New GA fuel?

On May 9, 2:26*am, "Al G" wrote:
"Mike Noel" wrote in message

news


On AvWeb:
New GA Fuel Promises Better Range, Lower Cost

"Not only can our fuel seamlessly replace the aviation industry's standard
petroleum fuel [100LL], it can outperform it," says John Rusek, a
professor at Purdue University and co-founder of Swift Enterprises. The
company recently unveiled a new general aviation fuel that it says will be
less expensive, more fuel-efficient and environmentally friendlier than
any on the market. Unlike other alternative fuels, Rusek said, SwiftFuel
is made of synthetic hydrocarbons that are derived from biomass, and it
can provide an effective range greater than 100LL, while costing about
half as much to produce. "Our fuel should not be confused with
first-generation biofuels like E-85 [85 percent ethanol], which don't
compete well right now with petroleum," Rusek said. Patented technology
can produce the 1.8 million gallons per day of fuel used by GA in the U.S.
by using just 5 percent of the existing biofuel plant infrastructure, the
company said.

The synthetic fuel is 15 to 20 percent more fuel-efficient, has no sulfur
emissions, requires no stabilizers, has a 30-degree lower freezing point
than 100LL, introduces no new carbon emissions, and is lead-free, Rusek
said. In addition, he said, the components of the fuel can be formulated
into a replacement for jet/turbine fuels. The company now is working with
the FAA to evaluate the fuel.

--
Best Regards,
Mike

http://photoshow.comcast.net/mikenoel

* * I saw this. It sounds almost too good to be true. I am curious about the
process used. Biomass? What kind of biomass? It actually makes sense for a
startup company to shoot for a market that already has a high price, and is
about to lose it's only source.

There are 5 components all from biomass. Here is a link to the
patent.

http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wo.jsp?...2008013922&DIS...

On Sat, 10 May 2008 17:17:23 -0700 (PDT), terry
wrote:

On May 9, 2:26*am, "Al G" wrote:
"Mike Noel" wrote in message

news


On AvWeb:
New GA Fuel Promises Better Range, Lower Cost

"Not only can our fuel seamlessly replace the aviation industry's standard
petroleum fuel [100LL], it can outperform it," says John Rusek, a
professor at Purdue University and co-founder of Swift Enterprises. The
company recently unveiled a new general aviation fuel that it says will be
less expensive, more fuel-efficient and environmentally friendlier than
any on the market. Unlike other alternative fuels, Rusek said, SwiftFuel
is made of synthetic hydrocarbons that are derived from biomass, and it
can provide an effective range greater than 100LL, while costing about
half as much to produce. "Our fuel should not be confused with
first-generation biofuels like E-85 [85 percent ethanol], which don't
compete well right now with petroleum," Rusek said. Patented technology
can produce the 1.8 million gallons per day of fuel used by GA in the U.S.
by using just 5 percent of the existing biofuel plant infrastructure, the
company said.

The synthetic fuel is 15 to 20 percent more fuel-efficient, has no sulfur
emissions, requires no stabilizers, has a 30-degree lower freezing point
than 100LL, introduces no new carbon emissions, and is lead-free, Rusek
said. In addition, he said, the components of the fuel can be formulated
into a replacement for jet/turbine fuels. The company now is working with
the FAA to evaluate the fuel.

--
Best Regards,
Mike

http://photoshow.comcast.net/mikenoel

* * I saw this. It sounds almost too good to be true. I am curious about the
process used. Biomass? What kind of biomass? It actually makes sense for a
startup company to shoot for a market that already has a high price, and is
about to lose it's only source.

There are 5 components all from biomass. Here is a link to the
patent.

http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wo.jsp?...2008013922&DIS...


It appears to be a patent of a formulation of conventional renewable
components so I'm surprised they were issued a patent.

It's not what I'd call a "synthetic fuel", but rather a formulation of
organic components (unless I missed something) "To Me" synthetic
indicates non organic compounds used in the fuel. This I might call
unconventional, but not synthetic.

As to the energy component, that depends on the molecular structure of
the compounds. Just as diesel fuel has a much higher energy content
than gasoline I see no reason whey with the formulation of components
listed they couldn't get more (or less) energy per unit volume/Gallon.
OTOH whether that extra energy would actually be useful in a standard
aircraft engine is something else.


Roger (K8RI) ARRL Life Member
N833R (World's oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com