The U.S. Needs to Transition to Hydrous Ethanol
Our nation needs to transition to hydrous ethanol as the primary renewable transportation fuel, writes Brian J. Donovan with Renergie, Inc. Many of you may be thinking that this is no different than what many people are proposing – the move to ethanol- but Donovan is proposing the use of hydrous ethanol versus anhydrous ethanol. Simply put, anhydrous ethanol has a purity of at least 99 percent and meets the standard specification for ethanol used as a motor fuel. Hydrous (or wet) ethanol can be produced by simple distillation (think in your backyard) without the dehydration step (which then produces anhydrous ethanol) and is between 93-96 percent ethanol and 7-4 percent water.
In February, 2009, the U.S. EPA granted Renergie a first-of-its-kind waiver for the purpose of testing hydrous E10, E20, E30 & E85 ethanol blends in non-flex-fuel vehicles and flex-fuel vehicles in the State of Louisiana. Under this test program, Renergie will use variable blending pumps, not splash blending, to precisely dispense hydrous ethanol blends of E10, E20, E30, and E85 to test vehicles for the purpose of testing for blend optimization with respect to fuel economy, engine emissions, and vehicle drivability.
Initial tests conducted in Europe have confirmed that hydrous ethanol can be blended effectively with gasoline without phase separation or other problems. But why is this important you ask? According to Donovan, hydrous ethanol may be better suited for mid-level blends used in FFVs and non-FFVs.
He writes that due to emissions and durability testing requirements, ethanol producers are having difficulty with assessing the economic and environmental impacts of midlevel anhydrous ethanol blends on current auto engines in order to increase blending rates and the RFS. In contrast to higher percentage anhydrous ethanol blends, HE15 and higher blends can be utilized in legacy vehicles (existing auto engines) as well as FFVs. Once parallel testing has been conducted for midlevel and E85/HE85 anhydrous and hydrous ethanol blends, further fuel efficiency and emissions testing may not be necessary.
Should that be the case, then this is good news for both consumers and the ethanol industry – consumers get more choice at the pump and the ethanol industry has a larger home for its product.
4 Comments »
Ian Griffyd-Williams
Wouldn’t selling hydrous ethanol to consumers mean selling them a product that was about 5% water? Any blender selling hydrous would have to make it clear that the product had water in it, and that could be a difficult sell to consumers who for decades have considered water in fuel to be a bad thing.
There would be substantial energy saving in producing hydrous v. anhydrous. About 20% of the energy a still consumes is spent getting that last 5% or water out. But let’s be sure we make it crystal clear to consumers the facts of the product we expect them to buy.
They would be correct in thinking that hydrous should be 10-15% less expensive to purchase than anhydrous.
rodrigo
Hydrous ethanol is widely used in Brazil. And it’s main advantage is that it cost less to be made. With flex fuel cars here we blend in the car any mix of gas (here each liter of gas has 25% anhydrous ethanol) and hydrous ethanol. The main disadvantage is to turn the car on in cool morning, but technology already has solved this problem with a very smal gas tank (less than a liter), that is used just to turn on the car.
Brazil to Have Record Breaking Sugar & Ethanol Production - Domestic Fuel
[...] 438.56 million tons, is intended for ethanol production, which will generate 9.13 billion liters of anhydrous-type fuel (to be added to gasoline) and 18.68 billion liters of hydrated alcohol (to be sold as fuel at the [...]
Brazil to Have Record Breaking Sugar & Ethanol Production
[...] 438.56 million tons, is intended for ethanol production, which will generate 9.13 billion liters of anhydrous-type fuel (to be added to gasoline) and 18.68 billion liters of hydrated alcohol (to be sold as fuel at the [...]
Comments RSS feed — TrackBack URI
Leave a Comment