't convince someone who's stopped listening. You'll learn this about barry: He's NEVER listened, and he never will. He's here to disrupt things for the most part. He does not contribute in any meaningful way. IMHO he's no different than Phil (97SilverLSC) - hate hate hate.

I sincerely hope you're done lecturing now so we can get back to the topic that barry hijacked.
 
fossten said:
I sincerely hope you're done lecturing now so we can get back to the topic that barry hijacked.

I hardly think I lectured, but I've made my observation. Probably one better made in private, sorry about that. Anyway....


The military is starting the change to alternative fuels. The idea of being dependent upon Iran and Venezuela to fuel our military is suicidal. A friend of mine who's a B-52 pilot just sent me this story:

http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123020290

Alternate fuel-powered B-52 to fly in September

by Staff Sgt. C. Todd Lopez
Air Force Print News

5/15/2006 - WASHINGTON (AFPN) -- This year, the Air Force will test fly a B-52 Stratofortress that is powered in part by fuel derived from natural gas.

The Air Force Research Laboratory's propulsion directorate, a part of Air Force Materiel Command, is providing technical assistance to the test flight scheduled for September at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif. The bomber will fly with two of its eight jet engines using a specially blended fuel made of conventional petroleum-derived JP-8 and a Fischer-Tropsch jet fuel produced from natural gas.

The experiment is part of the Department of Defense's Assured Fuel Initiative, an effort to develop secure domestic sources for the military's energy needs.

Alternative jet fuels can be produced from domestically available hydrocarbon products like natural gas, coal and shale using the Fischer-Tropsch process, which was developed in Germany in the early 1920s. Gasification can convert any hydrocarbon feedstock (raw material required for an industrial process) into a synthesis gas that can then, through the Fischer-Tropsch process, be converted into any number of liquid fuel products.

The cost of using Fischer-Tropsch has been cost-prohibitive until now. Today's petroleum prices are making liquid fuels derived from the process more cost-competitive, said Maj. Timothy Schulteis, Air Force propulsion program element monitor.

"The recent rise in cost of fuel has brought us to where many think we are now at the break-even point," he said.

An additional advantage is that the United States can reduce its dependence on foreign petroleum by using domestic feedstock such as coal to create liquid fuel.

"One of the primary things we are looking at is using a coal-based fuel for aviation use," he said. "One of the big advantages of that is we have a large domestic source for coal-based fuel."

The United States has perhaps the largest reserve of coal in the world. That abundance of coal, and the Fischer-Tropsch process, could put the United States on the path to a more secure energy future.

"If there is anything you can do to increase the assured access to a fuel, that is going to be a great benefit," Major Schulteis said. "It is a national security issue to have access to fuel. The other side of that is, with an assured source, you reduce (price) fluctuations so you have stable planning and budgeting."

Since this is an experimental program, the September B-52 test flight will not run entirely on fuel derived through the Fischer-Tropsch process. While two of the aircraft's eight engines will run on a blend of JP-8 and liquid fuel derived from natural gas, the remaining six engines will run on traditional JP-8 jet fuel. The fuel derived from natural gas is virtually identical to that which could be derived from coal. The test flight is just one experiment the propulsion lab will engage in before the Air Force sees a new fuel for its aircraft.

"This is kind of the initial step, (to say) we have proven we can fly it on an aircraft," Major Schulteis said. There are many issues to go through for the certification and qualification effort.

Air Force engines are specially designed to work with the current blend of JP-8 the service purchases. That fuel is held to high standards so it doesn't damage the engines it runs in. Any new fuel that goes in Air Force engines would have to meet similar criteria, Major Schulteis said.

Jet fuels produced via the Fischer-Tropsch process are chemically similar to petroleum-derived fuels. The propulsion directorate is conducting experiments to assure the fuel is fit-for-purpose for use in aircraft and will conduct tests to demonstrate engine performance, high-temperature stability, low-temperature properties and compatibility with aircraft systems.
 
fossten said:
That's been tried. I can't trust anything he says, because he talks out of both sides of his mouth. He talks nice in private and then slams in public soon after. He cuts lots of people to pieces behind their backs, Vitas for example.

You said it yourself, you can't convince someone who's stopped listening. You'll learn this about barry: He's NEVER listened, and he never will. He's here to disrupt things for the most part. He does not contribute in any meaningful way. IMHO he's no different than Phil (97SilverLSC) - hate hate hate.

I sincerely hope you're done lecturing now so we can get back to the topic that barry hijacked.


IMHO you are no different than what we're fighting with the Muslims. Everything has to be your way. You disregard anyone elses opinion and it makes you look the fool. I wish we could have a credibility poll. Then you would find out where you stand. Until then, keep your crybaby whining to yourself.
 
tit for tat.:(

Here...look up above in the sticky section.:shifty:

A credibility poll. Have fun and enjoy.
 
Do you people ever quit acting like children and actually stay on topic for once?

I run biodiesel in my PowerStroke in the summer time. I'm investing 8 grand into a self contained processor in the near future, as making that stuff is pretty involved. Lots of drums for treating the VWO, washing it, drying it, etc. the processor will do it all in one self contained unit. Put 50 gallons of WVO in it, and 48 hours later, you get 50 gallons of Biodiesel.

Even at 8 grand, with today's prices, it will pay for itself in less than 1.5 years. If all goes well, my truck will be 100% dino fuel free by june of next year. If I move to back to phoenix, I will be running B100 year round. Cost to make it? About 28 cents per gallon. And that's just for chemicals like Lye and sulphuric acid. I have access to hundreds of barrels of methanol, so that won't cost me a cent to use. Paying the tax man taxes on said fuel? Even if I have to pay 72 cents per gallon in tax, I'm still ahead.

My point: there are available alternatives right now, not 10 years from now, and not 100 billion dollars later. I know, the majority of vehicles on US roads still run on gasoline, but hell; If there are alternative fuel sources for diesel, why not gasoline? And with the big three coming out with diesel powered cars in the near future, I'm thinking that ratio will slowly change.
 
Frogman said:
I run biodiesel in my PowerStroke in the summer time. I'm investing 8 grand into a self contained processor in the near future, as making that stuff is pretty involved. Lots of drums for treating the VWO, washing it, drying it, etc. the processor will do it all in one self contained unit. Put 50 gallons of WVO in it, and 48 hours later, you get 50 gallons of Biodiesel.
What are you using as the raw material.

I watched those 2 clowns on Mythbusters take a bottle of cooking oil out of the kitchen and ran their diesel car off of it for a couple of miles. Pretty wierd.


Frogman said:
I have access to hundreds of barrels of methanol, so that won't cost me a cent to use. Paying the tax man taxes on said fuel? Even if I have to pay 72 cents per gallon in tax, I'm still ahead.
Too bad the Feds have to get in on that act. $.72/gal tax for home-made brew. I like the idea of $.50/gal Total. I'm dumping $170.00/wk in gas right now.
 
The raw material is WVO (Waste Vegetale oil - aka. used cooking oil) I have a couple of 55 gallon drums at several local chinese food restaurants. The restaurant owners are more than glad to pour the oil in my drums rather than the waste oil collecton bins, as they have to pay a waste product fee to have that stuff removed. So it saves them $$.

Most diesels will do fine on straight filtered WVO, however the 6.0 does not like it much due to it's injectors. I've ran SVO (Straight Vegetable oil - new cooking oil) in mine once, just to see how it would act. It did just fine. I bought a 5 gallon container at sam's club, and jut poured it into the tank. Albeit, I had about 1/2 tank of dino diesel. You should have seen the looks i got out of some people.

Frankly, I think the tax is a bit more, haven't paid much attention to it. My accountant is up to speed on such matters, since he runs WVO in his diesel.
 
Frogman said:
The raw material is WVO (Waste Vegetale oil - aka. used cooking oil) I have a couple of 55 gallon drums at several local chinese food restaurants. The restaurant owners are more than glad to pour the oil in my drums rather than the waste oil collecton bins, as they have to pay a waste product fee to have that stuff removed. So it saves them $$.

Most diesels will do fine on straight filtered WVO, however the 6.0 does not like it much due to it's injectors. I've ran SVO (Straight Vegetable oil - new cooking oil) in mine once, just to see how it would act. It did just fine. I bought a 5 gallon container at sam's club, and jut poured it into the tank. Albeit, I had about 1/2 tank of dino diesel. You should have seen the looks i got out of some people.

Frankly, I think the tax is a bit more, haven't paid much attention to it. My accountant is up to speed on such matters, since he runs WVO in his diesel.

I'm curious. I've never owned a diesel because I store my trucks indoors overnight and the stench of a standard diesel makes me quite ill. Is there a noticable difference in the odor produced using vegetable oil?

My wife is quite sensitive to the typical diesel "rattle". Is that lessened with the lowered BTUs?
 
B100 will not have the typical diesel smell. I've actually made people hungry off my fumes before. The fumes are not quite as delicious as straight WVO, but you can still smell the foodsy smell a bit.

Most of the rattle in the 6 liter Powerstrokes comes from the Injectors. The rattle is lessened a bit, but not because of the lower BTU's. It is lessened because of the higher lubricity factor that biodiesel has as compared to dino diesel. More lubricity = less noise, and longer injector life. I have noticed about a 10% fuel economy loss, but I ask you. Who cares!? :lol: I practically get the fuel for free.

Cetane numbers are a bit higher too, I can't recall off the top of my head though.

I am currently searching for aftermarket injectors for the 6.0, but I fear no one makes them yet. the OEM injectors are REALLY finicky.
 
You seem to be well informed on the subject.

What are the new "green" diesels from International all about? They claim better hydrocarbon levels than a gasoline engine. Since internal combustion engines are just a set of compromises, what is compromised with the new stuff.

Ford is claiming that their '08 diesels will be much quieter. How would they accomplish that? I assume they were talking about the engine, and not the exhaust.

I'm also curious as to why diesel fuel is more expensive than gasoline. Doesn't it have lower BTUs, making it less valuable as a fuel?
 
http://www.greendieseltechnology.com/whatis.asp

I was entertaining the idea of buying a new car this season. But, after some thought, I decided that I would refrain and instead invest the time an energy into making the Lincoln operate as efficiently as possible. The notion of 26-28mph on the highway sounds real good when compared to $20k for a Civic Si that gets only about 30mpg on the highway.

I'm really interested in the new diesel technology that is being introduced in America now. It's cleaner, smells better, and performs better. Plus, my brother-in-law owns an outback, so I'm sure I can get plenty of dirty vegetable oil is I decided to go that route.
 
barry2952 said:
You seem to be well informed on the subject.

What are the new "green" diesels from International all about? They claim better hydrocarbon levels than a gasoline engine. Since internal combustion engines are just a set of compromises, what is compromised with the new stuff.

It has to do with the new ULSD (Ultra Low sulphur diesel) that should be out by 01/07. Actually, a lot of pumps are selling it now. Next time you get your car filled up look at the diesel pump, and see the little ULSD sticker.
It also has something to do with particulate filters. I really haven't kept up on the Green diesel technology. Actually, IIRC, this was started by Former President Clinton. And no, I don't want to read about any bush clinton bashing... PLEASE! It helps the environment, and your grandkids will have somewhat of a clean air to breathe... providing we don't blow ourselves up in the meantime. And no, I'm not a tree hugger. Far from it. I could really care less about my grandkids, since I don't plan on having any.

barry2952 said:
Ford is claiming that their '08 diesels will be much quieter. How would they accomplish that? I assume they were talking about the engine, and not the exhaust.

It has to do with the new 6.4L Twin Turbocharged Powerstroke. I figure Ford has had enough of being laughed at with the 6.0.
Mainly, it's a new injector system based on piezo technology. Remember, the injectors are the loudest thing on them diesels.

barry2952 said:
I'm also curious as to why diesel fuel is more expensive than gasoline. Doesn't it have lower BTUs, making it less valuable as a fuel?

Good question. Again, it has to do with the new ULSD diesel coming/already out. It costs more money to refine this new ULS diesel, so ofcourse, the oil companies, in their tried and true method, are passing the costs plus some onto the consumers.
 
I went through the whole diesel presentation package. It appears that they have not really made the diesel any cleaner, they've just trapped the crap before it gets into the air. They really don't mention what method is used to dispose of the filters. I'm quite sure they're quite toxic.

I was interested in the MDX. That's a bad-a$$ tow vehicle.
 
Sounds like it would work well for a school system or delivery trucks that stayed within range of their special fuel supply. How long before you could actually drive cross-country and not worry about using improper fuel?

I like your Chinese food solution. Ummmmmm, Chinese food!
 
At the latest, it should be 01/01/07. The ULSD mandate called for the ULSD switch to happen on 07/06, but that didn't go as planned. Too many oil companies/refineries bitched and moaned, so the EPA extended the deadline to next year.

It's not like they knew about it for long. It's been only about 8 years. :rolleyes:
 

Members online

No members online now.
Back
Top