Your link is a little thin. <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/smile.gif' alt='Smile'><br /> <br /> Here's some meaty stuff:<br /> <br /> <a href='http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_fuel'>Linkie</a>

   

Returning to an old argument you made... Diesel engines CAN work with fuels other than conventional Diesel fuel. While gasoline engines are really picky about their fuel and must maintain a specific fuel-air ratio, Diesel engines are compression engines. The Diesel engine sucks in a large quantity of air and compresses it. The pressure increase created a temperature increase. Next you inject fuel into the cylinder and it will burn, causing an even greater pressure increase, tossing the piston downwards. I know for a fact, that heating oil and vegetable oil can be used to run a Diesel vehicle. Fuel good enough for Diesel vehicles can also be made from soybeans and coal liquification. Currently the US and Canada only have one car that comes with Diesel engine, which is the Volkswagen, however in Europe close to half of the cars are Diesel. It won't take a major effort for US automakers to start making Diesel cars either. American Diesel engines are among the best. They even use them in small aircraft. When oil becomes too expensive, alternative fuels will become economically viable. Peak oil won't be as bad as some people think. However, Peak Stupidity is still a black clowd on the horizon. It's a much greater threat than Peak Oil.

   

[QUOTE BY= badsector] Returning to an old argument you made... Diesel engines CAN work with fuels other than conventional Diesel fuel. <br /> [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Yes they can, but you can't just throw them in your tank and have them work. Some engines need slight modifications (fuel injectors or fuel filters for example) so they can handle the more viscous fuels.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= badsector] <br /> While gasoline engines are really picky about their fuel and must maintain a specific fuel-air ratio, Diesel engines are compression engines. The Diesel engine sucks in a large quantity of air and compresses it. The pressure increase created a temperature increase. Next you inject fuel into the cylinder and it will burn, causing an even greater pressure increase, tossing the piston downwards. <br /> [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> A little simplified, and not quite accurate. All fuels have an 'octane' rating, meaning at what pressure they will spontaneously combust without an ignition source. Car (gasoline, natural gas/ propane) engines typically run with a compression ration of 8.5:1 to 11:1. For the former, an octane rating of 87 is reccommended. If you try to run 87 octane in an engine with a compression ratio over 10:1, it will detonate before the spark plug is fired. This will give 'knock', a loss of power and can make the pistons fly out of the block. For 10:1 and over compression, you need a 92 or 94 octane rated fuel. Some engines in the 15:1 (racing) need special 100 or 110 octane racing fuel.<br /> <br /> The Diesel runs at over 80:1 compression. That is what causes the very heavy fuel to detonate, and why diesel engines have no spark plug. They don't 'burn' fuel, they explode it. And they need far less fuel to do it. The average gas engine (fuel injected) pressurizes the fuel at around 20psi. A Diesel will compress the fuel through the injector at upwards of 2500psi.<br /> <br /> Here's more:<br /> <br /> http://auto.howstuffworks.com/diesel.htm<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= badsector] <br /> I know for a fact, that heating oil and vegetable oil can be used to run a Diesel vehicle. Fuel good enough for Diesel vehicles can also be made from soybeans and coal liquification.<br /> [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Yes, but you can't just put used cooking oil into your engine as you suggested, without catastrophic engine failure. You need to chemically alter it for the diesel to be able to detonate it.<br /> <br /> http://www.freedomfuelamerica.com/<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= badsector] <br /> Currently the US and Canada only have one car that comes with Diesel engine, which is the Volkswagen, however in Europe close to half of the cars are Diesel. <br /> [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Ummm, no. Smart from Mercedes all have Diesel engines only. Mercedes offers an E class with diesel engines. Most Dodge and Jeep trucks have Diesel engine options. Ford and Chev offer Diesel options on the mid size pickups. <br /> <br /> True that our options are limited though on passenger cars. I'd like to see more Peugots here, and I thought the 406 was a very nice car.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= badsector] <br /> It won't take a major effort for US automakers to start making Diesel cars either. American Diesel engines are among the best. They even use them in small aircraft. <br /> [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Again, most NA trucks are available with Cummins or Caterpillar engines.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= badsector] <br /> When oil becomes too expensive, alternative fuels will become economically viable. Peak oil won't be as bad as some people think. However, Peak Stupidity is still a black clowd on the horizon. It's a much greater threat than Peak Oil.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Hopefully battery technology will have improved. The limitations of current discharge/weight will have been overcome, and we can all drive pure electric by then.

   

Sorry Caleb, you've got something wrong. No problem, you are not a mechanic.<br /> <br /> There are no detonations in engine cylinders. All internal combustion engines rely on the relation between heat and pressure. Nothing explodes. The fuel <b>does</b> burn in the cylinder, the heat causes a pressure increase and forces the piston down. Anyone who really knows how it works will tell you that.<br /> <br /> Also, in less developed countries Diesel vehicles are run on heating oil. Sorry to rain on your parade.

   

[QUOTE BY= Dr Caleb]If you try to run 87 octane in an engine with a compression ratio over 10:1, it will detonate before the spark plug is fired. This will give 'knock'[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= badsector]<br /> There are no detonations in engine cylinders. All internal combustion engines rely on the relation between heat and pressure. Nothing explodes.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Oh please, quit being so pedantic just because you can. Engine knock is referred to commonly as 'detonation'. If you were a real gearhead, you'd know that.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= badsector]<br /> Also, in less developed countries Diesel vehicles are run on heating oil. Sorry to rain on your parade.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Heating oil is not the vegetable oil you were planning on running your car on. Home heating oil is so similar to Diesel that they are almost interchangable. Go ahead, run your new Volkswagen on veggie oil. Good luck trying to start it! Glow plugs are not hot enough to start the engine running veggie oil.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= badsector] Sorry Caleb, you've got something wrong. No problem, you are not a mechanic.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Sorry to rain on your parade, but I can strip and rebuild an engine. And transmission. And fuel injection system, and a carb . . . I do all my own mechanical work (that doesn't require expensive machines).<br /> <br /> I guess I shouldn't bother trying to help you out. All it seems you can do is attack me personally.

   

Nothing personal. You were right in the sense that it takes a little modification to accomodate vegetable oil as fuel, however here are some links you might find interesting:<br /> <br /> <a href="http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=run+Diesel+on+vegetable+oil&meta=">Google search</a><br /> <br /> It's almost unbelievable, but some people spend their time converting Diesel engines to run on vegetable oil. These are generally small companies or just private car lovers like yourself. If they can make it happen, there is no stopping large car makers to actually design engines for vegetable oil. If there will be demand for it, they will do it. When oil gets too expensive, we will probably see a zoo of different fuel solutions until one becomes the best and take over the market.<br /> <br /> The Peak Oilers will probably feel a little sorry to spend all those years expecting the end of the World, but then they can always look forward to and prepare for Peak Vegetable Oil or Peak Hydrogen, so nothing is lost. <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/biggrin.gif' alt='Big Grin'>

   

Oh, I totally agree. But you don't have to convert the engine to run on Veggie oil. You just have to ethier put in a hotter glow plug to start it, or add a second fuel tank. A smaller one, just with diesel in it to start the motor, then run from a primary tank full of sunshiney Canola goodness.<br /> <br /> For the time being I favour using racing methanol to alter the chemical structure of used cooking oil, then using lye to precipitate glycerine from the mixture, and you have yourself 100L of biodiesel for the cost of 10L of Methanol ($5) and a box of lye.<br /> <br /> Imagine how far a Smart car could go on 100L?? And the Smart Roadster is a rather attractive package too!<br />

   

What exactly is the appeal of running an engine on vegetable oil? I know some extra green environmentalists do this (Neil Young's tour buses do, I believe, but don't quote me on that). <br /> <br /> Realistically, the soil nutrients and fresh water needed to grow vegetables is more scarce than petroleums. Mind you, if we're going to fertilize our crops with petroleum extracts, why not run our cars off vegetable oil?

   

Kory!! Long time!! Spring break, eh! Shouldn't you be in Florida getting really drunk?<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= Kory Yamashita]What exactly is the appeal of running an engine on vegetable oil?[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Vegetable oil is renewable, Crude (dino) oil is not. I put a link (that I can't find right now) about getting veggie oil and/or methanol from a perrenial sweetgrass. All you have to do is plant the grass, and cut it once in a while and turn it into fuel. No fertilizer. Very energy efficient.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= Kory Yamashita]Mind you, if we're going to fertilize our crops with petroleum extracts, why not run our cars off vegetable oil?[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> We could, but engines designed to run on gasoline won't burn veggie oil. We'd have to convert to the diesel type engine, which was origianlly designed to run on peanut oil. It is possible to turn the plant oil into synthetic crude, then to gasoline, but it would take a massive amount of energy.

   

Hey Doc!<br /> <br /> What concerns me isn't so much the renewable vs. non-renewable debate. Rather, it's more the limiting reactant (or product) issue. Since the ultimate choice of which energy sources we depend upon will likely be made by the overall projectected cost per unit of energy used, we might end up in big trouble. Current economics tend to be pretty short-sighted in relation to the timescales that mother nature works on. I kind of liken economics to a very fast-paced evolution: always changing and seeking more efficient structures to achieve its main goal. Unfortunately, the goal of modern dominant capitalist economics is quite different than the goal of evolution and even the population in general. But I'm ranting a rant I've ranted before.<br /> <br /> The point is this: what happens first? Do we turn to bio-fuels and deplete our fresh-water aquifers and soil nutrients, thus undermining our very ability to provide ourselves with basic nutrients? Or does burning the bio-fuels add to the already-high levels of CO2 in the atmosphere and asphyxiate us? Does burning oil products over-pollute the air with CO2? Or perhaps harsher particulates? Turning to coal might equally choke the planet. But with so much CO2 in the atmosphere, shouldn't planetary mean temperatures rise, providing plants with warmer conditions AND more CO2 to breathe, meaning they'll grow faster and provide MORE fuel to us? Obviously there's a whole in that argument - only so much solar energy hits the earth - so maybe that will limit plant growth.<br /> <br /> These energy discussions are so utterly complex that they really need a *VERY* in-depth study to determine exactly what kind of limits exist. Of course, there's a big push to avoid such a study as I'm sure it would betray certain mainstream corporate interests. And perhaps those who would lose market shares have already done such a study and understand their vulnerability.<br /> <br /> Which brings up the even more confusing issue: all our information is imperfect. Even WITH a well-conducted study, we don't actually KNOW if the oil companies and oil-producing countries hold the reserves they claim.<br /> <br /> Are oil-producing companies inflating the size of their oil fields to garner larger shares of markets under OPEC's reserves-based limitations (each country can produce a certain percentage of their total reserves each year)? Or are companies and OPEC countries low-balling their numbers to boost oil prices?<br /> <br /> I just find it really hard to properly discuss this question without SOME reliable sources. So, has anyone seen such a study??

   

[QUOTE BY= Kory Yamashita]I kind of liken economics to a very fast-paced evolution: always changing and seeking more efficient structures to achieve its main goal. Unfortunately, the goal of modern dominant capitalist economics is quite different than the goal of evolution and even the population in general. But I'm ranting a rant I've ranted before.[/quote]<br /> <br /> One user - Ed Deak - has posted quite a bit of economic theory here in the time you've been away. He's been studying economics since the end of WWII. If you have a chance, you might want to review his posts. Very enlightening.<br /> <br /> Specifically:<br /> http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article.php/20060221184719552<br /> http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article.php/20060212114538416<br /> http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article.php/20060128150315318<br /> http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article.php/20060123083817616<br /> http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article.php/20060110085537712<br /> http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article.php/20060105110336917<br /> <br /> http://www.vivelecanada.ca/comment.php?mode=view&cid=38532<br /> http://www.vivelecanada.ca/comment.php?mode=view&cid=30416<br /> <br /> Me, I'm in the Steven Leavitt crowd. I think that any economic model that blows up when a company sacrifices profit for goodwill (eg: donations to charity) isn't a very good model. It's flawed, and should be ignored.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= Kory Yamashita]<br /> The point is this: what happens first? Do we turn to bio-fuels and deplete our fresh-water aquifers and soil nutrients, thus undermining our very ability to provide ourselves with basic nutrients? [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> As above, the sweetgrass I mentioned requires no special farming methods (just plant and harvest once in a while) is easily converted to ethanol, and the residue can be packed into pellets and burnt like wood or fed to livestock. Aquifers wouldn't be depleted because you can use far greater land area, as the grass does not need irrigation other than natural rainfall. Plant 1 million hectares, and if only 900,000 grow, well, all you wasted was seed and fuel to plant. But the other 900,000 will produce next season.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= Kory Yamashita]<br /> Or does burning the bio-fuels add to the already-high levels of CO2 in the atmosphere and asphyxiate us? Does burning oil products over-pollute the air with CO2? Or perhaps harsher particulates? [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Ahhh! That's the beauty of BioFuel. Zero CO2 added to the environment, because the carbon in the plants was already taken out of the environment by the plants themselves.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= Kory Yamashita]<br /> Turning to coal might equally choke the planet. But with so much CO2 in the atmosphere, shouldn't planetary mean temperatures rise, providing plants with warmer conditions AND more CO2 to breathe, meaning they'll grow faster and provide MORE fuel to us? [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> You might want to look up 'Tipping Point'. Increasing CO2 does mean an increasing mean temperature, but as temperatures rise, the reflective nature of ice caps and glaciers that melt means that temperatures rise faster and melt more reflective ice, and increase temperature . . . Arrid regions such as sub-sahara Africa and south eastern Austrailia become hotter and drier. Plants will not grow in dry conditions.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= Kory Yamashita]<br /> Obviously there's a whole in that argument - only so much solar energy hits the earth - so maybe that will limit plant growth.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> It will, but then we'll be in a position to use that increased solar energy, if we develop the technology.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= Kory Yamashita]<br /> These energy discussions are so utterly complex that they really need a *VERY* in-depth study to determine exactly what kind of limits exist. Of course, there's a big push to avoid such a study as I'm sure it would betray certain mainstream corporate interests. And perhaps those who would lose market shares have already done such a study and understand their vulnerability.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> I agree. And for every opinion or fact I said above, there are exactally the same and opposite viewpoints somewhere.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= Kory Yamashita]<br /> Which brings up the even more confusing issue: all our information is imperfect. Even WITH a well-conducted study, we don't actually KNOW if the oil companies and oil-producing countries hold the reserves they claim.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> I don't trust Oil companies. Their stock price is exactally related to the reserves they control, so the do tend to overstate their reserves. Shell was busted for it a year or so ago. They overstated their reserves by some large factor, 10% or something.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= Kory Yamashita]<br /> Are oil-producing companies inflating the size of their oil fields to garner larger shares of markets under OPEC's reserves-based limitations (each country can produce a certain percentage of their total reserves each year)? Or are companies and OPEC countries low-balling their numbers to boost oil prices?[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> I'd say, yes to all the above.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= Kory Yamashita]<br /> I just find it really hard to properly discuss this question without SOME reliable sources. So, has anyone seen such a study?? [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Never. And I've looked.

   

[QUOTE]Realistically, the soil nutrients and fresh water needed to grow vegetables is more scarce than petroleums. [/QUOTE]<br /> Here is where some Third World countries come in, Brazil for instance. A huge landmass that could be used for this purpose.