The Ultimate Automobile

Reformed Methanol Fuel Cell Automobile Natalie (Credit: RG)

 by Marcel F. Williams 

Electric cars solely powered by lithium batteries are often promoted  as the inevitable  passenger vehicles of  a carbon neutral future  However, there are many alternate automobiles that could be compatible with a carbon neutral and even a carbon negative economy.


And  even gasoline powered vehicles could be carbon neutral and even carbon negative  — if the source of gasoline is from a carbon neutral or  carbon negative resource.

Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles already exist that utilize compressed hydrogen as their fuel source.  Hydrogen not only extends the range of a vehicle relative to a purely battery powered car but is much faster to refuel. And if the hydrogen fuel source can be derived through the electrolysis of water then carbon neutral sources of energy (nuclear, solar, wind, and hydroelectric) would also make the  hydrogen carbon neutral. As a plug-in-hybrid, lithium batteries could reduce the cost of hydrogen fuel.

Methanol contains even more hydrogen per volume, further extending the range of an electric vehicle. A methanol car with a reformed methanol fuel cell would use waste heat to extract hydrogen from the methanol before its utilized by the fuel cell for the production of electricity. Methanol can be produced from the electrolysis of seawater  or through electrolysis of potable water synthesized with CO2 extracted from the atmosphere.  Carbon negative sources of methanol could come through the  pyrolysis of urban, agricultural, and forest bio-waste. The pyrolysis of biomass can produce syngas that can be converted into methanol plus carbon rich bio-char that can be used to enhance the fertility and water retention of land areas. So sequestering the bio-char ground fertilization would be inherently carbon negative. And if the land that has been fertilized with bio-char is used to grow new forest then that creates even more carbon sequestration. So vehicles using renewable methanol derived from the pyrolysis of biomass could be considered carbon negative.

Methanol can also be conveniently converted into gasoline and utilized in existing internal combustion engine cars. A such fuel would also be ultimately carbon negative if derived from the pyrolysis of of bio-waste. However, synthetic gasoline would be even more expensive that synthetic methanol. And both fuels would be significantly more expensive than fossil fuels.  So it would be more efficient to utilize relatively expensive synthetic gasoline in hybrid and plug-in-hybrid vehicles that use at least some lithium battery technology.

Links and References

Gumpert Nathalie

World Premier of Roland Gumpert Fuel Cell Methanol Car

Methanol Fuel Cells: Powering the Future Conference

The Methanol Economy

Chevy Volt Test Drive

The Nuclear Synfuel Economy

by Marcel F. Williams

Currently, commercial nuclear energy in the US and in the rest of the world is solely utilized for the production of electricity. The 104 commercial nuclear reactors in the US provides nearly 20% of the electricity produced in the United States. But electricity only constitutes about 40% of America's total energy consumption. So even if nuclear power totally supplanted all other electric power generating systems in the US today, nuclear power would still only provide 40% of America's total energy needs. However, the rise of electric vehicles (EVs) and plug-in hybrid vehicles (PHEV) over the next few decades could greatly expand the use of electricity in ground transportation vehicles that normally use gasoline.

Petroleum consumption in the US also constitutes approximately 40% of the energy use in the US. America uses nearly 21 million barrels a day of petroleum with nearly 15 million barrels a day utilized for transportation fuel (gasoline, diesel fuel, jet fuel). But the US currently produces less than 9 million barrels a day of petroleum (the US is still the third largest producers of oil on Earth) and imports more than 12 million barrels a day of petroleum. So the US only produces 43% of its own oil while currently importing more than 57% of the petroleum required for domestic transportation and industrial chemical use.

Chevy Volt PHEV

Gasoline constitutes approximately 61% of the transportation fuel utilized in America. Studies have shown that the use of electricity for PHEVs could potentially displace up to 6.5 million barrels of oil per day, more than half of the imported oil coming to America (31% of total petroleum consumption in the US). Nuclear electricity, therefore, could potentially supplant nearly 31% of US petroleum requirements.

But what about the other 69% of US petroleum needs?

Up to 388 million dry tons a year of urban biowaste, 325 million tons of forest refuse, and 597 million tons of agricultural waste could be exploited from our cities, forest, and current agricultural acreage to produce carbon-neutral biofuels (gasoline, methanol, diesel fuel, and jet fuel), an equivalent of approximately 4 million barrels of oil per day (19% of total US daily petroleum consumption). So the addition of carbon neutral biowaste from urban and rural areas could further reduce US petroleum needs to only 50% of current levels.

Fuel cell methanol vehicle

Methanol fuel cells utilized to power automobiles could be twice as efficient as current automobile engines and could potentially reduce petroleum demand by an additional 3.2 million barrels a day equivalent of oil. That would further reduce daily petroleum needs to just 35% of current levels. Since the US produces 38% of its own petroleum, this would-- in theory-- make the US energy independent from foreign oil. But as the third largest producer of oil on Earth, the US would still remain a major greenhouse gas polluter. Electricity from batteries from plug-in hybrids would provide equivalent cost of only 75 cents per gallon. Fuel cells could also cut the energy cost of methanol in half. So even the highest priced synthetics fuels in the future would probably cost consumers less than they are paying now-- if they drove PHEV-fuel cell automobiles.

The synthesis of biomass into biofuels waste 80% of its carbon content in the form of carbon dioxide. But if hydrogen were added to the mix, biowaste could potentially supply up to 20 million barrels of oil equivalent of biofuels annually. And nuclear power plants could be used to produce hydrogen through the electrolysis of water. However, the extraction of CO2 from the atmosphere may be a more efficient mechanism for supply CO2 for nuclear electrolysis facilities in the long run. So nuclear power in combination with biowaste fuels would not only make the US totally independent of petroleum fuels but would also make the US a major exporter of carbon neutral synfuels.

In a pure nuclear synfuel economy, approximately 1170 nuclear reactors (1100 MWe of capacity each) dedicated for synfuel production, would be required to supply all of the carbon neutral industrial chemical and liquid fuel needs in the US today. However, in a hydrogen-biofuel economy that utilizes urban and rural biowaste in combination with highly efficient automobiles that utilize PHEV and fuel cell technologies, only 410 nuclear reactors dedicated to synfuel production would be required for America to become totally independent from foreign and domestic petroleum fuels, ending greenhouse gas pollution from the petroleum economy in the US-- forever.




References and Links

1. Michael Kintner-Meyer, Kevin Schneider, Robert Pratt IMPACTS ASSESSMENT OF PLUG-IN HYBRID VEHICLES ON ELECTRIC UTILITIES AND REGIONAL U.S. POWER GRIDS PART 1: TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory November, 2007

2. G. Olah, A. Goeppert, and G. Prakash, (2006) Beyond Oil and Gas: The Methanol Economy, Wiley-VCH Verlang, Weinheim, Germany

3. Robert D. Perlack, Lynn L. Wright, Anthony F. Turhollow, Bryce J. Stokes,Donald C. Erbach, Robin L. Graham, (2005)BIOMASS AS FEEDSTOCK FOR A BIOENERGY AND BIOPRODUCTS INDUSTRY: THE TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY OF A BILLION-TON ANNUAL SUPPLY Oak Ridge National Laboratory A Joint Study Sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy and the U.S. Department of Agriculture

4. Agrawal, R, Singh, N R, Ribeiro, F H , Delgass, W N , (Mar 2007) Sustainable fuel for the transportation sector. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104 (12), p.4828-4833,


5. Green Freedom: A concept for producing carbon-neutral synthetic fuels and chemicals, Los Alamos Labs, November 2007 F.J. Martin and WL Kubic,

6. Gasoline from Air and Water

7. The Plug-in Hybrid Revolution

© Marcel F. Williams
New Papyrus

Synfuels and the Price of Oil

by Marcel F. Williams

In January of 2007, petroleum prices dipped below $60 per barrel. But by March of 2008, oil prices had begun to peak above the $100 per barrel mark. And by July of 2008, oil prices had risen above $140 per barrel! But as the global economy began to decline, oil prices had again fallen below $100 per barrel by October of 2008 and as of late February 2009, the price of oil now stands at below $40 per barrel. Average gasoline prices in the US have also declined from a record $4.11 per gallon in July of 2008 to below $2.00 a gallon as of February of 2009.

Advocates of alternative fuels have bemoaned the current low price of oil as a hindrance towards weaning America off foreign oil and the petroleum fuel economy. However, I view low oil prices as a great economic opportunity to gradually introduce the higher priced carbon neutral synthetic fuels into the American hydrocarbon fuel economy as a component of our total liquid transportation fuel economy.

In 2006, the USA consumed more than 20 million barrels of oil per day while producing only 8 million barrels of oil daily while importing more than 12 million barrels of oil per day.

Thanks to America's importation of huge amounts of foreign oil, several hundred billion dollars of America's national wealth is being exported to foreign nations on an annual basis. And as we continue to use petroleum products for fuel and industrial chemicals, we continue to add substantially more excess CO2 to the atmosphere which is heating up our planet, accelerating the melting of the ice caps, and raising global sea levels.

With oil prices so low, some have argued that this is a perfect time to increase taxes on gasoline in order to fund alternative fuels and to provide incentives for drivers to continue to conserve fuel. However, some believe that raising taxes during a global economic recession (or depression) is a bad idea. However, I believe that mandating the a certain percentage of all gasoline, diesel fuel, and aviation fuel be composed of carbon neutral synfuels is a better alternative than raising taxes and would be a far more effective means for moving America away from the petroleum fuel economy.

If the Federal government mandated that just 5% of all gasoline, diesel fuel, jet fuel and industrial hydrocarbon chemicals in the US be composed of carbon neutral hydrocarbon fuels and industrial chemicals by the year 2015 and 10% by the year 2020 then a huge new carbon neutral synfuel industry could be created in the United States that could possibly completely replace the need for foreign and domestic petroleum in the US by the year 2050 and possibly even sooner.

Sources for these carbon neutral hydrocarbon fuels and industrial chemicals could come from:

1. Urban biowaste (garbage and sewage)
2. Rural biowaste (agricultural biowaste and forest by products)
3. Hydrogen from water electrolysis combined with CO2 extracted from air via clean nuclear, hydroelectric, wind, and solar electric power resources.

All of these sources of hydrocarbons could produce carbon neutral gasoline, diesel fuel, aviation fuel, methanol, methane, in addition to industrial chemicals such as hydrogen and ammonia. However, there is only enough easily available urban and rural biowaste to supply about 6% of America's total petroleum needs. So any substantial environmentally friendly increase in carbon neutral synfuels beyond that level would probably require a substantial increase in synfuels from the synthesis of hydrogen and carbon dioxide via clean nuclear, hydroelectric, wind, and solar electricity resources.

The current cost of these synthetic fuels and industrial chemicals would be generally higher than similar fuels derived from petroleum. However, these relatively more expensive synfuels would only be a small percentage of the total fuel cost since they would initially only be a small percentage of the total fuel content.

For instance, the GreenFreedom advocates argue that current nuclear reactors combined with electrolysis and CO2 extraction technologies could produce 18,000 barrels of oil equivalent gasoline per day for a 1000 MWe nuclear reactor at an estimated operating cost of just $1.40 per gallon. However, this doesn't include the capital cost of the nuclear reactor and the associated synthetic fuel facility and a reasonable profit margin which they conclude would raise the price of nuclear produced gasoline to $4.60 per gallon. Of course the capital cost of nuclear reactors and synfuel facilities would probably fall dramatically due to economies of mass production since it would require the construction of at least 700 new 1GWe reactors to produce enough gasoline for US consumption, or perhaps only half as many reactors (350) if all gasoline vehicles in the US are PHEV (plug-in-electric vehicles) in the 2020s.

So if all gasoline in the US were required to consist of at least 10% carbon neutral gasoline then $2.00 per gallon gasoline from petroleum combined with $4.60 per gallon of carbon neutral gasoline would cost $2.26 per gallon. Of course, if you're driving one of those future plug-in-hybrid vehicles (PHEV) in the 2020s then the cost of electricity could cost you as little as $0.75 per gallon. So your equivalent cost per gallon using 50% electricity, 45% gasoline from petroleum and 5% carbon neutral synthetic gasoline would be approximately $1.88 per gallon. Using nuclear derived carbon neutral gasoline alone in a PHEV would cost you approximately $3.05 per gallon which is still far below the peak cost of $4.11 per gallon US consumers payed for gasoline in July of 2008.

References and Links

1. Green Freedom: A concept for producing carbon-neutral synthetic fuels and chemicals, Los Alamos Labs, November 2007 F.J. Martin and WL Kubic,

2. Gasoline from Air and Water

3. Gasoline from Nuclear and Renewable Energy

4. The Plug-in-Hybrid Revolution

5. Crude Oil Futures

6. Petroleum (Wikipedia)

7. Country energy profiles

The Plug-in Hybrid Revolution

by Marcel F. Williams

General Motors yesterday introduced the production model for their new plug-in hybrid vehicle (PHEV) which they believe will be on the market by the year 2010. The four door Chevy Volt hatchback will be able to travel up to 100 mph and will be able to run solely on its lithium-ion electric batteries for up to 40 miles before its gasoline or E85 (85% ethanol and 15% gasoline) engine kicks in.

The Chevy Volt can be fully charged in 8 hours using a standard household 120 volt outlet. But if you have a 240 volt outlet, a full charge takes less than three hours. On average, it will be six times cheaper per mile to drive the Chevy Volt on electricity than on gasoline. But even the Volt's gasoline hybrid engine will get 50 miles to the gallon. Of course, for those who drive less than 40 miles per day, they will use no gasoline at all.

However, General Motors will not be the only major automobile company coming out with a PHEV in the next few years. Toyota says it will also be coming out with it own plug-in hybrid vehicle by 2010.

A report from the Pacific Northwest National laboratory in 2007 has estimated that 6.5 million barrels of oil per day equivalent could be displaced if most cars, pickup trucks, SUVs, and vans were plug-in hybrid vehicles. The US currently consumes about 21 million barrels a day of oil. So approximately 31% of our total petroleum consumption could be replaced or more than half of our oil imports. It would also equally reduce carbon dioxide pollution from petroleum use in the US by 31%-- if electricity generation in the US is eventually totally replaced by nuclear and renewable energy resources within the next 25 years.

PHEVs in the future could reduce our total fossil fuel transportation needs by more than 50% if they ran on methanol fuel cell technologies which are approximately twice as efficient as gasoline engines.

While the PHEV's would only be a partial solution to the problem of using fossil and foreign fuels in our transportation system, they still would be a big step forward that would allow future carbon neutral synthetic fuels from biowaste, nuclear and renewable energy systems to only have to replace 50% to 71% of our future transportation fuel needs. Now its time for the Federal government and state governments and the future president of the United States to step up and help this revolutionary transition to a new mode of light vehicle transportation.

Links and References

1. Michael Kintner-Meyer, Kevin Schneider, Robert Pratt IMPACTS ASSESSMENT OF PLUG-IN HYBRID VEHICLES ON ELECTRIC UTILITIES AND REGIONAL U.S. POWER GRIDS PART 1: TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory November, 2007

2. Plug-in Hybrid

3. Chevy Volt