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:
 We don’t use EITHER
need ethanol or gasoline
new car/engine
designs/distribution
Easy switchover for automobile manufacturers
 Rapid changeover of automobiles ispossible!

Fully compatible
 Little cost towith Hybrid cars automakers,
consumers,
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 “savings”!
 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 “blending” - just
 add E 85
 Multiple Issues, One Answer
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 Hydrogen Biofuels
Energy Security Risk High Low Low

Cost per Mile High -High Low

Infrastructure Cost High Very High Low

Technology Risk Very Low Very High Low

Environmental Cost Very High Med-Low Low

Implementation Risk Very Low Very High Low

Interest Group Opposition Very High High Low

Political Difficulty Very High High Low

Time to Impact - Very high 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)
 Carbon emission reduction of 80%++ for light transportation

 Zero sulphur, low carbon monoxide, particulate & toxic emissions

 Co-production of animal protein & cellulosic biomass

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

 Energy Crops (Switchgrass):

 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
140

120

129.4 %
100

80

105.3 %
106.4 %
110.0 %

103.2 %

105.5 %
95.5 %
103.3 %

102.1 %

60

89.3 %
40

20

0
Power Torque Max Speed Acc Time Consumption
(0~100 km/h) (L/100km)

Gasoline 0% Gasohol 22% Ethanol 100%

 photosynthesis.
6 CO2 + 6 H2O + light → C6H12O6 + 6 O2

During ethanol fermentation

C6H12O6 → 2 C2H5OH+ 2 CO2 + heat

During combustion,

C2H5OH + 3 O2 → 2 CO2 + 3 H2O + heat

1. Biomass Handling.
2. Biomass Pretreatment.
3. Enzyme Production.
4. Cellulose Hydrolysis.
5. Glucose Fermentation.
6. Pentose Fermentation.
7. Ethanol Recovery.
 Farmers Are Driven By Economics
Biomass Corn Wheat
Grain yield (bushel) N/A 162 46
Grain price ($/bushel) N/A $2 $3
Biomass yield (tons) 15 2 2
Biomass price ($/ton) $20 $20 $20
Total revenue $300 $364 $178
Variable costs $84 $168 $75
Amortized fixed costs $36 $66 $36
Net return $180 $120 $57
 Hydrogen vs. Ethanol Economics
 Raw Material Costs: cost per Giga Joule (gj)
 Electricity @$0.04/kwh = $11.2/gj (Lower cost than natural gas)
 Biomass @$40/ton = $2.3/gj (with 70% conversion efficiency)

 Hydrogen from electricity costly vs. Ethanol from Biomass

 Hydrogen from Natural Gas no better than Natural Gas
 Cost multiplier on hydrogen: distribution, delivery, storage
 Higher fuel cell efficiency compared to hybrids not enough!
 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 = Rs 20 crores
machineries = Rs 5 crores

 Funds available = Rs 4 crores

 Funds required = Rs 21 crores
 Estimated rate of return(before B.E.P) = 75 %
 Estimated rate of return(after B.E.P) = 125%
 RESULTS?
Feed mid-east terrorism Mid-west farmers

17
IMPORT EXPENSIVE
GASOLINE
USE CHEAPER ETHANOL
 Results?
MID-EAST OIL
CREATE FARM JOBS 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