Currently, most vehicles on the road run on either gasoline or diesel, and I hope we can all agree on that.

What do you think, what will be the next major fuel, or fuels?

 

Even though I voted E85, I think we'll see more diversity in the transportation fuel market. Really we'll need to. I think everything you've put up there will be part of it.

 

Algae produced biodiesel.

 

I think electricity if they alow the new battery technology to be developed.

 

I voted E85.. for now..

I do believe in the future we'll have the technology to make hydrogen usage more.. economical.. but short term I believe E85 is the answer.

Easy enough to use with our current technology with little or no trade off as far as operation and design changes... easy for the consumer to adapt to.. etc etc..
even compatible with diesel engines (as E95).

I believe the next step will be E85 hybrids... with electric motors.. that should carry us over the next 40-50 years until we have better hydrogen technology. There really is no excuse for not using more E85 now.. probably 95% of flex-fuel vehicles never see non-gasoline usage (just like 4X4 trucks.. the vast majority never leave the road)..

Two main reasons for this.. price and availability.

E85 price tends to be a little higher than gasoline (it may be cheaper at the pump but if you calculate the 15% fuel economy loss it's a bit more expensive).. and here in the St. Louis area there is only ONE place to get it... (there were two but one quit selling the stuff). If I happen to be nearby I'll fill'er up, but it's a huge inconvenience for me to fuel there every time!

Although my truck absolutely LOVES the stuff.. it runs so much smoother, quicker, and quieter (pinging 100% eliminated) on E85.. I love it too.. but like I said.. hard to find.

BTW I have a 2000 B3000 flex fuel.

 

I voted none of the above.

Synthetic distillates (diesel, jet and light fuel oil) from natural gas, not coal, will be next. Major oil companies are already building the plants in Australia and Quatar. It is more practical to transport distillates than LNG thousands of miles by ship.

The problem with using coal for this is that you end up with a lot of excess CO2. Hydrogen and/or electric may be the ultimate answer, but not anytime soon. We will need nuclear power (not politically viable) to do that.

Jim

 

The US has enough reserves of coal to supply all of our energy needs for the next three hundred years. If we can't figure out fusion by the time we use up all the coal, we're screwed. We already have a commercial coal gasification plant in the US. It has been operating in western North Dakota for nearly twenty years turning coal into synthetic natural gas (now there is an odd phrase) for home heating throughout the midwest. When I used to work in coal R&D, the break even cost for producing liquid motor fuels was estimated to be $50 per barrel oil. All the liquid motor fuels we use today can be duplicated with coal technology at a cost cometitive with todays oil.

 

burning hydocarbons isnt the answer

 

Unless you want to return to a hunter/gatherer society, burning hydrocarbons will have to continue.

We can not maintain the current world population without them.

 

Actually, continuing to burn hydrocarbons unchecked may get us back to the hunter/gatherer society, too.

In any case, I think politics and global issues will play a significantly more important role than now. Regardless of availability, the percentage of fossil fuel usage will decrease significantly. The Kyoto Protocol is signed and ratified by most countries with 2 important exceptions, the US and Australia. However, I do expect them to ratify it in the not very distant future. I'm sure all of you heard of global warming, and currently the debate is on whether the rise of sea level will be measured by inches, or feet by 2100. But there are some lesser known effects, such as the acidification of oceans -- it's getting closer to a point where small creatures that use calcium for their shells won't be able to build one, and that will have far reaching effects.

So I think the replacement will be something with zero or close to zero greenhouse emission. The few electric cars are already viable for commute (up to 100 - 200 miles range), but they're still in a need of some cost reduction. The only other green fuel I aware of is hydrogen, but that needs some more work. Gasoline and diesel will be available for a long time (at a higher cost to discourage usage) for uses where electricity or hydrogen will be impractical.

 

I was kinda hoping hot air.....








With my wife I would never have to worry about a fuel shortage again!

 

[QUOTE=aurgathor] The Kyoto Protocol is signed and ratified by most countries with 2 important exceptions, the US and Australia. However, I do expect them to ratify it in the not very distant future. QUOTE]

And just how are the nations who have ratified the treaty doing at reaching their reduction goals? Nearly all are totally failing. How will us joining and also failing help the cause?

 

So how green is the production of these two new fuels -- electricity (in the case of totally plug in cars) and hydrogen?

 

Simply: join and stop failing. Countries have to get their acts together, or else the consequences will not be pretty. And it's more important for major industrial powers such as US or China to reduce their CO2 emission, then. say, Laos. And the US, as the current #1 emitter should lead this effort.

 

Currently, it's not very green, but there are countries where nearly 50% of the electricity is generated by nuclear power, however controversial that may be for other reasons.

But the better question would be, how will electricity be generated in 25 - 50 years? I believe the majority of it will not involve greenhouse gas emission, at least in the industrialized countries. There will be lot more wind on solar power generation and more nuclear power plants. I also read plans to scrub the C02 from the exhaust of fossil fuel fired power plants, and pump it into depleted oil fields, for instance.

Electricity and hydrogen can be generated and used without any greenhouse gas at any phase, and that's not true for the other fuels, although one can argue that plant based fuels have a zero net effect on CO2, which is still better than using fossil fuels.