Ethanol Powered Aircraft

On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 13:56:11 -0500, James Robinson
wrote:
LNG has about 73,000 BTU/US Gal., while ethanol has about 80,000. Gasoline
ranges between 110,000 and 125,000.

Of course you also get to factor in the difference in weight per
gallon...

Keep in mind that the LNG is also accompanied by a very heavy tank, which
has payload implications.

LPG has lighter tanks, but still heavy compared to the ones we have
now for gasoline... Now, on the other hand, I can see the Grumman AA1
series aircraft fuel tanks possibly being converted to LPG in that
they use the tubular spar for a fuel tank... One could perhaps argue
that under pressure the spar might even be stronger... Still, that's a
20g fuel tank... Range will be decreased, but cargo capacity will go
up a few pounds from the reduced weight of the fuel... I suspect that
most aircraft would not be able to have their fuel tanks so easily
modified...

On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 13:56:11 -0500, James Robinson
wrote in :

Larry Dighera wrote:

On 15 Aug 2006 08:15:58 -0700, "Bret Ludwig"
wrote in om:

Natural gas is methane, which can be turned into methanol pretty
cost-effectively. Ethanol, despite its poorer power density and seals
compatibility issues, is far more benign and has more energy per gallon
than does methanol.


How does the energy density of LNG compare to ethanol?

LNG has about 73,000 BTU/US Gal., while ethanol has about 80,000. Gasoline
ranges between 110,000 and 125,000.

Keep in mind that the LNG is also accompanied by a very heavy tank, which
has payload implications.


If Kevlar reinforced aluminum is used in the construction of the tank
(as is used for aviation O2), tank weight shouldn't be such a large
factor:
http://www.mhoxygen.com/index.phtml?...product_id=372
1,800 psig service pressure
The KF series cylinders are the perfect solution for cylinder
installations far aft in the aircraft previously not possible
before. A thin-wall, seamless aluminum (6061-T6) alloy
'liner-cylinder' is reinforced by a full over-wrapping of Kevlar
fibers sealed in epoxy. This yields about a 50% to 60% weight
savings over conventional cylinder technology without any
compromise in safety.

KF-050, Item #CYL1050 For built-in applications
MAX DIAMETER: 17.27 cm. (6.8 in)
MAX LENGTH: 64.00cm. (25.2 in)
AVG WEIGHT: 3.58kg. (7.9 lbs)
SERVICE VOLUME: 1416 liters (50 cu. ft.)


Below are the results of my research on BTU content of various fuels:


http://bioenergy.ornl.gov/papers/misc/energy_conv.html
Natural gas: LHV = 930 Btu/ft3 = 34.6 MJ/m3
Therm (used for natural gas, methane) = 100,000 Btu (= 105.5 MJ)
Ethanol energy content (LHV) = 11,500 Btu/lb = 75,700 Btu/gallon =
26.7 GJ/t = 21.1 MJ/liter.

Barrel of oil equivalent (boe) = approx. 6.1 GJ (5.8 million Btu),
equivalent to 1,700 kWh. "Petroleum barrel" is a liquid measure
equal to 42 U.S. gallons (35 Imperial gallons or 159 liters);
about 7.2 barrels oil are equivalent to one tonne of oil (metric)
= 42-45 GJ.

Gasoline: US gallon = 115,000 Btu = 121 MJ = 32 MJ/liter (LHV).
There are 19.5 gallons of gasoline in a barrel of oil,
4.1 gallons of kerosene-type jet fuel in a barrel of oil

Petro-diesel = 130,500 Btu/gallon (36.4 MJ/liter or 42.8 GJ/t)

Efficiency of an internal combustion engine is about 22% and
electric motor...about 96%(plus or minus a few points...depending
on who built it).

Electricity at 3412 Btu input per kWh.



http://www.ethanol-gec.org/netenergy/NEYShapouri.htm
http://www.ethanol.org/EthanolNewsSpecial1.28.05.htm
This report estimates the net energy balance of corn ethanol utilizing
the latest survey of U.S. corn producers and the 2001 U.S. survey of
ethanol plants.

On the average, dry mill ethanol plants used 1.09 Kwh of
electricity and about 34,700 Btu of thermal energy (LHV) per
gallon of ethanol. When energy losses to produce electricity and
natural gas were taken into account, the average dry mill ethanol
plant consumed about 47,116 Btu of primary energy per gallon of
ethanol produced. Wet mill ethanol plants that participated in the
survey used 49,208. Btu per gallon of natural gas and coal, on
average, to produce steam and electricity in the plants. After
adjustments for energy losses to produce natural gas and coal, on
the average, a wet mill ethanol plant used 52,349 Btu of energy to
make a gallon of ethanol.

All energy inputs used in the production of ethanol is adjusted
for energy efficiencies developed by GREET model. The estimated
energy efficiencies are for gasoline (80.5 percent), diesel fuel
(84.3 percent), LPG (98.9 percent), natural gas (94 percent), coal
(98 percent), electricity (39.6 percent), and transmission loss
(1.087 percent). After adjusting the energy inputs by these energy
efficiencies, the total estimated energy required to produce a
bushel of corn in 2001 was 49,753 Btu.


http://www.herecomesmongo.com/ae/comptab.html
1 gallon non-reformulated gasoline = approximately 113,500 BTU
(depending on seasonality and other factors... Oil Industry
Literature reportedly indicates that real-world gasoline sold at
US pumps can go to 108,500 BTU or lower).

1 gallon of #2 diesel = approximately 131,295 BTU (LHV)

1 gallon of biodiesel = approximately 117,093 BTU (LHV)
(10/08/02: BTU per gallon for diesel and biodiesel updated using
best-available info from US DOE website).

1 cubic foot of natural gas = approximately 1000 BTU

1 lb of H2 = approximately 61,000 BTU

1 gallon = approximately 3.785 liters (1 quart = 1 quarter of a
gallon = .946 Liters)

Definitions: 1 kWh = 3412 BTU = 3,599,660 Joules

1 barrel (of Petroleum) = 42 gallons

1.0 US bushel = 0.0352 m3 = 0.97 UK bushel = 56 lb, 25 kg (corn or
sorghum) = 60 lb



http://www.eere.energy.gov/cleanciti...ri_webcast.pdf
Btu content (LHV):- Diesel fuel 128,450 per gallon
- Gasoline 116, 090 per gallon
- LPG 84,950 per gallon
- Natural gas 983 per cubic ft.
- Electricity 3,412 per kwh
- Coal 9,773 per pound
- Ethanol 76,330 per gallon


http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/CostsAn...s/testpick.htm
Commodity Costs and Returns: U.S. and Regional Cost and Return
Data


http://energy.cas.psu.edu/costcomparator.html
Energy Cost Calculator is an EXCEL spreadsheet.

Must make fuel stops hard. Perhaps its "flex fuel".
-Robert


Jay Honeck wrote:
For those who think ethanol is a fuel that can't be made to work in
aircraft, I present the following:

http://makeashorterlink.com/?E6EB52F8D

and

http://makeashorterlink.com/?N40C13F8D

These folks, photographed by me at OSH '06, are burning ethanol in
certificated engines (and, in the case of the Mooney, in a certificated
aircraft) without difficulty.

Aside from the obvious stupidity of using more energy to make ethanol
than it actually produces, this is a fuel that we're apparently going
to be stuck with -- forever? -- for political reasons. We're gonna
have to live with it, somehow.

To which I again ask: Where is EAA on this? Why are they washing their
hands of this all-important issue? Are the asleep at the switch, or
simply hoping the issue goes away?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
Aside from the obvious stupidity of using more energy to make ethanol
than it actually produces, this is a fuel that we're apparently going
to be stuck with -- forever? -- for political reasons. We're gonna
have to live with it, somehow.

How much energy is used to make the Duracell AA battery that you use in your
GPS?

If they're burning oil to make this fuel, it makes no sense. If they're
something not easily refined into gasoline (coal, solar, nuke, methane), it
does.

"Steve Foley" wrote in message
news:6_lEg.237$ha1.93@trndny03...
"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
Aside from the obvious stupidity of using more energy to make ethanol
than it actually produces, this is a fuel that we're apparently going
to be stuck with -- forever? -- for political reasons. We're gonna
have to live with it, somehow.

How much energy is used to make the Duracell AA battery that you use in
your
GPS?

If they're burning oil to make this fuel, it makes no sense. If they're
something not easily refined into gasoline (coal, solar, nuke, methane),
it
does.



As has been listed Natural Gas is the main source of energy in the process.

And of course there is a lot of loss making a Duracell but that is for
practicality. I really don't want a fire powered laptop in my lap. That's
why I got rid if the Sony battery in my Dell.

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net wrote in message
...

"Steve Foley" wrote in message
news:6_lEg.237$ha1.93@trndny03...
"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
Aside from the obvious stupidity of using more energy to make ethanol
than it actually produces, this is a fuel that we're apparently going
to be stuck with -- forever? -- for political reasons. We're gonna
have to live with it, somehow.

How much energy is used to make the Duracell AA battery that you use in
your
GPS?

If they're burning oil to make this fuel, it makes no sense. If they're
something not easily refined into gasoline (coal, solar, nuke, methane),
it
does.



As has been listed Natural Gas is the main source of energy in the
process.

And of course there is a lot of loss making a Duracell but that is for
practicality.

My point exactly.

I really don't want a fire powered laptop in my lap. That's
why I got rid if the Sony battery in my Dell.



I really don't want a Natural Gas powered lawn mower.

On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 15:59:57 GMT, "Steve Foley"
wrote:
I really don't want a Natural Gas powered lawn mower.

Probably wouldn't be any more inconvenient than one of the electrical
ones that require a cord (i.e. not the rechargable battery types)...
I've used air hoses like you use for shop air tools for routing
natural gas to grills for temporary use... CNG (compressed natural
gas) would work, but is not as convenient as LPG...

LPG (aka propane) would probably work since you see LPG powered fork
lifts and such...

Hmmm... A quick search via google shows that it's already been done...

http://www.landscapemanagement.net/l....jsp?id=317568
http://chenchang.en.alibaba.com/prod...awn_Mower.html

I started a couple of hours ago researching the production of ethanol,
use of land, fetilizers, an thos dam tracters.. I juss fin the sbjek
too be too dam comp, comp, cmmp, uhhh hard to ger reel faks... scuze me
I'm gonna resea, resear, resur, unhhh, opena nother pint...

d ennnn i

We use propane in the balloon. So that's an example of "propane in an
aircraft". The balloon I used to fly has three 15-gal tanks. So each
tank has 75 lb of LP in it. The stainless tanks are quite heavy,
requiring 4 of us to set it up. It's easier when we have to put it
away. Also, in the dead cold winter, a heater must be attached to it
over night before the flight so the LP will vaporize. Just like
preheating an airplane.

Grumman-581 wrote:
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 15:59:57 GMT, "Steve Foley"
wrote:
I really don't want a Natural Gas powered lawn mower.

Probably wouldn't be any more inconvenient than one of the electrical
ones that require a cord (i.e. not the rechargable battery types)...
I've used air hoses like you use for shop air tools for routing
natural gas to grills for temporary use... CNG (compressed natural
gas) would work, but is not as convenient as LPG...

LPG (aka propane) would probably work since you see LPG powered fork
lifts and such...

Hmmm... A quick search via google shows that it's already been done...

http://www.landscapemanagement.net/l....jsp?id=317568
http://chenchang.en.alibaba.com/prod...awn_Mower.html

On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 10:54:05 -0500, "Gig 601XL Builder"
wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net wrote:
I really don't want a fire powered laptop in my lap. That's
why I got rid if the Sony battery in my Dell.

I've had a couple of laptops over the years that definitely acted as
lap warmers... I remember an older IBM ThinkPad that would leave a red
mark on your leg if you left it there too long...