REFLECTOR: New Aviation Fuel?
Scott Derrick
scott at tnstaafl.net
Mon Jul 17 17:15:51 CDT 2006
We could argue all year about how much energy it takes to create one
gallon of ethanol, or how much energy it takes to create one gallon of
gasoline. Gasoline ain't free either, I worked in the oil exploration
industry for a few years and its not cheap. I think finding fields of
corn or switch grass is much easier! :-)
I've heard well meaning, well educated people spout figures about
different energy resources that covered the entire spectrum, I think
the answer is probably somewhere in the middle.
The one thing I think is obvious to all is that the hydrocarbon
economy(as a fuel) has a finite lifetime and will only get more
expensive from here on out, possibly at an ever increasing rate. There
is only so much crude, it takes a long time to make it(millions of
years), we are burning it(stupid) up at a prodigious rate. With other
growing economies around the world wanting more of what we have the
supply and demand teeter toter is swinging hard and fast towards the
supply side. As is evident in crude futures, gas prices and actually
in just about everything we purchase.
Poopooing alternative energy resources that can be harvested locally be
they solar, geothermal, wind, bio-diesel, ethanol, tidal engines,
etc... can only put us further under the heal of the oil cartels
around the world. The middle east country's know they have a limited
resource that will eventually run dry and are going to make every dime
they can while they can. I'd probably do the same.
I agree that some of the new energy ideas are pie in the sky, but many
of them have merit and should be encouraged.
100LL has other problems, one large one being TEL. Its dangerous to all
life forms and we are supplied by one company in the world and its not
in America. 100LL is also high in lead and the EPA has its eye on
eliminating it as soon as possible.
AGE85 might not end up being the replacement for 100LL but I'm very
happy to see alternatives coming out. So far its the only alternative
I've seen that has a chance of replacing 100LL in a manner that would
allow us to burn either 100LL or AGE85 or a mix of both fuels in our
engines as 100LL is phased out. A big plus.
Scott
Ron Brown wrote:
> And, it uses just about a much energy to make the stuff as it produces.
>
> Sorta like the hydrogen economy - its going to take a lots of electricity -
> as in nuclear to make all that hydrogen.
>
> And natural gas is cheaper than gasoline until you have to pressurize it to
> put in a high pressure tank to use in your car.
>
> If we can get over all of the tree hugging we can go get the oil we have
> already - in Alaska, in the Gulf, off the coast of Florida and the
> Carolinas, and California and........
>
> I don't know how many folks also follow the RV lists, but a couple of
> excellent notes were posted recently
> - discussions started when folks were arguing over petroleum vs. ethanol
> fuels:
>
> (As a former employee of the nuclear and fossil fuel energy industry - I
> have to say I am very much concerned about the amount of power the Sierra
> Club and algore have amassed - with a great deal of help by the liberal
> media! Oh and Jimmah didn't help any when he decided we didn't need nukelar
> power or domestic off shore oil wells!!!!!! - Ronnie)
>
> This excellent note is by "Tom Gummo" <T.gummo at verizon.net>
>
> "First, I am over 55+ old.
>
> Second, I am a trained Chemist and Computer Scientists. (Subjects with my
> masters degrees)
>
> I teach chemistry, math and computer science at two local colleges.After
> reading tons of stuff on the subject, I realize that I KNOW NOTHING ABOUT
> IT.
>
> I really think that scientists are in two camps: the first is the side that
> is paying them (Follow the money, just like several people have stated) and
> others are in the side that will get them money. If there is NO problem,
> there is NO money. If you can make it look like there is a problem, money
> will be thrown at you. Why is it in the newspapers, No problem - NO NEWS.
> Problem - BIG NEWS. You only really hear from the "Problem" folks.
>
> Why do I bring up my age: in the 60's and 70's and maybe even the early
> 80's. All I heard was about global cooling and the coming ice age. Now
> scientists using the SAME DATA are telling us that it is global warning. The
> book the "Population Bomb" stated that we would be living shoulder to
> shoulder by now. Funny, I don't hear anything about it anymore. The OZONE
> hole got bigger and smaller without any help from mankind in the past.
>
> If the earth is getting warmer, could it be the sun is getting hotter. Look
> it up, the sun goes through cycles too and we are in a period where it is
> hotter. If that is the case, could it the sun and have nothing to do with
> mankind that there maybe a world wide temperature change.
>
> What about the fact, that the earth has had several ice ages. That means it
> got cold then it got warn then it got cold and then it got warm .... Once
> again, mankind wasn't able to change the cycle or better yet create one.
>
> Take another case, what if it was a good idea to melt all the polar ice. Go
> find a scientist that could find a way to do it. CAN'T BE DONE with current
> technology. So why do you think my car and plane will do it?
>
> IS THERE A PROBLEM?: MAYBE. Should we try to be NICER to the planet: YOU
> BET.
>
> But anybody who claims to know is full of sh_t.
>
> Of course, this is just one slightly educated man's opinion
>
> And I missed getting the authors of these contributions:
>
> "So...are you saying there is no natural fluctuation of the earth's climate?
>
> The Sahara was farm country a few thousand years ago and turned desert way
> before the machine age, and even before the human population explosion
> occurred. What about the redwood cones found above the arctic circle? I
> don't say emissions of various kinds have NO effect, but how can the events
> (volcanic and otherwise) that produce far more CO2 than decades of man made
> emissions be discounted? I'm curious also how we can presume to know the
> average temperature of a point on the earth's surface when records have been
> kept for only a hundred years or so. Is it the same kind of science that
> can build a complete culture from a couple of knife points and a molar?
>
> No offense, but it seems the science that's out there is pretty selectively
> chosen by the supporters of the current global warming theory. There's lots
> that point the other way, too.
>
> The people pushing the global warming theory aren't exactly operating out of
> the back of a VW bus, either. There's plenty of money on both sides and
> people on both sides making a living advocating their particular position.
>
>
> "With no disrespect intended to anyone.... man made global warming is a
> farce I believe.....
>
> "Carbon dioxide does occur naturally, of course, and is essential to life
> on Earth, as it is an essential chemical component in the photosynthesis
> process of plants."
>
> "When Mount Pinatubo erupted it pumped more CO2 into the atmosphere than
> humans did in the entire industrial age. The concern over anthropogenic CO2
> emissions is politics dressed up as science."
>
> http://climatesci.atmos.colostate.edu/2005/08/09/is-co2-a-pollutant/
>
>
> And before you say this has nothing to do with building Velocities, it
> certainly has everything to do with our freedoms to fly our Velocities as
> this can have a terrific impact on aviation and the fuel we need to fly
> them!!!!
>
> Ronnie Brown
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Andy Millin" <amillin at sbcglobal.net>
> To: "'Velocity Aircraft Owners and Builders list'" <reflector at tvbf.org>
> Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 4:02 PM
> Subject: Re: REFLECTOR: New Aviation Fuel?
>
>
>
>> Ethanol may be an answer. In automotive it will get you 20% lower MPG. I
>> am assuming it will get you 20% few hours in the tank.
>>
>> Ethanol also changes the capacitance of the fuel. For those with
>> capacitance type probes, it will not read the same as avgas. You will
>> need
>> to recalibrate ... every time you change to a different blend percentage.
>>
>> Andy
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: reflector-bounces at tvbf.org [mailto:reflector-bounces at tvbf.org] On
>> Behalf Of Scott Derrick
>> Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 3:50 PM
>> To: Velocity Aircraft Owners and Builders list
>> Subject: REFLECTOR: New Aviation Fuel?
>>
>> http://www.age85.org/
>>
>> Scott
>>
>> --
>>
>> -
>> Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it.
>>
>> George Bernard Shaw, Liberty
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> To change your email address, visit
>> http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
>>
>> Visit the gallery! www.tvbf.org/gallery user:pw = tvbf:jamaicangoose
>> Check
>> new archives: www.tvbf.org/pipermail Check old archives:
>> http://www.tvbf.org/archives/velocity/maillist.html
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> To change your email address, visit
>> http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
>>
>> Visit the gallery! www.tvbf.org/gallery
>> user:pw = tvbf:jamaicangoose
>> Check new archives: www.tvbf.org/pipermail
>> Check old archives: http://www.tvbf.org/archives/velocity/maillist.html
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> To change your email address, visit http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
>
> Visit the gallery! www.tvbf.org/gallery
> user:pw = tvbf:jamaicangoose
> Check new archives: www.tvbf.org/pipermail
> Check old archives: http://www.tvbf.org/archives/velocity/maillist.html
>
>
>
>
--
-
Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add "within the limits of the law," because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.
Thomas Jefferson
More information about the Reflector
mailing list