Ethanol Powered Aircraft

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
Aside from the obvious stupidity of using more energy to make ethanol
than it actually produces, this is a fuel that we're apparently going
to be stuck with -- forever? -- for political reasons. We're gonna
have to live with it, somehow.

How much energy is used to make the Duracell AA battery that you use in your
GPS?

If they're burning oil to make this fuel, it makes no sense. If they're
something not easily refined into gasoline (coal, solar, nuke, methane), it
does.

"Steve Foley" wrote in message
news:6_lEg.237$ha1.93@trndny03...
"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
Aside from the obvious stupidity of using more energy to make ethanol
than it actually produces, this is a fuel that we're apparently going
to be stuck with -- forever? -- for political reasons. We're gonna
have to live with it, somehow.

How much energy is used to make the Duracell AA battery that you use in
your
GPS?

If they're burning oil to make this fuel, it makes no sense. If they're
something not easily refined into gasoline (coal, solar, nuke, methane),
it
does.



As has been listed Natural Gas is the main source of energy in the process.

And of course there is a lot of loss making a Duracell but that is for
practicality. I really don't want a fire powered laptop in my lap. That's
why I got rid if the Sony battery in my Dell.

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net wrote in message
...

"Steve Foley" wrote in message
news:6_lEg.237$ha1.93@trndny03...
"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
Aside from the obvious stupidity of using more energy to make ethanol
than it actually produces, this is a fuel that we're apparently going
to be stuck with -- forever? -- for political reasons. We're gonna
have to live with it, somehow.

How much energy is used to make the Duracell AA battery that you use in
your
GPS?

If they're burning oil to make this fuel, it makes no sense. If they're
something not easily refined into gasoline (coal, solar, nuke, methane),
it
does.



As has been listed Natural Gas is the main source of energy in the
process.

And of course there is a lot of loss making a Duracell but that is for
practicality.

My point exactly.

I really don't want a fire powered laptop in my lap. That's
why I got rid if the Sony battery in my Dell.



I really don't want a Natural Gas powered lawn mower.

On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 15:59:57 GMT, "Steve Foley"
wrote:
I really don't want a Natural Gas powered lawn mower.

Probably wouldn't be any more inconvenient than one of the electrical
ones that require a cord (i.e. not the rechargable battery types)...
I've used air hoses like you use for shop air tools for routing
natural gas to grills for temporary use... CNG (compressed natural
gas) would work, but is not as convenient as LPG...

LPG (aka propane) would probably work since you see LPG powered fork
lifts and such...

Hmmm... A quick search via google shows that it's already been done...

http://www.landscapemanagement.net/l....jsp?id=317568
http://chenchang.en.alibaba.com/prod...awn_Mower.html

I started a couple of hours ago researching the production of ethanol,
use of land, fetilizers, an thos dam tracters.. I juss fin the sbjek
too be too dam comp, comp, cmmp, uhhh hard to ger reel faks... scuze me
I'm gonna resea, resear, resur, unhhh, opena nother pint...

d ennnn i

In article . com,
"Denny" wrote:

I started a couple of hours ago researching the production of ethanol,
use of land, fetilizers, an thos dam tracters.. I juss fin the sbjek
too be too dam comp, comp, cmmp, uhhh hard to ger reel faks... scuze me
I'm gonna resea, resear, resur, unhhh, opena nother pint...

d ennnn i

Denny, you're not suppose to drink the ethanol when you are doing the
ethanol research!

On 15 Aug 2006 11:04:53 -0700, "Denny" wrote:


I started a couple of hours ago researching the production of ethanol,
use of land, fetilizers, an thos dam tracters.. I juss fin the sbjek
too be too dam comp, comp, cmmp, uhhh hard to ger reel faks... scuze me
I'm gonna resea, resear, resur, unhhh, opena nother pint...

Keep goin' and you'll have as much time in there as I do:-))
Pick a stance and you can find supposedly creditable studies that
support it.

Skewed results, commissioned studies with limitations that will
strongly bias the output which is particularly true of corn produced
ethanol and these are state supported studies in some instances. It
just depends on the state rep(s) and/or senator(s) who set the
criteria. The big one is making sure they included *ALL* the costs of
growing the crop to come up with a real energy balance. (energy to
grow the crop and produce the alcohol compared to the energy in the
alcohol as well as any saleable byproducts. Sometimes the byproducts
can make a product profitable) "NEAR AS I CAN TELL" the general
consensus (if there is one) it there is now a small positive energy
gain when producing alcohol from corn. I think this in part (possibly
mainly in part) comes from the ability to use/sell the byproducts of
the process as feed stock.

BTW the most skewed result I saw was from a large state university
that did a state sponsored study.

Then there is E-85, the flex fuel vehicles, and gasohol (E10).
We would do well to remember the car manufactures receive mileage
credit for producing flex fuel vehicles that allow them to keep on
producing gas guzzlers. Then there is the question: How many of
those flex fuel vehicles actually use E85? How many of them use E85
when regular gas is available? How much E-85 is actually used?

From what I've been able to find "IT APPEARS" that most, (the vast
majority) of "flex fuel" vehicles are not running on E-85. If this is
true, what advantage is there to having the "flex fuel" vehicle other
than it lets "Detroit" to continue to make gas guzzlers while claiming
mileage credits for producing those unused features. BTW check to see
what additional elements are required for a vehicle to be called "flex
fuel".

Overall efficiency wise, "IT APPEARS" that the two best alternatives
at present are hybrid cars and E-10.

Applying this to airplanes, although they may be true, I can not come
up with the figures "they claim" for performance and fuel consumption.
Nor can I come any where near the claimed cost for converting an
aircraft to *SAFELY* run on E85. (I wish they stop calling them
Methanol run and admit to E85).

Even if I could convert the engine in the Deb to burn E-85 by changing
a few gaskets and O-rings (they claim a few hundred dollars) what
about the gas tanks. How would the bladder tanks handle E85? For
planes with Aluminum tanks, is there enough protection afforded by the
15% gas to make the tanks last.

Unless I screwed up my math (which I have done on occasion) E-85 has
about 60% of the energy contained in AvGas. That means to come up
with the same power it takes 40% more fuel which means a 40% reduction
in range for the same fuel and power. OTOH as Alcohol weighs less we
could probably fit another 20 to 30% fuel in the plane for the same
weight (if we have a place to put it).

I purchased the plane I have to go places at about 190 MPH, not to run
at economy cruise to get what I see as a useful range.

OTOH, from what I've read it'd cost me at least several thousand
dollars to convert even if I didn't have the bladder tanks. New
bladder tanks can be built that should handle E-85 nicely. I
seriously doubt the old natural rubber and canvas tanks would do well
even with Gasohol (E10). Taking onto account the Deb's old bladder
tanks and fiberglass tip tanks and I figure it'd cost 12 to $15,000 to
convert. OTOH with the tip tanks full I'd be able to get about the
range I do now on the mains and Aux tanks without the tip tanks. To
top it off the price will be as much or more than I'm paying now.




d ennnn i
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

We use propane in the balloon. So that's an example of "propane in an
aircraft". The balloon I used to fly has three 15-gal tanks. So each
tank has 75 lb of LP in it. The stainless tanks are quite heavy,
requiring 4 of us to set it up. It's easier when we have to put it
away. Also, in the dead cold winter, a heater must be attached to it
over night before the flight so the LP will vaporize. Just like
preheating an airplane.

Grumman-581 wrote:
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 15:59:57 GMT, "Steve Foley"
wrote:
I really don't want a Natural Gas powered lawn mower.

Probably wouldn't be any more inconvenient than one of the electrical
ones that require a cord (i.e. not the rechargable battery types)...
I've used air hoses like you use for shop air tools for routing
natural gas to grills for temporary use... CNG (compressed natural
gas) would work, but is not as convenient as LPG...

LPG (aka propane) would probably work since you see LPG powered fork
lifts and such...

Hmmm... A quick search via google shows that it's already been done...

http://www.landscapemanagement.net/l....jsp?id=317568
http://chenchang.en.alibaba.com/prod...awn_Mower.html

Also, in the dead cold winter, a heater must be attached to it
over night before the flight so the LP will vaporize. Just like
preheating an airplane.

You fly a balloon -- in WINTER?

BRRRRRRR!
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On 15 Aug 2006 15:15:31 -0700, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:
You fly a balloon -- in WINTER?

BRRRRRRR!

Well, they do carry a really big heater with 'em...