Fuel for 2013 Engines

[flynfrog]

I found a respirator to more helpful than the hat. I came across I really cool book on how to make your own race fuel written in the 60s most of them were base off of av fuels. We mixed some kart fuel back in the day I think the worst part was benzene

[autogyro]

I found a respirator to more helpful than the hat. I came across I really cool book on how to make your own race fuel written in the 60s most of them were base off of av fuels. We mixed some kart fuel back in the day I think the worst part was benzene

I remember Ginger Baker who drove one of my cars saying the smell made him nearly as high as cocaine.
He got drenched in it one weekend, its in his book.

[Edis]

the bio-oxygenates will be replaced by bio-hydrocarbons. The most common bio-hydrocarbon today is the bio-diesel from vegetables or animal fat but there are researches going on to produce gasoline from the same sources.

I don't like the idea of F1 moving to bio-fuel. It's a real dead end in automotive technology. There will never be enough land to serve every car in the world with bio-fuel and it puts pressure on land and food markets.

It's the same scam as hydrogen - oil companies want a product to sell, through a pump, and bio-fuels fits this bill nicely. Admittedly, biofuel might be the only option for aviation, but straight electricity has to be the ideal for cars. Hydrogen might be required if other energy storage options are not workable.

If you limit yourself to first generation biofuels that use only the energy stored by the plants in the form of oils (bio-diesel) and sugar/starch (bio-ethanol), that is correct, making enough fuel would be difficult. But second generation biofuels can go around that problem. Gasfication can for instance convert any hydrogen and carbon containing material into synthesis gas (CO + H2) which then can be used to "build" the fuel from the ground up. It is usually used to produce hydrocarbons using the Fischer-Tropsch process or methanol and dimethyl ether. A large proportion of the waste heat created by the process can be sold for district heating (some electricity production can also be possible), so the overall efficiency is very high. Since the biomass is gasified it also doesn't matter what type it is; sugar, starch, cellulose, lignine or what ever, everything goes.

But of course, we must also use much less primary energy per person in the future than we do now. Security of supply really starts with energy efficiency.

Also, there is nothing that says we can only use land to produce biomass.

Biomass is also a primary energy unlike hydrogen, which is only an energy carrier. So hydrogen will never be a replacement for oil. Electricity is also only an energy carrier, and thus not a replacement for oil.

[WhiteBlue]

If you limit yourself to first generation biofuels that use only the energy stored by the plants in the form of oils (bio-diesel) and sugar/starch (bio-ethanol), that is correct, making enough fuel would be difficult. But second generation biofuels can go around that problem. Gasfication can for instance convert any hydrogen and carbon containing material into synthesis gas (CO + H2) which then can be used to "build" the fuel from the ground up. It is usually used to produce hydrocarbons using the Fischer-Tropsch process or methanol and dimethyl ether. A large proportion of the waste heat created by the process can be sold for district heating (some electricity production can also be possible), so the overall efficiency is very high. Since the biomass is gasified it also doesn't matter what type it is; sugar, starch, cellulose, lignine or what ever, everything goes.

But of course, we must also use much less primary energy per person in the future than we do now. Security of supply really starts with energy efficiency.

Also, there is nothing that says we can only use land to produce biomass.

Biomass is also a primary energy unlike hydrogen, which is only an energy carrier. So hydrogen will never be a replacement for oil. Electricity is also only an energy carrier, and thus not a replacement for oil.

Some very valid points. Thanks for this input.

[Alvin]

Hi,
For more addition at this thread, i want to say that Bio fuel cannot fulfill the teh consumer requirement as it is generated from plants and things like this so we cannot reserver much land for cars and engines. There must be another alternative for Gasoline.
Thanks

[Scuderia Nuvolari]

nono

[djos]

Hi,
For more addition at this thread, i want to say that Bio fuel cannot fulfill the teh consumer requirement as it is generated from plants and things like this so we cannot reserver much land for cars and engines. There must be another alternative for Gasoline.
Thanks

Biofuel made from waste (eg Aussie "Sucrogen" BioEthanol is made from waste products from the Sugar making process) is fine, I draw the line at the stupid Americans growing switch grass etc especially for making biofuels etc instead of growing food to feed ppl.!

[Sayshina]

I was under the impression that biofuel made from algae was still pretty far away from being market viable. As in several years.

At any rate, biofuels are here to stay. The US Navy is investing heavily in them and considers them to be a national security issue. And that's a nation that has a reasonably supply of oil. Germany taught the world what can happen when you try to fight a war without a native fuel supply.

Some of you have argued that biofuels are a dead end because they can't take over the entire load from fossil fuels. I don't see any reason they need to. You wouldn't want to put solar panels on your F1 car either, but that's no reason you can't get your pit electrical needs from solar.

I would expect a greater bio content by rule. That just seems to be politically expedient. I would also expect the fuels to otherwise look mostly the same as today, again by rule. The people in charge of F1 at present are not technically minded at all.