Anant Raina Ganesh Rajeev Nikhil Swati Bhala U.

Prabir Jaiswal

Implausible Assertions ? 
We don t need oil for cars & light trucks Little incremental cost to produce &low risk  We definitely don t need hydrogen! 
Consumer choice: use EITHER ethanol or gasoline  We don t need new car/engine

designs/distribution 

Easy switchover for automobile manufacturers  Rapid changeover of automobiles ispossible! Fully compatible with Hybrid cars  Little cost to consumers, automakers,

government

Plausible? 
Petroleum use reduction of 40% for cars & light trucks. Ethanol cost @ $0.75/gal vs Petroleum @ $1.60/gal 60-80% reduction in GHG $50b on oil imports ³savings´!  Almost as many FFV¶s as diesel vehicles! Easy switchover for automobile manufacture

Why Ethanol? 
Today¶s cars & fuel distribution  Today¶s liquid fuel infrastructure  Leverages current trends: FFV¶s, Hybrids  Part of fuel market via ³blending´ - just

add E 85  Multiple Issues, One Answer
Š
Cheaper fuel energy security farm incomes & rural carbon emission reduction al employment

Fermentation of straw

C6H12O6

2C2H5OH + 2CO2

RISK: Oil vs. Hydrogen vs. Ethanol
Oil Energy Security Risk Cost per Mile Infrastructure Cost Technology Risk Environmental Cost Implementation Risk Interest Group Opposition Political Difficulty Time to Impact
High High High Very Low Very High Very Low Very High Very High -

Hydrogen
Low -High Very High Very High Med-Low Very High High High Very high

Biofuels
Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

‡E85
‡Low Evaporative emissions (Lower RVP) ‡Expected Low Permeation emissions in FFV¶s ‡Low Nox in modern vehicles with oxygen sensors

‡E6 (low ethanol blends)
‡Low Nox in modern vehicles with oxygen sensors (higher in older vehicles) ‡Increased RVP and increased VOC¶s (and hence ozone formation) ‡Increased permeation emissions in older vehicles ‡Reduced CO emissions «but ‡Reduced permeation emissions ( thicker hoses & plastics) in newer vehicles ‡California Low Emissions Vehicle II program reduces permeation and evaporative emissions (part of 2007 Federal Law)

« reasons to not like ethanol are disappearing!
Source: Personal Communications

Environmental Issues (Cellulosic E85)
Š Carbon emission reduction of 80%++ for light transportation Š Zero sulphur, low carbon monoxide, particulate & toxic emissions Š Co-production of animal protein & cellulosic biomass
ƒ ƒ

Allows existing cropland to produce our energy needs Reduces cost of animal feed & energy

Š Energy Crops (Switchgrass):
ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ

Carbon enrichment of soil (immediate) 2-8X lower nitrogen run-off 75-120X lower topsoil erosion (compared to corn) 2-5X more bird species Resistant to infestation & disease; lower pesticide use

Relative Performance of Ethanol Engines
140 120 100

110.0 %

106.4 %

80

103.2 %

105.3 %

103.3 %

40 20 0

Power

Torque

Max Speed

Acc Time (0~100 km/h)

89.3 %

60

102.1 %

Consumption (L/100km)

Gasoline 0%

Gasohol 22%

Ethanol 100%

105.5 %

95.5 %

129.4 %

Production 
p otosynt sis.
6 CO2 + 6 H2O + lig t C6H12O6 + 6 O2 

During t anol f r ntation C6H12O6 2 C2H5OH+ 2 CO2 + heat 

D ri g c

sti

, 2 CO2 + 3 H2O + at

C2H5OH + 3 O2

Production Process

Process Description.
1. Biomass andling. 2. Biomass Pr tr atment. 3. Enzyme Production. 4. Cellulose ydrolysis. 5. Glucose Fermentation. 6. Pentose Fermentation. 7. Et anol Recovery.

Farmers Are riven By Economics
Biomass
Grain yield (bushel) Grain price ($/bushel) Biomass yield (tons) Biomass price ($/ton) Total v Variable costs Amortized fixed costs N t turn N/A N/A 15 $20 $ $84 $36 $

Corn
162 $2 2 $20 $ $168 $66 $

Wheat
46 $3 2 $20 $ 7 $75 $36 $ 7

Hydrogen vs. Ethanol Economics
Š Raw Material Costs: cost per Giga Joule (gj)
ƒ ƒ

Electricity @$0.04/kwh = $11.2/gj (Lower cost than natural gas) Biomass @$40/ton = $2.3/gj (with 70% conversion efficiency)

Š Hydrogen from electricity costly vs. Ethanol from Biomass Š Hydrogen from Natural Gas no better than Natural Gas Š Cost multiplier on hydrogen: distribution, delivery, storage Š Higher fuel cell efficiency compared to hybrids not enough! Š Hydrogen cars have fewer moving parts but more sensitive, less tested systems and capital cost disadvantage
Reference: The Future of the Hydrogen Economy ( http://www.oilcrash.com/articles/h2_eco.htm#8.2 )

Financial structure 
Total cost of production :

procuring land machineries

= Rs 20 crores = Rs 5 crores 

  

Funds available Funds required Estimated rate of return(before B.E.P) Estimated rate of return(after B.E.P)

= Rs 4 crores = Rs 21 crores = 75 % = 125%

RESULTS?
Feed mid-east terrorism Mid-west farmers

17

IMPORT EXPENSIVE GASOLINE

USE CHEAPER ETHANOL

Results?
CREATE FARM JOBS
MID-EAST OIL TYCOONS

19

Results?
Oil rigs
Prairie grass fields

20

Results?
Fossil fuels Green Fuels

21

Results?
Gasoline Cars Cars with fuel choices

22

Results?

23

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful