|
| Hi Dvswia,
I have to disagree with your statements and here are some proofs I have that might change your mind on ethanol:
http://www3.epa.gov/otaq/presentations/epa-fev-isaf-no55.pdf
An important step toward increasing alcohol fuel demand, then, may lie in providing economical engine technology options that utilize such fuels more efficiently, to compensate for the lower fuel energy density. The FFVs produced today, however, use fairly typical gasoline engines, which, because they must retain dual-fuel capability, are not able to take full advantage of the favorable combustion characteristics of alcohols. Engines optimized for alcohol fuel use, on the other hand, may yield efficiencies that exceed that of state-of-the-art diesel engines—or, about one third higher than that of FFV engines. In earlier engine research at EPA with neat methanol and ethanol [1], for example, over 40% brake thermal efficiency was achieved over a relatively broad range of loads and speeds, with peak levels reaching over 42%.
FROM RICARDO:
The new federal CAFE standards are calling for a doubling of fuel mileage performance, which, Vint says, is going to send OEM’s looking for high octane numbers to improve efficiency and ethanol is the best source. Ricardo, an engineering firm with over 100 years in the business of engine design, has developed an extreme boosted direct injection engine (EBDI) to optimize ethanol blends. The 3.2 V6 gasoline engine rivals the power and torque of a much larger GMC Sierra 6.7 diesel, he said, and it delivers 3.5 percent better fuel economy than the diesel.
FROM SCANIA:
Scania has a number of products available for running on bioethanol – e.g. buses, trucks and waste collectors. Scania is the only vehicle manufacturer to date that has successfully produced bioethanol applications for heavy transport. Our engines adapted for bioethanol fuel have the same energy efficiency as a standard diesel engine and fulfill the Euro 5/ EEV emission level.
FROM CUMMINS:
...According to Cummins, it delivers the power (up to 250 hp) and peak torque (up to 450 lb. ft.) of gasoline and diesel engines nearly twice its displacement.
http://www.dieselprogress.com/July-2014/A-Cummins-Gasoline-Engine/#...
These guys are getting more work from ethanol than diesel. Btu is NOT a measure of work, that is a joule. Power is the speed at which a joule takes place. 1 joule per second is a watt.
Here are some extreme examples to show that Btu is irrelevant to work.
The heating value of 1.25 pounds of wood, a cup of gasoline, and 4 pounds of dynamite are all about the same(7000 Btu)
The 1.25 pounds of wood generates 30 kilowatts(.000003 gigawatts), the cup of gasoline generates 3.2 gigawatts, and 4 pounds of dynamite generates 2000 gigawatts.
An ethanol optimized engine gets far better mileage than gasoline, equal to better than diesel and is naturally clean. Even the inefficient gasoline optimized flex fuel vehicles, if you account for extra horsepower, are more efficient on E85, the EPA calls it that gasoline equivalent ratio and our flex fuel fleet is 3% more efficient if power is accounted for.
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/bioenergy/pdfs/analysis_saab2007.pdf
There is a lot of disinfo out there from the American Petroleum Institute, this Btu argument has been made by them. This organization is larger than the top three advertising firms all combined and the API's number 1 enemy is ethanol.
Edited by Fletch 10/15/2015 01:14
| |
|
Breaking OPEC ; Ethanol Optimized Engine Project
