We have an existing infrastructure that costs billions of dollars to put in place. We have an automotive industry that is tooled around building internal combustion engines. Why would we want to spend the money to retool this entire infrastructure?
There is another option out there. Modern diesel engines are very fuel efficient, and when coupled with Biodiesel fuel they are very environmentally friendly.
Volkswagen makes a model of their Jetta with a 2L TDI (Turbo Diesel Injected) engine that gets 50 mpg freeway and town. Couple that with a 14-gallon tank, and you have quite the cruising range. My F250 gets 16 in town and 20 on the freeway – pretty good for a 7.3L V8 with 525 f/lbs of torque. Here is a good page with lots of information about diesel engines, how they work and more.
According to the EPA’s studies in 2002, when you run biodiesel three of the four major regulated pollutants drop by 50%, 50% and 80% (C02, Particulate Matter and Hydrocarbons), and NOx rises by about 10%. Note that these were done in 2002 with engines built before 1997. According to the National Biodiesel Board, B100’s emissions are as following: HC – 67%, Carbon Monoxide –48%, Particulate Matter –47%, NOx +10%, Sulfates –100%, Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons –80%, Nitrated PAH’s –90% and Ozone potential of speciated Hydrocarbons –50%. All of this was taken from the National Biodiesel Board’s Research.
A little about biodiesel. Many of the biodiesel fuels are blends with standard diesel. This is notated as B
Biodiesel is also supported in existing engines – you do not need to modify the engine to run it. The National Biodiesel Board has information about specific companies and if their warranties are voided by the use of Biodiesel.
In Spokane you can get biodiesel at City Service Valcon,18826 East Appleway, Pump 2. You can find a biodiesel pump near you at (again) The National Biodiesel Board
As of this writing, Biodiesel is more expensive then normal diesel, however Congress just lowered the Excise Tax on it, and as soon as that goes into effect, it will become much more competitive.
So, let’s all help out Mother Nature with the tools that we have right now, and not pour billions of dollars into new infrastructure. Let’s use what we have now, buy diesel and pour that vegetable oil into it!
-Tsyko
2 comments:
True, but the output from hydrogen powered vehicles would be water. So instead of reducing pollutants to 50% like the biodiesel would, it would reduce it by 100%.
We do have an infrastructure in place for internal combustion engines, but trying to remain compatible with our current infrastructure is not a good argument for polluting the air.
In the past the government has done some pretty silly things, but they have also done some good. For example, the highway system running throughout our country was very costly, but in the end, the interstate highway system is one of the things that has made this country great.
Moving to hydrogen vehicles could just be the jumping off point for the entire world to go that direction.
What better way to take the wind out of the sails of terrorists then by taking their oil money away?
|\/|. |<.
Well, using B100 would allow us to stop buying fossil fuels from other countries. We have the production means in the USA to produce enough Soybean and Rapeseed fuel to run the nation. If we put that billion, I'll bet we could even figure out a way to use the left overs from farming - say, wheat stalks.
To put hydrogen fuel pumps at every corner would cost billions and billions of dollars - As of 1998, there were 187,097 gas stations in the USA. I suspect that number has grown. Those stations sold 344,765 gallons of Gas and 85081 gallons of Diesel a DAY. So, let's just assume that there are 200,000 gas stations in the US right now - a pretty good WAG. Even if the cost is only 100,000 dollars per station to add Hydrogen pumps, we are looking at an investment of 20 billion. All of these numbers are totally out of thin air. If the cost is only 10,000 dollars per station, it would still cost 2 billion to add these pumps.
Add to this that tanks carrying hydrogen are about twice the size of gas tanks for the same amount of range, (http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/progress/hydrogen.html) it really does not seem feasible. Add in the increased cost of hydrogen as fuel, the extreme flamibility of it (can you say Hindenburg?) and we have a real recipe for disaster.
My big point is that we already have the stations, we already have the fuel production technology and we already have the vehicles to run this. Why should the goverment be spending my hard earned tax money on researching such a pipe dream?
We have a safe, enviromently freindly fuel that we already have done the foot work on. Why not just use that?
Honestly, I think that the Oil companys have something to do with this. The see Biodiesel as the only real threat right now, so they convince the goverment to research a new technolgy that will cost more, be more unsafe, and eventually not be used.
Post a Comment