Subscription Center
From liquid coal to biofuels, military and commercial aviators are searching for domestically sourced, cost-effective and clean alternatives to petroleum-derived jet fuel
January 14, 2008 | 7
YES! Send me a free issue of Scientific American with no obligation to continue the subscription. If I like it, I will be billed for the one-year subscription.
Pollution, Poverty and People of Color: Living with Industry
How Can Los Angeles Adapt to Coming Climate Change?
Can Nuclear Power Compete?
Where Do the Presidential Candidates Stand on Environment and Energy?
World Changing Ideas 2010
World Changing Ideas: 20 Ways to Build a Cleaner, Healthier, Smarter World
Does Congress Get a Passing Grade on Science?
Climate Benefits of Natural Gas May Be Overstated
YES! Send me a free issue of Scientific American with no obligation to continue the subscription. If I like it, I will be billed for the one-year subscription.
7 Comments
Add CommentPerhaps a bit friendlier, but certainly not good for the climate. (1) The fuel is still about 1/2 fossil. (2) Contrails are bad.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisVery true Robert, as I note in the story. The key will be developing some kind of closed loop biorefinery system. But let's face it. The Air Force's goal is focused first and foremost on domestic sourcing and only secondarily on environmental benefit.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnd the airlines are just looking for cheap.
If contrails are an issue, and I think they are. Perhaps we should also be concerned about passenger mile per lb of H2O in the jet's exhaust. Perhaps this synthetic fuel is better in that regard. If it is not then perhaps the synthetic fuel should be used at ground level and continue to use conventional fuel in the jets.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFly with hydrogen from Aluminum. The aluminum is regenerated by electricity:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://www.instructables.com/id/SODA-CAN-HYDROGEN-GENERATOR/
Bring back dirigibles filled with helium. The Hindenberg was luxury liner after all. They can be designed more aerodynamically aand given enough motor power to go pretty fast and much less energy use. And less noise. And less room for runways, etc.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTank water in the aircraft. Water does not burn. Water is the new fuel for the airlineindustry. Lead water through pipes to the engines. At the the jet engine before injection into jetstreamchamber where the air is compressed and hot, split before injection the water into hydrogen and oxygen. The inject the oxygen and water mix into hot compressed chamber of a jet engine. There it ignites and expand a lot like jet fuel. Water is a unlimited resource. It is cheap to exept in deserts by why not plan airports appropiate distance from waterresources. This way we could power any cars, busses, trains, ships, boats, bikes, aeroplanes.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThere is another solution too. That you ignite mixture of the oxygen and hydroxen without compressed air and let the expanded gas(water) thrust a jetturbine, use ax to transmit force.
Third solution spilt water in engine let oxygen out, let hydrogen react with hot and compressed air in jetengine.
The thing is to find a way to split water suffiently fast enought.
The spaces ferries of NASA has engine-thrust from hydrogen.
"[Brazil] has weaned itself from foreign oil by embracing ethanol domestically produced from sugarcane."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSugar cane ethanol is a fraction of Brazil's oil independence (~12% of Brazil's energy needs), much more of the credit goes to Petrobras for becoming better at extracting and refining oil (~88%).
Brazil produces the oil equivalent of about 300,000 barrels per day of sugar cane ethanol, and its total oil consumption (according to the Energy Information Administration) is 2,500,000 barrels per day. Petrobras produces about 2,400,000 barrels per day of oil. In other words, 88% of Brazil's energy needs come from oil.