Which alternative fuel do you think shows the most promise?

Question

Ethanol, despite getting all the press, has a lot of problems. One, it's expensive (currently around 3.00/gal to produce). Secondly, there couldn't possibly be enough of it to make a large dent in the oil need (If all corn grown in the US was made into ethanol, it would only replace 12% of the crude we now use for gasoline.) And third, it has a lower return of energy than gas which means cars would have to burn even more of it (lower mpg).

What are your thoughts on alternative fuels?

How do you make solar mobile? Batteries? Lead, cadmium, lithium....eesh! That could be worse.

Answer 1

it should be noted that fuel and energy source are 2 different things that are often confused. Solar is an energy source that they make heat or electricity from, hydrogen is fuel made from many sources. Oil is an energy source that they make different fuels from.

Your question is about the fuel.

Hydrogen is probably going to be the fuel of the future because it is limitless. It already works in regular engines. The question you should ask or probably are trying to ask is how are they going to make hydrogen. I'm guessing wind, and waves will play a big part. If solar gets cheaper, and it looks like it is going to, it could play a part. I suspect we will all have solar roofs in the future after it becomes dirt cheap to make them.

The fact is we aren't running out of peto any time soon. We have hundreds of years worth left in the US and Canada.

Answer 2

Other than gasoline?

I think gasoline rocks. With rearranging the hydrocarbons of coal, like the Germans is ww2, we can make a pure diesel without a phosphorous burn-off, at about 42$ a gallon. If you just use our coal to make gasoline, the USA has enough coal to last us 140 years, assuming demand doubles every thirty years, and that the technology does not improve.

Lighter, carbon composite cars would triple your gas mileage as well. Nothing beats gasoline in delivering power for its weight to an engine.

However, if we must go to alternates, for some stupid reason in cars, fuel cell technology shows the most promise. weight ratio to power is there, and the technology is 120 years old, so we concentrate on perfection instead of learning and invention of this technology.

For the power grid, changes to LED lighting for homes would drop power consumption 80% off a home energy use, to say nothing of the business benefits. Nuke plants are still the best choice, so long as we end that stupid ban of Carter's and start re-processing spent reactor fuel.

Answer 3

On just being able to replace gasoline chemically, I would say butanol would be the ideal.

Cons:
It has 5 to 10 thousand less btus per gallon than gasoline. Only about 5% loss in mpg compared to gasoline.

Pros:
Far more energy than ethanol.
Less corrosive than gasoline, much less than ethanol.
less evaporative than gasoline and far less than ethanol.
Can be shipped or stored in any structure that gasoline can.
Will run any gasoline engine that is currently working.
The process at butanol.com apparently is slightly less expensive than ethanol production.

Unfortunately the two methods of making butanol are in the conversion phase between lab and production. It will be some years yet before we see it on the market.

Answer 4

Despite all the scare tactics used to prevent its use, nuclear energy is probably the best "alternative" energy source available right now.

If you look at the statistics, there have been very few accidents invloving nuclear energy plants ... and just Chernobyl that caused deaths or far-reaching ramifications. The safety measures employed (or *not* employed) likely have something to do with that.

Nuclear energy will allow us to preserve the world's supply of fossil fuels long enough to discover or develop alternative sources for vehicles and other non-"wired" energy needs.

That said, it is nearly impossible to build nuclear plants in the U.S. due to unbelieveable environmental regulations (many of which are very over-reactive) and the good old NIMBY (Not In My Backyard) mentality we have here.

Nuclear is still the best way to go in the short haul.

Answer 5

Depends on what you want to use it for.

To generate electricity Nuclear, hydroelectric, Solar
For cars-- electric/hybrids, Biodiesel - recycle all that McDonalds oil.. 8-), Ethanol maybe in a few years when we figure out how to make it more economical.

Conservation (has the best return). Need more efficient vehicles, more mass transit (electric), more transport via Rail vs. Truck

Ultimately, it will need to be a combination of several things.

Answer 6

solar...gonna be there until the end...and drives all the other natural energy sources..wind, tidal....
in fact..if you look at it right..growing corn is dependant on the sun...why not just go to the source and make the infrastructure..???

Answer 7

http://www.ethanol.org/documents/EthanolFAQs_000.pdf

read the Q&A about E85 and then make an educated decision

Answer 8

Cow poop

Answer 9

you could try hybrid cars....?

Answer 10

HYDROGEN