Hello Meg1,
If you want a car that uses less fuel then get one of the European diesals.
They do a much better milage than the Prius.

Re charging from the grid, well the fact is the power from the grid to
the wheels produces less co2 than burning petrol.
This is because of the efficiency of power stations even coal fired power stations.

However the objective is not to produce less co2 but to replace oil
consumption. According to the Hirsch report it is expected to take
20 years to replace the vehicle internal combustion engine.
The fleet turnover time is around 10 years so we don't have much time left.
Ethanol requires too much fertiliser, an oil derivative, and the
energy return is not brilliant. We might just get away with using
sugar cane, but I doubt we can do it economically when you consider
where the ethanol would be produced and where it would be used.
It cannot be put through pipes.
It could get down to driving or eating.

There is not enough fossil fuels that will be burnt to reach the CCIP
projections anyway, so we should concentrate on the real problem.

If the pessimists are right then we are already out of time.
A major switch to public transport will happen well before we change
our cars, and some argue we should not even try.

Hi Bazz,

The fuel-efficient European diesels get good mileage because (a) these cars weigh very little and thus take little power to move; (b) diesel fuel packs more power per litre than petrol (it's heavier and has a higher carbon content); and (c) diesel engines have a higher thermal efficiency than petrol engines.

The reason the Prius doesn't do so well as a small diesel is *entirely* down to the weight and the choice of fuel. It certainly does better than any petrol car of comparable mass using a traditional transmission. I don't think there are any really lightweight hybrids available yet (even the Insight weighs over 800kg), but diesel-engined ones are already available.

It's certainly true that a battery car chraged from mains electricity will generate less CO2 emissions than would a comparable car with a petrol engine. But this does not mean that coal-fired power stations are very much more efficient than internal-combustion engines: they're not. A steam turbine at its very best doesn't reach 40% thermal efficiency (conversion of heat to mechanical power) while a petrol engine can manage 20-30% and diesels can reach 40%. CO2 emissions from internal-combustion-engine generators are actually somewhat lower than from "efficient" coal-fired power stations.

The reason vehicles' emissions are so high is that the engines are almost never run at optimal speeds and temperatures and spend much of their time idling or "engine braking" (an utterly wasteful process). An electric drivetrain decouples the power source from the variable speed of the vehicle, and also permits regenerative braking. The efficiency gains to be had are almost as great from a well-designed hybrid (which can choose the conditions under which it runs the IC engine) as from a battery-electric vehicle.

Expect to see plenty of plug-in hybrids soon, charged from mains electricity when parked but including lightweight internal-combustion engines for extending the range. I'd *like* to see battery-electric vehicles with standardised, accessible battery packs that can be exchanged and recharged at any filling station (like changing horses but with less personality). I don't know how likely that is, but it's practical.

Bazz, a quick response to 1. 'Ethanol requires too much fertiliser'

...no more than for food and with the development of cellulose ethanol, this will be reduced per tonne of feedstock to minimal proportions.

2. 'energy return is not brilliant. We might just get away with using sugar cane, but I doubt we can do it economically when you consider where the ethanol would be produced and where it would be used.'

Brazil's statistics from sugar cane are: 1 unit of energy input produces 1.7 units of energy. US stats on corn based ethanol are 1.2 to 1.3 units produced. Brazil's ethanol energy output/fossil fuel input is 8.3 (Corn is 1.3 to 1.8), (sugar beet (1.9) and (wheat 1.2).

We produce over 85% of sugar for the export market which is now oversupplied. Around 40% of the domestic crop could supply 10% of the total petrol engine market in Australia with NO increase in production. The domestic market uses a million tonnes of sugar and there would still be sugar for export to NZ and other contracted buyers, with room for further ethanol production from the existing sugar cane crop without expansion. This does not include the ethanol production from grains that are already in existence, though less efficient, they are still environmentally friendly in all respects. Manildra produces ethanol (sufficient to supply the entire NSW market to 2% blends by 2008) from the waste product of wheat used to produce flour from their mills. No danger to food supply there.

“It cannot be put through pipes.”

Brazil is currently piping ethanol through newly constructed pipelines to ports in order to overcome their transport problems to get export ethanol to ships for transport.

(tbc…)

(Cont…)
Brazil is using ethanol for car engines to 100% in flex-fuel cars and for aviation fuel in aeroplanes currently in use. German built racing cars and carts have used pure ethanol for over a generation.

“It could get down to driving or eating.”

As indicated above, there is more sugar produced now than the world market can use since Brazil has expanded and continues to expand its production. This argument is not a valid one when the use of sugar cane is concerned as production would rise to meet demand requirements anyway. Regarding grains, significant increase in production is already happening in the USA since ethanol from corn has been in greater demand.

“There is not enough fossil fuels that will be burnt to reach the CCIP
projections anyway, so we should concentrate on the real problem.”

Surely any amount of fossil fuels that can be substituted by renewable, green energy is a necessity in the current environmental climate. The real problem with use of fossil fuels is the additives that are included, including toluene, MTBE and others that have been long banned overseas due to their highly carcinogenic nature…review some of the material provided by Associate Professor Dr Ray Kearney, (retired Dec, 06) from the University of Sydney, Immunology and Respiratory Diseases…his arguments for the use of ethanol in fuel are impossible to dispute for health reasons alone. Ethanol, even at 10% will clean up vehicle emissions up to 50%. Tests on vehicle emissions in Sweden and indeed world-wide, using ethanol blends, prove beyond any doubt that using the present fossil fuel blends and additives in Australia is killing our country and producing enormous damage to the health of its residents.

Use of fossil fuels is environmentally and economically against the best interests of Australia and Australians. Use of ethanol blends in flex fuel cars will replace fossil fuels and clean up vehicle emissions far beyond the actual blend % as indicated in testing done during the biofuel trials (instigated by Minister Roz Kelly), where ethanol powered vehicles won every category by a country mile.

Meg1 says;
Brazil's statistics from sugar cane are: 1 unit of energy input produces 1.7 units of energy. US stats on corn based ethanol are 1.2 to 1.3 units produced. Brazil's ethanol energy output/fossil fuel input is 8.3 (Corn is 1.3 to 1.8), (sugar beet (1.9) and (wheat 1.2).
unquote;

Well there you are 1.7 to 1 is not very good at all and that is before
you transport it. Then of course you only get about 65% of the energy that you would get from petrol.
That means a greater volume has to be transported.

>We produce over 85% of sugar for the export market which is now >oversupplied.
Around 40% of the domestic crop could supply 10% of the
>total petrol engine market in Australia with NO increase in >production.

And its all up in Nth Queensland.
So how do we produce the next 90% ?
I suspect that you do not understand the magnitude of the problem.

“It cannot be put through pipes.”

>Brazil is currently piping ethanol through newly constructed >pipelines to ports in order to overcome their transport problems to >get export ethanol to ships for transport.

Interesting, I had not heard that previously. I wonder what is the difference in the pipe.
Must be lined I imagine with poly plastic of some sort (another
petroleum product) to prevent corrosion.
(tbc…)

Hirsch, the author of the US Gov report on energy depletion has just
produced a paper on the mitigation of liquid fuels. I have not read it
yet but it should be very enlightening

1 to 1.7 means that ethanol from sugar cane does better than covering its inputs…by .7…that’s better than any of its competitors...including coal fired power stations or ‘clean’ coal…if we can seriously use that term. .7 over and above inputs is almost double in this instance…that’s not good, Bazz…it’s excellent!

Ethanol does not have anywhere near the transport distances that can be attributed to fossil fuels and all fuels need to be transported…including batteries and coal. Ethanol would be produced in WA (sugar cane), NSW (wheat waste), Vic (CSR’s Portsea grain plant presently in planning stage), Qld (sorgum-Dalby and sugar cane from northern NSW to Redlynch and the Atherton tablelands). SA has investigations under way into waste products suitable as ethanol feedstock. Ethanol produced can easily be utilized relatively close to point of supply, with relatively little planning and foresight. …Not ‘all up in Nth Qld’, Bazz…all over the country…aint it great?

‘So how do we produce the next 90%?’

The grid cannot supply sufficient electricity for Australia’s present electricity needs, how do you suppose there could be enough electricity supplied to power cars, trains and buses without causing massive difficulties with power supply and resultant outages across the country…well then again, we’ve already got a regular taste of that with present poorly maintained electricity infrastructure, haven’t we? Of course the sugar cane crop supplies co-generation to the grid too, doesn’t it? Marvellous plant that cane!

The next 90%? Well that will be supplied by a variety of purpose designed products that will suit the needs required…e.g., ethanol, hydrogen cars (ethanol is a great source of hydrogen too!), electricity, gas powered, etc……..

With the use of ethanol produced from cane stubble, banana plants, timber waste, lawn clippings, sugar cane trash and other crop biomass, ethanol can be produced in far greater quantities within a relatively short time frame, the technology is there, it’s just the political will that is dragging the chain. I understand the ‘magnitude of the problem’ very well, it’s all about political donations by the power brokers who control policy…

(tbc...)