What alternative fuel has the most promise?
In your opinion, what alternative fuel is most likely to emerge as a gasoline replacement? Why?
Answers (14)
No alternative has yet stood above the pack, as far as I've seen. Each seems to have some drawback; for instance, ethanol from corn seems to drive up food prices...
Most professionals I've read suggest all the current alternatives are 'transitional' as no single one can effectively replace fossil fuels completely; some solutions (e.g., waste tires converted to pyrolitic oil for blends) are dependent on a large source of tires, and significant emissions controls on the equipment using the fuel.
Right now, for instance, no diesel manufacturer will warrant biofuel blends beyond B20 (20% biofuel); the specifications and standards for biofuel are still being developed...
Les D
Software Quality Assurance Lead
Best Answers in: Government Policy (16), Change Management (12), Organizational Development (8), Equity Markets (8), Career Management (8), Using LinkedIn (8), Economics (7), Education and Schools (6), Business Development (5), Personal Investing (5), Ethics (5), Manufacturing (4), Quality Management and Standards (4), Market Research and Definition (4), Starting Up (4), Energy and Development (4), Biotech (4), Computers and Software (4), Computer Networking (4), Web Development (4), International Law (3), Internationalization and Localization (3), Packaging and Labeling (3), Project Management (3), Small Business (3), Job Search (2), Staffing and Recruiting (2), Writing and Editing (2), Wealth Management (2), Positioning (2), Business Plans (2), Green Business (2), Green Products (2), Enterprise Software (2), Facilities Management (1), Travel Tools (1), Certification and Licenses (1), Freelancing and Contracting (1), Occupational Training (1), Conference Venues (1), Accounting (1), Foreign Investment (1), Financial Regulation (1), Government Services (1), Compensation and Benefits (1), Exporting/Importing (1), Offshoring and Outsourcing (1), Treaties, Agreements and Organizations (1), Contracts (1), Corporate Law (1), Guerrilla Marketing (1), Internet Marketing (1), Graphic Design (1), Lead Generation (1), Business Analytics (1), Corporate Governance (1), Labor Relations (1), Planning (1), Bond Markets (1), Derivatives Markets (1), Hedge Funds (1), Non-profit Management (1), Supply Chain Management (1), Individual Insurance (1), Personal Debt Management (1), Personal Real Estate (1), Distribution (1), Engineering (1), Industrial Design (1), Product Design (1), Professional Books and Resources (1), Professional Networking (1), Blogging (1), E-Commerce (1), Information Security (1), Telecommunications (1), Wireless (1)
I think the answer is that regardless of souring of hydrocarbons, the most promise will remain with liquid fuels that look and act like gasoline or fuel oil/diesel. The medium term may have a mixture of souring, biofuels, coal gasification, tars.... someplace in the mix may actually come a combination of nuclear power produced hydrogen reacted with coals, oil shale and such to form hydrocarbon fuels. The same medium term, nest couple decades will also see a variety of biotechnology contribution, algae feed stocks, bacterial tar processing and similar.
Barb E
Data Operations Manager at Insight Schools
Best Answers in: Career Management (2), Green Business (2), Staffing and Recruiting (1), Internationalization and Localization (1), Project Management (1), Telecommunications (1), Software Development (1)
My votes: 1. Recycled oils (cooking, greasing, manufacturing, etc.) [available now and not being used to full ~fuel~ potential - although these may require specialized/additional refinement], 2. algae’s for biofuels [don't disrupt food production or require more than a fair share of water or other resources to grow], then 3. Methane capture and concentrating [face it, humans create a lot of this anyway].
Otherwise, if not reproducing a look and feel of liquid or compressed gases/fuels as we know them today (think outside of the box) then stabilized hydrogen production probably.
Cheers.
Links:
Clarification added May 29, 2008:
Here's an interesting article RE: Algae
http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-9954638-54.html?part=rss&tag=feed&subj=GreenTech
Charles C
Vice President at Tmtelcomm: "one of the largest AT&T remarketers"
Best Answers in: Venture Capital and Private Equity (1)
Ethanol will be the most likely replacement since it shares the same infrastructure and can be used on gasoline engines with just a slight modification. Ethanol also has a future as a fuel for fuel cells so I see it as the bridge from the current gasoline age to the future hydrogen age.
Matthew L
Communications Director at ClimateWorks
Best Answers in: International Law (1), Business Plans (1)
Electricity.
Liquid fuels are great - we'll continue to need them for aviation and shipping - but, for most transport needs, electric motors are far more efficient, the infrastructure is already in place (the grid), and, with the coming deployment of smart grid technologies, you'll be able to charge your plug-in car using mostly clean, renewable sources of electricity. When coupled with emerging battery technologies that can store a 150-mile charge, the vast majority of personal transport will be electric-propelled, as most people only drive 40-60 miles a day, max.
On the alternative liquid fuels side, corn ethanol is little more than a tax scam pushed by connected investors and is more of a political ploy than a technical solution. Sugar cane ethanol is great - Brazil has seen wild success with its sugar ethanol program, but political barriers prevent its broad export. Biodiesel, biomass ethanol, switchgrass and other similar crop-reliant fuels are unlikely to be able to scale beyond the boutique fuel category, as there are serious problems with both environmental impact (e.g., land clearing for soy in Indonesia) and competition with foodstuffs; there also isn't enough land on earth to turn them into a 100% replacement.
Algae could hold promise, but again the problem is algae fuels don't scale - yet. That could change, but not within the next 10 years.
That said, as electricity grows to dominate the fuel of choice for most transport, there will certainly be a place for boutique fuels that can fill in the gaps and provide fuel for sectors that can't switch to electricity. But it's definitely too soon to say which boutique fuel will win - of course, everyone has their favorite. Mine is the bicycle ;>)
Lowell R
Technical writing and editing
Best Answers in: Corporate Governance (2), Car and Train Travel (1), Government Policy (1), Internet Marketing (1), Career Management (1), Energy and Development (1)
i find it annoying that people can't seem to differentiate between ethanol from corn and ethanol from any other source.
ethanol and other fuel alcohols, i believe, have the best long term promise. they can be produced cheap (methanol can be made very cheaply from coal), have energy densities very near to that of gasoline, and are easy to transport and store.
gasoline and gasoline-like fuels made directly by algae and/or bacteria also have promise, but the technology and genetic engineering are likely going to be harder.
biodiesel made from vegetable oil or algae oil also holds promise.
the key to these renewable liquid fuels is the ability to genetically engineer algae, bacteria, and other plants to produce the fuels we need. agricultural feedstocks such as corn and even sugar cane are likely to be expensive in the long run to be viable solutions.
recycling hydrocarbons from the waste stream (waste cooking oil, recycled plastics and tires) is an improvement over simply putting these materials in a landfill, but the quantities available aren't enough to supply a growing economy.
electricity is a good option over short and medium distances (if battery capacity can be extended). for commuting, the best option is mass transit. an electric commuter train and electric buses are far more efficient than 40 or 100 individual electric cars. at any rate, what kills the electric car is not the range but the recharge time. just look at how impatient drivers get at having to wait 3 minutes to fill their fuel tanks with gasoline then tell them they have to wait four hours for their battery to recharge. i believe electric vehicles are more viable when they can run off an electric source from the road like electrified railroad tracks or a catenary wire above the road. battery power can be used as a backup or to get from one electrified road to another.
Thomas G
Radio/TV Broadcast Professional, Game Designer, Music Composer, Film/TV Industry, Marketing, Public Relations, Inventor!
Best Answers in: Energy and Development (1), Green Products (1)
Sadly we will have very little change in fuels as long as Detroit and OPEC are in charge. Just quick hype of temporary green fads.
1) Hydrogen as a fuel would be a far better option, both as a combustable fuel, or a fuel cell source. But I doubt hydrogen fuels will ever see the light of day.
2) Electric cars - would be best - especially as local commuter's cars. There is movement there, such as the RTEV's coming out next year.
3) Compressed air engines show incredible promise, especially with Fuel/CA Hybrids. The MDI is nice as a hybrid, but I like the Australian engine better. (video links posted)
The big thing of course is the profit margin and whats the bottom line. Can it make the company money in the ROI.?
Links:
There will probably not be ONE answer to our fuel situation:
1. You have to take into consideration the emissions produced by each alternative fuel and the manufacturing of these vehicles (like the Prius). Many areas of the country are in nonattainment for one of the 6 criteria pollutants (as defined by the EPA) and certain fuels are not viable options in these regions. For example, ethanol produces more NOx emissions than regular gasoline. For an area in nonattainment for ozone or NOx, this is not the best option. However, it is a good option for reducing carbon monoxide.
2. Vehicle availablility - Many vehicles are only available in California and the 10 NE coast states due to the stricter California Air Resource Board requirements (vs. the EPA). Many veihcles, like the CNG Honda Civic are simply unavailable in markets like Texas. Some people have had some luck getting them but they are few and far between.
3. Cost - Most alternative fueled vehicles simply cost too much to be a very biable option right now. The lease on a CNG Honda Civic is over $600 (compared to $200-$300 for a regular model). The cost of most Flex Fuel Vehicles is more comparable, but again, you have emissions issues in some areas of the country.
I think the main focus would need to be on diversification. We need to look at other sources of Ethanol - like celluosic. GM is currently researching this technology to make it more available and afforable. That would cut down on the food to fuel issue (although the corn crop used for ethanol is only about 12% currently). We also need to work on making other fuels - propane, natural gas, methane, electricity - more available and more comparable to gasoline. Once the range of these vehicles improves and the cost comes down (and infrastructure improves), the outlook will be much better.
I constantly get e-mails at work everyday from people looking for other alternatives. Some want electric vehicles, CNG or electric conversions, propane vehicles, cleaner diesel vehicles (which I believe is a great option for many areas)...it runs the whole spectrum. It's encouraging to see this market increase.
Links:
Todd,
Your question does not have at this time a clear cut answer since no technology has demonstrated an ability or economics to supply the volume required for the US let alone the world's transportation needs. One thing is very clear is that the fuel will be much more expensive.
Consider some of the alternatives:
1. Electricity: unless this country is prepared to go nuclear, meaning probably 300+ nuclear power plants, electricity will be primarily generated by coal. Wind could provide up to 20% at probably 50 to 100% premium to coal. For wind to be used, high wind area like off shore and the Flint Hills in KS will have to be used. Right now those are major legal battles. Solar is a long way from offering competitive electricity to coal, I believe solar is around $0.20 Kwh making it 500 to 1000% more expensive than coal. Solar potential limited even if the state of AZ is literally covere d by solar cells. Natural Gas is about equal to wind but short and expect a big push back on natural gas electricity when people get their heating bills this winter. If we go the way of a carbon tax, expect electricity to really go up in price.
Bio-diesel: Is not economical. If all of the fats and oils produced in this county were converted to bio-diesel it might represent 5% of our diesel needs. Let alone the fact that the largest available oil is now more expensive than crude. Even with a $1 a gallon blending credit, bio-diesel is a non starter. In addition there are quality and corrosion issues.
Ethanol: Might supply part of this countries fuel needs. Ethanol helps gasoline burn cleaner but is about 25% less energy per gallon than gasoline (density and chemistry). Believers in ethanol must also not be believers in global warming since in the fermentation process one molecule of carbon dioxide is formed for each molecule of ethanol. The economics are iffy and the supply is limited. Last year 25% of this countries corn was used to make bio-ethanol and it represented under 20% of this countries gasoline (under 10%). Cellulosic ethanol is still a fermentation process and the economics are dramatically higher than starch/corn economics (which is dramatically higher than sugar ethanol economics). Bottom line, ethanol will probably be part of the answer.
Butanol: DuPont/Tate & Lyle has technology they are trying to commercialize to ferment butanol. Since butanol is less polar than ethanol and more like gasoline it energy density is closer to gasoline, can be transported in the current hydrocarbon pipelines that go across this country and will have improved purification costs (a major cost of fermentation ethanol).
One thing is clear we will pay more for an inflation adjusted fuel in the future. If the average mileage increases in this country from around 20 mpg to 30 mpg, expect 100% increase in gasoline taxes just to keep highway budgets in place. No tax increase, highway construction stops. As gas prices go up people will drive less and buy more fuel efficient cars which is why if gas taxes will have to go up faster than mileage improves. In 2006, the Congress was working on an $0.08 increase to meet highway needs and that was before the bridge collapse in Minneapolis.
Part of the fuel of the future will be more efficient vehicles, not for environmental reasons but for economic reasons. Ethanol and possibly butanol will be part of the answer, maybe electricity but unless government and environmental groups starts being honest about the downside of each of these solutions, expect gasoline to the be major fuel of the future, very expensive gasoline.
Maurice Sadowsky
Scott L
CEO at Zymetis, Inc.
Best Answers in: Venture Capital and Private Equity (2), Corporate Debt (1), Social Enterpreneurship (1), Green Business (1), Energy and Development (1)
And the answer is... it depends. As has been touched on above, there is no one energy solution that has the most promise in general. It's a question of application.
In the electricity arena, the long term answer is solar. We are bombarded with more solar energy every day than humanity can consume. We are just limited by the efficiency of current technologies. These technologies, however, are on the way and should make a major impact in the "grid" systems of energy.
In the world of transportation, it's bioethanol and biobutanol. The "bio-" in front of these fuel sources are important as they refer to those alcohols that derive from biomass plant material, such as wood, grasses, and waste paper, rather than food (corn, wheat, etc.) Again, new technologies are coming online in the next few years which will make these processes economic. (Our company Zymetis is contributing to these efforts.)
Other alternatives, such as wind, tidal, nuclear and hydro, will also play their role in making up a more complex fabric or "cocktail" of energy sources to meet our needs in the future. It's going to be a great 25 years!
It will be a combination of various alternative energy sources. Not one solution or alternative will replace crude. The green algae has a huge promise but it will not be mass produced for another 3 years. Couple it with more efficient vehicles such as PHEV or Hybrids, then we'll be on our way in reducing the dependency on crude.
Hydrogen's infrastructure needs and the amount of CO2 required to mass produce it makes it a less viable option.
Complete battery replacement is still quite a few years away due to safety reasons and cost. However, battery holds promise if we look at Lithium Ion as a longer term solution.
As Scott had pointed out, it really depends.
Links:
The simple answer is any and all fuel sources which are renewable, sustainable and economically viable. However, your question focuses on the supply side of the energy equation. We must first and foremost focus on the demand side by reducing our per capita energy needs through efficiency.
John D
Business/Technology Analyst, Project Manager
Best Answers in: Computers and Software (2), Staffing and Recruiting (1), Ethics (1)
We must reconsider Nuclear Energy first. It has the least CO2 impact, provides electrical power, and reduces the need for coal burning power plants. If I've done my estimations correctly, for every one nuclear power plant built, two coal burning, air polluting, CO2 impacting power plant could be shut down. Replacing all of the coal burning plants with nuclear would eliminate a massive amount of particulate pollution and significantly reduce CO2 emissions as well as dramatically reduce acid rain.
The greenest way to go for automobiles is electric, however, the existing limitation of 250 miles without the need for a 3 or 4 hour recharge won't cut it for half the people. People compare a gasoline car that needs only a few minutes to refuel, and that is what they want from electric. Obviously, with today's battery technology, that isn't going to happen, so what can we do to eliminate the need to stop and recharge? One possible idea is to put in a separate system to recharge the batteries on the fly. If that could extend the range of electric cars to 400-450 miles, it might do the trick for the majority of people's need for mileage range. For the remaining few that still see the need to drive 700 or 800 miles in a single day, perhaps today's limitations can't help them.
Regardless, I think electric vehicles are the way to go (with the electrical power coming from nuclear reactors). There are battery alternatives out there that have yet to be tried, and as we all know, necessity is the mother of invention.
Greg A. W
Senior Embedded Systems Developer at TELoIP Inc
Best Answers in: E-Commerce (2), Computers and Software (2), Enterprise Software (1), Information Security (1), Telecommunications (1)
Electricity, obviously.
Of course all the things others have said about getting away from unclean and/or "non-renewable" sources have to be accomplished along the way.
Also I think we need to move to a somewhat more de-centralized system of generation and distribution. Wind, solar, co-generation, and many other current and potential sources pretty much require this to happen.
I'm constantly surprised by the number of people who regurgitate various assumptions and opinions as if they are cold hard facts, especially when it comes to figuring out how the public masses can adapt to change. There's a lot of negative attitude of various kinds in other responses here.
