Why can't we artifically create gasoline?

Question

Maybe I'm crazy, but it seems to me that if the Mobil process allows the generation of gasoline from methanol (wood alcohol, the bad stuff you don't want in moonshine), and the Karrick process allows the conversion of coal to gasoline, and charcoal is created by heating plant fibers and animal bones (readily available in the trash), and charcoal is impure carbon that is roughly as good as bitumenious coal, then why can't we harvest the power of our trash to fight Middle Eastern oil? The landfills could make the charcoal that is then converted to gasoline through the Karrick process. If not, methane is abundant and can be used to synthesize methanol. I found this in Wikipedia and am curious why we pay three dollars in gasoline with one idiot advocating an additional DOLLAR tax on gas.

I know it may be "costly" but how much can we gain with Middle Eastern petroleum dependence. And I can't believe some people elected this fool that is seriously advocating an extra DOLLAR in gas tax.

Answer 1

Harvesting the hydrocarbon chains from readily available domestic sources, for reformation into the chains needed to replace petroleum based fuels is possible and seams to be a no brain-er. But this reformation consumes large amounts of energy($). if you go to "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density" you will see that all the sources you asked about are lower in power density than gasoline or diesel fuels. Crude oil is a mixture of different chains and during the refining process these chains are separated and used to make all types of fuels, gas, oils and plastics, where its fairly simple process to separate and crack heavier chains into lighter chains the reverse is not. We as the world do not yet have a competitive process and infrastructure to reform these lighter chains. it will take time and more importantly leadership to affect the changes you asked about.

Answer 2

A bunch of people will say its because of the death grip the oil industry has on the American economy (and most of the rest of the world too) and they will be partly right. But its more complicated than that. New technologies, such as energy from trash, are not that new. The ideas have been around for many years. Out of all of them, the one that could help the most is conservation. If we all just used less power, recycled our raw materials, compost what trash we can, used compact flourescent light bulbs, rode the bus or walked or biked more often, we could reduce our dependence on foreign oil by as much as 25%, but who among us is willing to do all that just so some other jerk can string a zillion Christmas lights all over his house, drive a huge SUV that gets 4 mpg, etc. etc. So many people want to live the high life that conservation will never be wisde-spread... more's the pity. People are stupid and will be left to their cruel fate eventually, its only a matter of time. I'm glad I'll be long gone when it happens.

Answer 3

The answer is the same as answer to the question why we still use oil and coal instead of sun's rays to heat our homes: thats the cheapest way of obtaining energy. All the methods you mentioned are more costly that refining gasoline from oil.

Answer 4

do not be stupid. Celtic human beings have older origins than all of us calling themselves English. Rich3 - nicely that wasn't incredibly nicely easily worth the size of time it took to study.... we are actually not 'each and each of a similar human beings.' not all individuals are concerning to Britons, i'm under no circumstances. My DNA is many times Nordic and the section my kinfolk come from backs that up thoroughly. announcing we are each and each of a similar is tantamount to denying there has been succesive influxes of individuals into the British Isles. Even the very call England pertains to those that migrated westwards centuries in the past.

Answer 5

If we actually did that the big foreign oil companies and people who want you and me dead would not be able to continue to have a strangle hold on our economy and government and we wouldn't want that all that money the lobbyists are paying to US senators and representatives would be waisted and we wouldn't want that.

Answer 6

We can, but it COSTS more than refining it from crude oil, so it doesn't make sense to do so....yet!