Hi Jerry and all Sorry, this is a bit belated.
> Hi Keith and All, >--- Keith Addison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Thomas > > > > >Hey, just a thought, but since it appears that the > > most readily > > >produceable biofuel is methane from digesters, > > maybe this bears more > > >discussion. > > > > You won't say that when your digester leaks some air > > and explodes, > > and the, um, feedstock hits the fan! > While possible it's not probable. With the >exception of the first 3 days until the digester gets >going the inside will be under pressure a little and >the main gases present would be methane and CO2 and >under 1% O2 . The danger in the first 3 days can be >eliminated by putting Co2 in the airspace. It should >be outside and 1 way gas valves used in the supply >line. They do explode. Not if you do it right, but the world does have its fair share of dumbos, and let's face it, we all do dumb things at times. > >I'm not so sure > > it's the most > > readily produceable biofuel, I think it's quite > > troublesome. IMHO > > both biodiesel and ethanol would be simpler, if it > > came to a choice > > and all things were equal (which they seldom are). > Methane is the most readily producible biofuel. >Digesters are a fair way but for volume on demand is >Destructive Distillation of wood without O2 is much >better. This puts out about 70% methane, 20% H2, >methyl gas, ect that can directly run gas engines and >burners. An engine made to run on this / natural gas >has eff equal to a diesel and little pollution. An eff >engine would have a 13 to 1 compression ratio and a >long stroke. This very interesting, but just let me say here that I think what is the most readily producible biofuel depends on your circumstances. You can rig up an improvised biodiesel setup in the average kitchen, and then take it all away again when you're finished and cook the dinner. I think Aleks makes biodiesel in his bathroom. A digester isn't an option on those circumsances, nor in the average urban/suburban household with maybe a garage and a yard, and I doubt DD is either. > While this is great for home use for car use you >have to store it to 3000psi. This wastes about 25% of >the energy and the containers are heavy though they >have recently made some light ones by using carbon >fibers. In an accident 3000 psi could be very >dangerous. > The easist liquid biofuel is methanol or wood >alcohol. This is made by taking the output of the DD >process and while keeping it at 700/1000 > deg F and run it thru a copper tube with copper chor >- girl for catalyst inside it. The output is mostly >methanol alcohol. While this was done to make fuel a >lot 1890 to 1938 this is the only technic to make it >I've found so far. I found it in Home Power #21 page >55 to 63. I joined this list hoping to learn more >about this. Nobody seems to have responded to you on this, unless off-list. Instead of learning, would you mind teaching? If you tell us more about it, maybe some listers will take you up on it and you'll have a cooperative effort. Can you describe the two processes (methane and methanol) in more detail? Any chance of scanning the Home Power article (it's not online)? I did find this, I don't know if you know of it: BIOMASS TO METHANOL SPECIALISTS' WORKSHOP: Ed. T. Reed and M. Graboski, 1982. Expert articles on conversion of biomass to methanol. ISBN 1-890607-10-X 331pp $30 http://www.woodgas.com/Books.htm BEF Press The Biomass Energy Foundation Press > Bad points are fairly toxic though biodegrades fast >so good handling is nessasary and has only 40% of the >energy of gasoline > While wood wastes will be free for many years here >in Fla after biodiesel ,a great fuel, becomes popular >it's main feedstock, used fryer oil will become more >costly. > Also there are wastes left over to get rid of. True. However, industry is already making millions upon millions of gallons of bd from waste oil, yet the collection rate still isn't very good in most places, and the cost has been falling in many places (because of BSE, food scares etc in Europe's case for instance). Re the wastes, I think we're making progress on minimising them and turning the rest to good account, several new techniques are about to see the light. But it needs more. A good way of refining glycerine would be most useful, for instance. Biodiesel may prove to be a transitional fuel. Terry de Winne says: "The most practical and sustainable alternative transport fuel is straight vegetable oil... Biodiesel is the second most practical alternative fuel." I'm inclined to agree. Rudolf Diesel had it right in the first place. Where straight oil or fat can't replace biodiesel is in blends with dinodiesel and as a lubricant additive for ULS diesel. > Ethanol is a great fuel but not easy at all to >make. Due to the large amount of leftover mash unless >you have cows or another hi-value use for them it's >too ineff. Time start to finish is weeks and needs a >lot of volume. Has 60% of gasolines energy. But it makes up for it, there's little or no loss of power or fuel economy on 100% ethanol. Always with leftovers and by-products it requires an integrated approach, which usually works best at a local level. Fuel ethanol is good local or on-farm industry. rational energy use and reduction of fossil fuel use will require a more local approach such as this. Re the time it takes, once you've got it running you can keep it running, if you want. Alternatively, it's not difficult to arrange it so that with a bit of foresight you have ethanol when you need it. The new fuel alcohol still that Steve and I have been talking of is a continuous still that promises to produce high-proof ethanol without any trouble, very simple and effective. It'll just keep going until the feedstock runs out, if that's what you want. More on this soon I hope. > Ideal would be a method to turn DD gas or methanol >to ethanol. This would be the best of both worlds and >should be possible. I hope to learn how to do this. > > >I'm right with you that biogas needs more discussion > > on the list, > > there's been very little, and it certainly > > qualifies? > I agree!! > > We don't talk much about woodgas either (producer > > gas). Nor about > > using straight vegetable oil as diesel fuel. > While biogas from digesters , methane and CO2, is >a clean fuel wood gas ( producer gas)is anything but >clean. It's mostly N2, CO2 , CO, H2 and many nasty >things like benzines, creosote, ect. Only 1/3 of the >gas burns so you lose 50% of your engine power and >gunks it up. DD gas is much better and almost as easy >to make and much easier to clean. Gasifiers aren't all dirty. We're not only talking about mobile fuels here though. You agree that biogas hardly qualifies as a mobile fuel, though it's possible, as with woodgas. Both certainly have a place in local energy generation (see above), where you need the full range of options to choose from rather than best-choice, either or decisions. Also, I think both biogas and woodgas have a role in supplying the energy to produce mobile fuels such as biodiesel and ethanol. And DD too maybe? > I like straight veg oil as much less waste. From >what I hear starting on and finishing on biodiesel or >reg diesel relieves most problems. Yes, see above. It needs work though, for general acceptance. Right now, your average spoiled SUV owner probably won't accept even that little inconvenience. Biodiesel bridges that gap very well in the interim. > > >Exactly how difficult/expensive is it to compress > > methane > > >to the point where it could be used with standard > > propane fuel systems? > > >Isn't propane/butane a mixture of biogasses? > Very expensive equipment and 25% of the energy to >compress it. You use it like nat gas. One nice thing >is CO2 goes liquid first and can be drawn off. I've >heard that cooling is a more energy eff way to to >densify these gases rather than compression. > I will use mine at low pressure with a little >storage for starting the engine and the exhaust to >heat the DD process to make more gas to run it on. I'd really like to know more about what you have in mind. > Charging my house and ev batteries is my goal. >Also a liquid fuel for the ev's take along genorator >for unlimited range. More please! :-) > Propane / butane are longer mol chains of HC so >compress easier. Slightly more pollution but much >better than gasoline. Converting biomass to these >would be good but ethanol is better. > At least one company is changing methane to a >liquid but stringing methane atoms into a chain for >use as a liquid diesel fuel. I'd like to learn how >this is done. Anyone? <snip> > Converting wastes is where the cheap energy is. >What we need are good processes to do it. We have good processes now, and they're improving all the time. The progress in techniques available for DIY biodiesel over the last year or so has been spectacular. The same thing will soon happen with ethanol. > I believe that in 3 years energy costs will 2 to 3 >times what they are now so I'm getting ready now. I think you're right. I think a lot of us think that. All best Keith Addison Journey to Forever Handmade Projects Tokyo http://journeytoforever.org/ Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
