Beer as a renewable fuel: Vehicles could run on it 2022, without having to be altered

[rangerrebew]

Beer as a renewable fuel: Vehicles could run on it 2022, without having to be altered

Sunday, December 31, 2017 by: Janine Acero   


(Natural News) Beer could soon replace diesel and gasoline as a promising source of sustainable motor fuel by 2022, thanks to chemists who developed a method for converting the alcoholic beverage into a new type of fuel without the need to alter the vehicles.

Scientists from the University of Bristol have managed to create fuel from beer by converting its active ingredient, ethanol, into butanol through petrochemical processes similar to how gasoline is refined.

https://www.naturalnews.com/2017-12-31-beer-as-a-renewable-fuel-vehicles-could-run-on-it-2022-without-having-to-be-altered.html

[IsailedawayfromFR]

I thought it was a bad idea to have cars run on food, but this is far more terrible/

[WingNot]

I thought it was a bad idea to have cars run on food, but this is far more terrible/

This is just a ploy to rack up More DUI offenses.

[andy58-in-nh]

"Honest, officer: I was just refueling..."

[Free Vulcan]

Wow. The thing about butanol is not only does it have a higher BTU, but it doesn't mix with water like ethanol does.

Which means there is no special blending process needed. It can be transported through pipelines. It doesn't harm engines, and it burns better.

If it can be done economically, to scale, it would change the alternative fuel scene completely.

[thackney]

Wow. The thing about butanol is not only does it have a higher BTU, but it doesn't mix with water like ethanol does.

Which means there is no special blending process needed. It can be transported through pipelines. It doesn't harm engines, and it burns better.

If it can be done economically, to scale, it would change the alternative fuel scene completely.

Butanol is also more expensive and quite toxic.  Ethanol is moved through pipelines, but it has more expense than moving gasoline.

https://www.afdc.energy.gov/pdfs/km_cfpl_ethanol_pipeline_fact_sheet.pdf

[truth_seeker]

I presume there will be onboard gauges, to keep levels in both the fuel tank side, and the drinks cooler side balanced ??

[dfwgator]

"That's heavy!"

[Free Vulcan]

Butanol is also more expensive and quite toxic.  Ethanol is moved through pipelines, but it has more expense than moving gasoline.

https://www.afdc.energy.gov/pdfs/km_cfpl_ethanol_pipeline_fact_sheet.pdf

They must of done some retrofitting to keep water out of the pipe, or are taking it off at the end, which would definitely add expense. It doesn't like looks it's been done large scale so far, most still seems to be transported by truck or rail.

Butanol now costs more when done by fermentation like ethanol. If they could chemically convert it to scale, I'm curious as to what they cost may be.

[thackney]

They must of done some retrofitting to keep water out of the pipe, or are taking it off at the end, which would definitely add expense. It doesn't like looks it's been done large scale so far, most still seems to be transported by truck or rail.

They have to spend more to keep water out of the pipeline.  In a normal refined products pipeline, moving gasoline & diesel, water will drop out and accumulate at low points.  Dedicated ethanol pipelines don't have that problem.

Butanol now costs more when done by fermentation like ethanol. If they could chemically convert it to scale, I'm curious as to what they cost may be.

The article is starting with ethanol.  Unless it is magic, it is going to cost more than ethanol.

[Elderberry]

Butanol vs. ethanol as a fuel component
April 5, 2017  By Bill Brandon
Is your business model based on government regulations or fuel science?

In light of the recent article on Butamax, I feel a response from the perspective of automakers is appropriate.  One of the earlier articles referenced asked “ where’s butanol, or other substitutes for gasoline besides ethanol?” and went on to ask why the auto industry is not co-operating by switching to E85 or E100.  The simple answer is that E85 or E100 are not very good fuels for everyday use.

So what makes a ‘good fuel’?  I will limit my comments to spark ignition engines, because high compression diesel type engines are not compatible with aluminum blocks and heads that are necessary for vehicle ‘light weighting’ (a diesel type aluminum engine can be blown apart).  Unless you are an airline, energy density has little or nothing to do with what a good fuel is except as it impacts on cost.  Auto manufacturers have been asking for a 100 RON fuel for several years now to advance the efficiency potential of downsized, direct injection engines with turbochargers.  This is the way auto manufacturers would like to go rather that the expensive, though theoretically possible, mechanical improvements that EPA is advancing.

So how do we get a 100 RON fuel?  First, we must recognize that the ‘blending octane number’ is generally lower than the RON number; Butanol is about 93 and ethanol is about 117.  Of the potential ethanol components, only methanol and ethanol have blending octane numbers above 100.  Aromatics have high blending octane numbers, but have significant health risks and many in the health arena advocate for total elimination of aromatics from our fuel.

More: http://www.biofuelsdigest.com/bdigest/2017/04/05/butanol-vs-ethanol-as-a-fuel-component/

[thackney]

Butanol vs. ethanol as a fuel component

A comparison of fuels that does not include cost, ought to tell you something rather important.