It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

How they accidentally discovered a 100 percent petroleum replacement

page: 3
26
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 2 2016 @ 07:26 PM
link   
a reply to: crayzeed

Paper manufacturer's didn't want competition from hemp based paper for the news paper printers. Rope manufacturer's also didn't want to lose valuable contracts for hemp rope when they could sell manilla rope.




posted on Dec, 2 2016 @ 07:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: hounddoghowlie

They've flown a private aircraft with it, but the Navy has only started testing in September or so. It'll be a little while longer before they tell if it will leave a residue.


The problem with jets is will this new fuels swell the seals like JP.
Most bio fuels do not swell the seals and that causes a leaking of lubricants.

This is why most biofuels are mixed 50/50 with regular JP.

Plus many biofuels gel at cold temperatures.
edit on 2-12-2016 by ANNED because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 2 2016 @ 08:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Zaphod,

There's been multiple people who have accidentally discovered this process I believe... Either that or there's a couple hundred very similar ways to do this exact thing.

What's really a shame is that the can't we all get along fruit cakes and the I made biodiesel in my basement types inundate every thread like these

Both groups are equally as irksome and equally plug up and destroy threads like this with their inane and, at best, tangentially related verbal diarrhea.



posted on Dec, 2 2016 @ 09:19 PM
link   
a reply to: roguetechie

Previous biofuel flights were usually a mix of jet fuel and biofuel. Having a biofuel that matches petroleum is a big step, and can be extremely useful.



posted on Dec, 2 2016 @ 09:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

www.ara.com...

This is a variation on a theme that has been around for a long while. Part of the process includes hydrotreating and then distillation. These are standard refinery operations and all they are doing is taking a carbonaceous feed and running it through a refinery. Where do they get the hydrogen for hydrotreating? By reforming methane, of course.
What will this process get them? PR.
There is not enough biomass to make even a small dent in the demand.



posted on Dec, 2 2016 @ 09:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: ANNED

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: hounddoghowlie

They've flown a private aircraft with it, but the Navy has only started testing in September or so. It'll be a little while longer before they tell if it will leave a residue.


The problem with jets is will this new fuels swell the seals like JP.
Most bio fuels do not swell the seals and that causes a leaking of lubricants.

This is why most biofuels are mixed 50/50 with regular JP.

Plus many biofuels gel at cold temperatures.


You are thinking about methyl esters of long chain fatty acids. These are even more useless.

This uses that same feedstock but has been hydrogenated to paraffins and fractionated.



posted on Dec, 2 2016 @ 10:30 PM
link   
So, what is the cost per gallon of that fuel approximately. How does it compare to the cost of Jet fuel commercial airlines use. Is that big increase justified?

I doubt it, it is a big defense contract where the cost is strongly inflated.



posted on Dec, 2 2016 @ 10:45 PM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

The costs given aren't the cost of fuel. It's the total cost, from pilot salary, maintenance, parts, pieces, fuel, etc. to operate the aircraft per hour. The DoD pay about $2.82 per gallon compared to the national average of $4.11 for Jet-A on a commercial scale.
edit on 12/2/2016 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)

edit on 12/2/2016 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 2 2016 @ 10:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

The OP says fuel costs, I thought that was a little steep. The savings of using the other fuel is not that much of a savings then. I actually read it a couple of times before commenting on the price but it said fuel.



posted on Dec, 2 2016 @ 10:58 PM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

It's not about just the savings, it's about getting away from relying on petroleum based products, and relying on them. Biofuels cut emissions, cut costs, and get us away from petroleum.



posted on Dec, 2 2016 @ 11:48 PM
link   
I don't doubt this process works, but the question is can it be scaled up and can it compete on price.

I doubt it.

There have been several other companies over the last decade that were going to make biofuels a real competitor, but none have succeeded.



posted on Dec, 3 2016 @ 01:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: loveguy

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: loveguy
a reply to: Zaphod58

Ain't it nifty that it's actually tax-payer funding behind this keep the death marchers alive scenario?

Kinda says something when it's only good for the goose-egg on our heads, huh?

We amidst the gander?


Well without those funds going to the MIC alot of the advances never would had came about.


So we as tax-payers have a choice, we can continue to watch our funds getting used to bring about the death of those who have as much right to life as we do, or we can put the tech to better use, like healing the planet and it's inhabitants?

All of this hooray for me and you can find a gutter to sleep in is nauseating....


MEdicines and alot of other tech that saves alot of lives have also came out of these programs. They have good sides as well as bad sides. And sorry NO ONE has a right to live more than anyone else. Who is to say their deaths were not meant to happen that way as well?
How arrogant to "heal the planet" George carlin was right.



posted on Dec, 3 2016 @ 05:04 AM
link   
Wonder if it's yet another approach to thermal depolymerization?

eta: yep. They do a multi-stage TDP conversion with a metallic catalyst in one or more of the stages.
edit on 3-12-2016 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2016 @ 07:08 AM
link   
I'm all for biofuels and I believe research in this area should be supported. I also believe we should invest in reutilization of any elements of the 'waste stream' that make sense (the "cents" will follow eventually). So I am a supporter.

That said, there's a lot of 'black magic' in biofuels presently, similar to solar. Things are not always what they seem, and inventors often seek to make a quick buck then cut and run before everyone understands the "real" story, or the full-lifecycle costs of whatever the product is.

In my experience the principal issue with biofuels, such as bio diesel for example, is gelling or waxing at much higher temps than regular No. 2 diesel of the same 'octane'. Yes, additives can be used to lower the gelling point to a certain extent, but these additives come at an additional cost. The Cold Filter Plugging Point (CFFP) temperature of nearly every bio diesel is significantly higher than that of petroleum based diesel.

Side note: I use diesel in my examples because it makes the illustrations easier to understand. Jet-A, JP-4 and JP-8 are all just permutations of Kerosene which is essentially just diesel with a lower fracturing column temp (i.e. fractures higher in the fracturing column) in the refining process. Gasoline has even a lower temp still, and fractures even higher in the column.

Side note 2: There is all sorts of chemistry we could get into with this discussion like Cetane ratings and the like, but they only distract from the point I'm trying to illustrate here. (And I'm not a chemist, so I'll leave this to the pro's).

In any case, the result (at least right now) is that other energy is required to avoid this problem (i.e. heat, or additives, etc.).

The other problem with bio fuels is their inherent propensity to absorb water. Yes, water can be scrubbed through filtration and other processes, but there is a "cost" penalty (usually performance or diversion of energy for other processes). I don't think I need to go into too much more detail about why water is an issue in any high performance system.

In summary, I look forward to advances in these areas of fuel production. My hope is researchers are able to cost effectively deal with these two thorny side effects. Again, I sincerely applaud research into ways to make productive uses out of any and all waste streams, and I mean this. In the same breath, there are a lot of 'snake oil' guys out there who will try to make a fast buck and not do the required R&D to make things like this a viable alternative in the larger "lifecycle" sense. Let's hope this isn't the case in this instance.




edit on 12/3/2016 by Flyingclaydisk because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2016 @ 07:36 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58




They can use almost any type of grease, or several other materials.


Ethics, ethics, ethics...ok, what according to you guys is the ethical situation regarding using Human bodies for fuel...yeah, i know..but we're chock full of grease, and could make quite a bit of fuel if there were enough bodies.

Is it ethical for a military outfit, say the Navy to destroy an enemy vessel, salvage the dead from said vessel and render them down for fuel...alarming, grisley, monsterous..sure...but what's worse ethically...slaughtering the Human beings in the first instance, or using their lifeless corpses for fuel after the fact?



posted on Dec, 3 2016 @ 07:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I do believe kitchen grease is incredibly easy to convert to diesel fuel. Someone in my town in selling diesel fuel made from kitchen grease. I do believe they are charging similar prices as gas stations. They collect kitchen grease for free and then sell the final product.



posted on Dec, 3 2016 @ 07:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: MysterX
a reply to: Zaphod58




They can use almost any type of grease, or several other materials.


Ethics, ethics, ethics...ok, what according to you guys is the ethical situation regarding using Human bodies for fuel...yeah, i know..but we're chock full of grease, and could make quite a bit of fuel if there were enough bodies.

Is it ethical for a military outfit, say the Navy to destroy an enemy vessel, salvage the dead from said vessel and render them down for fuel...alarming, grisley, monsterous..sure...but what's worse ethically...slaughtering the Human beings in the first instance, or using their lifeless corpses for fuel after the fact?


Not all that far fetched of an idea.
German submariners in WWII wore socks knitted from human hair.
There were experimental batches of soap made from human fat by German researchers during the same time period.
The sources of the raw materials were concentration camp victims.



posted on Dec, 3 2016 @ 07:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: Zaphod58

How much kitchen grease would it take to make enough fuel to fly a Growler for an hour?



Alot but the process uses triglycerides basically the same stuff humans use for fat storage. But the advantage is you can get it from bio waste as well.Bsically you can use plants (Brassica carinata basically a mustard plant) and algae. This isnt new by the way this discovery was around 2008 with full sclae manufacturing to begin in 2012 they are a bit behind.



posted on Dec, 3 2016 @ 03:09 PM
link   
a reply to: servovenford

Its not allowed in Canada.

I used to own a plane (second line)



posted on Dec, 3 2016 @ 03:22 PM
link   
a reply to: schuyler

Just a fast dirty number based on round numbers:

15000 MCD in the states, top estimate on oil use is 4 liters so 60,000 liters per is available from just one source.

I do not know how many jet that will fill.



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join