Methanol vs. Ethanol

I wanted to provide the Japanese company I referanced Google bioethanol Honda
or rite honda that should be helpful

COAL, Refinery Bottoms, Waste burnables like most of City Garbage,Leaves,Agro-wastes,Farm Manure, Chicken-farm Excreta---forest thinnings--all can be(Oxygen) GAsified to yield Heat energy+Synthesis Gas(CO+H2).

Synthesis Gas(SYNGAS) Can with one step be catalyzed to Methanol and/or DME.

Methanol can readily be converted to Dimethyl Ether=DME

DME is rightly the fuel for the future. With a small change --all Diesel Engines can switch to 100% DME injection.Most passenger cars ALREADY offer Diesel Engines. Tomorrow these can be ordered"for DME"

And for Cooking/Heating-if you are using LPG -then you can start using DME without any change.

Shanghai's East China University's Institute of Clean Coal Technology is pushing these Technologies fast Ahead--Search ICCT-ECUST

Methanol/DME is World's answer. Ethanol may be USA's(Prairie&Corn belt). Maybe Brazil's too(poor Amazon Rainforest!)

Thanks for the link I'll check it out

Why the need to convert methanol to dme ?

<Why convert Methanol to DME first?>

M85 (Methanol 85% +Gasoline 15%) ran for a decade in California --even longer in Brazil .

Discontinuation of M85 vehicles was (some say )a plot by Oil Companies-hand in gloves with Auto makers in Detroit." Go Methanol" lobby was quietened by "Go Ethanol" lobby via Capitol Hill.

All the Anti-Methanol outcry can be put to rest by using DME--as Diesel and as LPG.

I was not aware there were M85 vehicles even developed yet better discontinued.It's embarrasing how insulated we are in the US .What was the anti metanol issue ,Toxicity or simply overcome by ethanol lobbists .How does DME specifically address the "problems "associated with Methanol .What are its advantages .What is it a gas ,liquied ?Please excuse my ignorance and enlighten me.

Methanol=Methyl Alcohol

Dealy Poison. Liquid.Has been used as the only fuel in Indy Car Races-till now.

Can be manufactured in huge quantities from Wood Distillation(Brazil uses the remainder Char in lieu of Coke for Iron Smelting).And please see my top post.

It is now all manipulated from Saudi Arabia/Texas/Cornbelt---Gasoline or Ethanol OR Methanol. DME will win most of the world soon.

The USA still has plenty of rich soil which puts food on tables world wide. This need not continue. - Ed

Power carries responsibilities. If the responsibilities are ducked, the results are uniformly disastrous - and not just for the client countries.
In this case it will not even need wars. If the US action to reduce its own CO2 output results in increased output elsewhere...

Of course, if your intention is simultaneously to support food and bio-fuel production elsewhere, the results will be positive all round

Happy New Year to it from the starving millions of people in the world...

Methanol has been and is being used a motor fuel. It has also been used in race cars, so the choice of ethanol has partly to do with politics, and agricultural policies and subsidies.

Despite being called wood alcohol (ethanol can also be made from wood), most methanol is presently made from natural gas.

The ethanol used for motor fuel is not pure ethanol, since that is tightly regulated by the government. Rather it contains an additive to make it undrinkable, and this additive is typically methanol.

The biggest downside of methanol compared to ethanol is its lower energy content: only slightly more than half as much as gasoline. However both are higher octane than gasoline.

Gasoline .......... 124,500 BTU/gal

Ethanol ............. 75,500 BTU/gal

Methanol ........... 64,500 BTU/gal

Question: Which country is the leader in the development of "green" technologies?

Answer: China

So we may even be buying that from them too!

There's a good report on China and how far it has developed its methanol program at the following link:

www.methanol.org

China has huge coal reserves and has been generating a significant quantity of methanol (almost 3 million metric tons in 2007) for domestic fuel purposes alone. This compares to 11 MMT of total methanol production, which is about 27% of global production. The report goes on to say that if even a small portion of China's coal bed methane and coke-oven waste gas streams are captured and converted to methanol (technically feasible), China would be able to grow its methanol production capacity even more significantly. This will address the environmental issues associated with the waste gas stream as well.

The US has comparable coal reserves and the question arises why we are not looking more closely at what China is doing. As others have said, US government policy seems to influenced by the farm lobby pushing ethanol subsidies, and all research in the area of alternative fuels is in ethanol.

Perhaps there will be a methanol proponent in the new administration.

Forgoing the tendency to answer with politics, policy, governments, large corporate greed, and public perception at the expense of being brief -

methanol is made from products with limited renewable capability. Soybeans yield 35-50 bu per acre per yr. No one has control over soybean yield. The woods take years rather than months to replenish.

ethanol technology is easily duplicated in a mountain basement with discarded radiator equipment by methods passed down from sun to son. The local annual renewable capability of each ethanol ingredient including corn yield can be easily varied within weeks by persons of meager means and limited technological handles of degrees by selecting proper readily available low cost equipment, (low cost to very expensive) seed, (local renewable to global supplied) fertilizer application rates, and local selectable variable acreage. As noted Corn (ethanol) yield can be intentionally varied based on economic decisions. After planting and during growth period corn yield can be controlled from 35 bu per acre to well over 300 bu per acre within the last few weeks of maturity. If the ethanol does not materialize, the corn mesh is instant hog feed, cattle dressing, or personal consumptionable. Please do not contact the authorities. I really do knot know jest kinda heard tale about that thare shinny stuff.

<30 to 300 Bushels per Acre - as you want-if you want?>

This is BS .

Genetics,Soil humics,Ideal insolation,best of micronutrients/fertilization,ideal humidity, even addition of CO2 to the climate around the plants- all have been tried by world's best Agro-botany-science in the last 100+ years.

Yield of seeds/oil/starch/protein have saturated.

Today yield of cornseeds is considered HIGH if you get 6 Tons(13200lbs) in a Hectare. (100mx100m)

And this is not all Ethanol.

Let the Statistics be put right--no Guessing-no Hearsay!

I apprieciate your perspective .I am from the northeast and my availible material, thus my interest ,is forest byproducts .The hope would be ,that all availible byproducts can be utilized in some way to turn a buck,and to specifically be able to tell the middle east to shove thier oil .Aside from that ,on a scientific point, I believe the specific properties of of methanol lend it to certian applications ,specifically the fuel cell .Maybe all sources of energy are important without one having to win out over another .As with woodstoves I'm sure wood fired pellet stoves can coexist with corn stoves as do conventionally fired heating systems .I like your point on how independent farm suppliers can be it runs contrary to my perception that it would be a government mess to be on the corn standard.The only problem comes with the unique problems of distribution .There are huge supplies of renewable woody byproducts that in my opinion should not be overlooked .I'm sure there's room for everyone to make a living.

So I don't think the perception is, that your an ignorant farmer at all, it's just a matter of educating people and overcoming obsticals .Maybe you have a better feel for my view .I think I do yours .

Ethanol is also poisonous. If taken in only somewhat larger doses it will kill you very dead. The main difference is you can metabolize smaller quantities without serious side effects.

methanol can be used in fuel cells more efficiently than ethanol, Hard to make methanol bby feremtation due to toxic oxalate transients kill yeats.

Tethered enzymes will be able to make methanol and ethanol. 6 carbon sugars do well for ethanole. 5 carbon make both at the end.

In the long run fermentation of corn will go away and be replaced by enzyme digestion of biomass into sugars and these will be converted to ethanol, and methanol, and other stuff. 20-30 years before this gets to be large enough to replace oil

Thanks

You have touched on this very vital direction of Methanol's use-DMFC.

Nobody can tell yet--but Direct Methanol Fuel Cell (DMFC) Might keep humanity busy for the next 50 years!

Western and tropicalized sugar beets produce much more ethanol than sugar cane and european fodder beets produce even more ethanol than the affoementioned crops using conventional mashing methods/distilling, but the corn lobby( Cargill, ADM, Bunge, The National Corn Growers Association, ethanol plant builders and others/Senator Grasso and other corn belt senators and congressman and women) does nothing to promote these beet crops because the Lurgi Methods will not convert them to ethanol and the volatile organic chemicals released pollute even more along with using huge amounts of natural gas to make the corn based ethanol.

So we all suffer and keep paying for the corn lobbies desires and the livestock farmer pays more for corn grain than he or she should have to and it has been proven by the United States Department of Enenrgy that it takes more energy to make ethanol from corn that it it creates.

Besides the fact that it takes huge amounts of chemicals and fertilizer to grow corn and even more irrigation, pesticides and fungisides to grow sugar cane.

When Henry Ford built the model A he desinged it to use and burn ethanol and he wated nothing to do with gasoline but the refiners had all this gasoline from refining crude for kerosene and had no market for it untill they convinced Mr. Ford to try it.

Pure ethanol in gas engines burns cleanly with no residue or pollution after effects,

Its to bad we have not awoken from our gasoline stupor.

If anyone is interested www.revenoor.com

Go DME ! Good stuff for diesels. Easier on the engine also. See my post on diesels.

Actually, the choice for Ethanol over Methanol is purely operational. Ethanol only requires an increase in fuel system capacity to allow for the higher air fuel ratio. Methanol reacts with aluminium and/or various welding and machining byproducts to form a gluggy paste which clogs up the system. It also tends to eat away various engine components. These problems don't matter in TOP Fuel drag racing as the stuff isn't there long enough. The BIG PROBLEM is that Methanol burns to large quantities of very toxic Formaldehyde Vapour; again not a problem in TOP Fuel and motorsport as everyone can wear protective clothing etc. but in smog city.....I suppose the New York zombies would like it....These problems can be fixed but it is expensive compared to Ethanol.. hence the choice.

yes, too rich a mix will cause a partial burn and you can get formaldehyde forming, but that also happens with ethanol, albeit to a lesser degree, but a modren injected engine should avoid these over rich mixtures because the computer has a plan.

There seems to be conflicting ideas on Methanol depending on which camp your in .I assume you are correct in reporting the corrosive qualities and or clogging properties which may or maynot be handled by filters or other mitigating measures .I am developing a historical perspective that reveals that ethanol has been around since antiquityand methanol(wood alcohol) been recognized as a engine fuel at least since before wwII ,as a sythetic fuel by Nazi german (by neccesity) ,has been most resently been utilized before in USA in up to 85% mixes in vehicles in at least California and europe or south America .Older more expensive and impractical extraction meathods ( acids )for reduction of woody stock have been replaced by extraction from liquid natural gas but new meathods show promise to develope workable enzime or other (bio) processes including the use of steam,heat and other new processes that may release methanol for common use .

Most likely the production of methanol ,ethanol or any other fuel subtitutes will depend on the price of existing fuels staying high ,or public pressure to reduce greenhouse gasses or americans unwilling to go to war to protect cheap foriegn fuels .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methanol

One of the drawbacks of methanol as a fuel is its corrosivity to some metals, including aluminium. Methanol, although a weak acid, attacks the oxide coating that normally protects the aluminium from corrosion:

6 CH₃OH + Al₂O₃ → 2 Al(OCH₃)₃ + 3 H₂O

The resulting methoxide salts are soluble in methanol, resulting in clean aluminium surface, which is readily oxidised by some dissolved oxygen. Also the methanol can act as an oxidiser:

6 CH₃OH + 2 Al → 2 Al(OCH₃)₃ + 3 H₂

So the corrosion continues until the metal is eaten away

http://yarchive.net/car/methanol.html

So avoid Aluminium -- and take all the best out of easily available/affordable CH3OH.

That's the thing to do. I am sure there is a place for methanol in the automotive power future.

Water from condensation in the whole methanol works is also a problem. Water is barely soluble in methanol, and fully miscible with ethanol. The water drops carried in flowing methanol add to the corrosivity to metals, carry the sludge into the injectors, andlike to plug filters very rapidly. The sludge from aluminum is for all practical purposes bentonite. Maybe m/e 85/15? And DME is many times more explosive than methanol. Add in the static spark problem caused by any volatile fuel in a dry state ( AvGas is bone dry due to the thermal range of exposure of -40 degrees, and requires very careful grounding during fueling) and methanol would present similar problems. Probably DME slightly less so, but probably much higher vapor pressure.

RichH

We must remember that the use of ethanol is currently as a replacement for MTBE, which was pushed out there as a oxigenation solution for gasoline in California, a way for the oil companies to make money off their waste. Now MTBE and byproducts are showing up in nearly every surface water source in california. Methanol would be just as bad to have in our surface drinking water supplies. Ethanol is relatively non-toxic, and, therefore, will be less of a concern in low concentrations in our water supplies. Ethanol also is not as volatile, so it will not contribute to air quality issues as badly. Finally, the US has huge resources of corn and other agricultural products that are fast growing, cheap, and available. The use of corn and other ag products means we will keep a high production rate and have supplies available to convert to food if the market demands and the supply falls short in off years (better than minimal production for food only and a bad year hits).

ethanol and methanol are metabolised rapidly in the environment, unlike MTBE, which few bugs can digest.

If you use corn for fuel alcohol, as oil rises, so does the corn price.

The only long term solution is to eat corn and digest waste cellulose into assorted alcochols

Aurizon,

Another great post as usual. I agree 100%.

On the formaldehyde issue though, the EPA tests showed little or difference between that produced by methanol in a properly configured engine and that produced by gasoline.

The concept of using food for auto fuel strikes me as nonsensical when we have a huge present problem of disposing of our garbage and waste. We should be looking to produce whatever energy we can from our waste stream, and "kill two birds with one stone". Also, since it presently costs considerable money to dispose of our waste stream, the economics become all the more attractive. Thermal, chemical and (preferably) biological (including the engineered kind) breakdown of garbage results in gases and liquors that are usable as is (methane) and/or can serve as raw materials for just about everything we currently use fossil fuels for. I know you too are a big advocate of bio related technology.

Greg

< Finally, the US has huge resources of corn and other agricultural products that are fast growing, cheap, and available. >

May be not so simple!

How about disappearance of cheap Corn for pigs/Chicken/Cattle? And for Corn Syrup?

You cannot " Have a cake and eat it too".

Methane/Methanol, please excuse my ignorance, but what is the difference and can methane be made to do the same job for us as methanol?

Being and old guy I remember outhouses in the Midwest USA being highly explosive on not so rare occasion. The gas responsible for the surprise lift off of the structure was "Methane". It seems that there is an abundance of this waste (and other urban waste) capable of making burnable fuel without using crops, forest products etc.

I have always wondered why this particular resource appears to be ignored. In years past it was not an unusual site to see city sewage plants burning off the methane residue.

thats a good question I assume it is in it's gass form .

There has been utilization of that readily availible fuel ,landfills have collected and burned methane in engines(generators) to produce electricity .Apparently from landfills corrosives had to be dealt with and plasma coated components solved the problem .I guess the concentrations are minimal but still usable .There was an article on CR4 last year about a farm that collected the methane from manure to make electricity ,with great sucess .Apparently there were less corrosion problems with that application .
It appears that alternate sources of energy are readily availible BUT are marginally profitable against low oil prices .Every time over the years we drag them out again and suddenly oil prices drop and we can't compete .In the Northeast there were 20 or wore biomass burning plants in the 80s and as soon as the atomiic power plants went back on line they all were crushed .I guess thats business but I would hope there is a movement to finally push alternative energy as a sustainable ,viable way to end our dependence on foriegn oil and address the global warming issues .I think the timeing may be now with the need for war(to protect supplies),violent weather (from global warming ) and a willingness to change .I'm going to fill my wood stove and do my part ,the day I can fill my tank with an oil alternative sign me up.P.S. I know it pollutes so does oil

Hi,

All alcohols have an OH radical joined like so ( as far as i know as i did Chemistry at a higher level in College 24 years ago)>>

Carbon with 3 hydrogen atoms attached and then the O-H radical joined to the carbon. Hence CH₃-OH for Methanol.

Methane is CH₄ as a carbon atom has a valency of 4 it requires 4 hydrogen atoms to make it stable in a compound.

Number of carbon atoms = prefix>>

1=Meth, 2=Eth, 3=Pro, 4=But, 5=Pent, 6=Hex, 7=Sept, 8=Oct, 9=Non, 10=Dec and after that i can't remember!!

E.G. Methanol, Ethanol, Propanol, Butanol, Pentanol, Hexanol, Octanol, Nonanol, Decanol.

By the way it is Ethanol that is in alcoholic drinks, and Methanol in "Meths" or Methylated Spirit ( with added purple colour ).

"Meths" is known as a "tramps drink" in some parts of the world!!

By the way Alkenes rather than the Alkanes like Methane have a double bond between their carbon atoms.

Ethane is CH₃-CH₃ the dash is the single bond between the carbon stoms.

ETHENE is CH₂=CH₂ with the double bond between the carbon atoms.

Regards,

Dr M.

So basic organic chemistry didn't change too much in the last 50 years.

BTW, did you work for Boots the chemists?

This is really good topic.

I agree the most interesting aspect is how all sorts of alternative energy has been done before and abandoned by lower oil prices .I remember reading an article that was an interview of a middle eastern oil supplier who said every time you (the us) try to develope alternated energy we just drop the price of oil temporarily . It's hard to believe that things are such a fix but they are .Exxon has the highest profits of all time and we just lay down and take it .I wish options would open up I would take great interest .

Virginia Tech's Yi-Heng Percival Zhang is working on a hydrogen technology that converts inedible biomass to sugars that are then converted to hydrogen on an as needed basis for use in fuel cells to power automobiles. If this technology is successful, it may solve many of the difficult problems with many of these intermediate solutions.

I think rate considerations will scupper this, unless they have a storage means for the H2

There is a company in Miami FL that has developed a process for converting (the celulosic material in) municipal sewage waste into hydrogen; the hydrogen can then be fed back through their electrolytic cell to produce DC electricity. Or, alternatively combined with the other electrolysis byproducts to produce methanol. Their efficiency factor for H2 production is 2x better than conventional water electrolysis and the cost to produce and transport the renewable media to the generator is relatively insignificant - especially when compare to the ethanol generating infrastructure.

Does that mean that the carbon content is released into the atmosphere as a constituent of CO2 without the heat of combustion becoming available for other use? Doesn't sound that great a trade-off to me.

That's interesting any more information so I can read up on it .

Processes like this use the heat of combustion to create oxygen starved reactions, one of the products is Hydrogen and they take it out via a gas permable membrane of palladium. Quite a high % ends up as CO2 and CO and some as H2. There is also H2O.

I would have to see the complete energy and carbon balance to assess it. QUite possibly it is viable?

<point is why one product over another>

Traditional , welcome to 2009 --so clear you are!

Why??

I can see one little problem presently.

There are complications if the same vehicle has to use Pure Gasoline- (various Octane# ) today, E80 Tomorrow,M85 the day after. But these can be ironed out in the current waves of CHANGE. And this needs to be the norm --'ANY BLEND GAS'.

And when this becomes a NORM , the question: Methanol vs Ethanol will be quietly solved with a 3- position rotary switch(maybe) M-G-E near the ignition.

Region-EconomicConditions might necessitate use of all these 3 fuels in same car.

But the huge stocks of Coals,Oil sand,Bitumens,Petcokes,Biomass,Municipal Solid wastes --- point to gradual increase in Gasifiers>Methanol.

Once Methanol arrives as a stable-cost fuel there will be CHOICE:

-Do we convert Methanol to DME andthen make Diesel vehicles run "On DME too"?

OR

-Do we rather stick to M-G-E in fast ,rapid acceleration engine cars?

OR

-Do we go all out for Direct Methanol FUEL CELLS in all-electric vehicles .

I have a feeling.Corn will stop being diverted to Subsidy-Driven Power Ethanol--soon.

Chicken,Pigs,Cows ,Humans need to Eat !

It is interesting we are back to this discussion from 06 who would have thought so many changes would have transpired .

I am currently looking into wood gasification there appears to be breakthroughs on converting syngas to ethanol see the work of Jan 13 2008 GM announces biofuel partnership with Coskata I think things may be on the brink of change .I am hopeful the new Obama administration will support the need for a sustainable alternative to foreign dependence .

Wow, and yet the discussion stopped. Considering the number of half truths, a mixed blessing.

Methane occurs naturally from rotting, and is used to power generation and other uses by tapping dumps. Methane is gas, and I expect it can do all the things propane and natural gas do in terms of combustion. I recall releasing it from the bottom of my grandfather's pond by kicking previously undisturbed mud.

I have heard that if you cook the corn really soon after picking, you get less sugar and more starch from the corn. Is this an energy loss to the cells of the dying plant?

Methanol seem to require more redesign to use in engines, but its use in race cars for years means this is only a history research project. It burns with a nearly invisible flame, making it more dangerous in fires. It supports very high compression ratios or blower boosts without preignition or pinging, like a super octane rating, making it potentially more thermally efficient than most other fuels in piston and I suppose Wankel engines but not so handy for diesels. It works well with Otto cycle engines with turbochargers (which capture extra power from the exhaust).

BTW, I always wondered if a turbo would match up well with a custom high rpm alternator, to capture the high revolution rate power in a readily convertible form when that power was not needed to boost intake pressure. I suppose you could have an electric blower, too, so the battery could cancel out the turbo boost lag and you are never wasting the power pumping air at a partly closed throttle plate.

Both return to CO2 and H2O if pure and properly combusted, and can make ugly other things if not, just like every other hydrocarbon or carbohydrate fuel.

I suspect both methanol and ethanol can be made from most plant material, but my impression is that methanol is easier to get from low grade material, like pig manure. Methane can probably be transformed into methanol without too much effort, but it might be safer and more efficient to use methane in place of other fuels directly (no corrosion issues).

Does anyone know if methane is heavier than air, like propane, or lighter, like natural gas? Propane is easier to liquify and use in portable/vehicle applications than natural gas. Natural gas is safer in boats, where propane would sink into the bilges.

Methane sounds like a really easy fuel source to engineer with common, natural biological mechanisms. However, if tuned by an engineer, biologist, geneticist, etc., I am sure it can be accelerated. Economies of scale, such as rotting your methane in really big sealed containers (sealing container cost rises to the square, volume to the cube) seem obvious.

Carbon delta should be pretty good, not up there with solar cells, but some of the plant matter is captured CO2 in a loop. The stuff that rots without methane capture/burn is probably part of our carbon load. Does it decompose in the upper atmosphere into CO2 and H2O?

Pickett I assume any alternate power source is viable ,the major problem is the fact that energy company's have a stranglehold . Until we overcome those reality's I'm afraid there will never be any significant progress. As I said in previous posts, I was hoping the new administration might take the lead but I am sad to say I doubt it.

In an interview with a member of the oil cartel it was clearly stated " we will wait until you begin making progress on alternate energy and simply drop the price of oil "

I paraphrase but these are harsh realities that will basically take a revoulution to impliment

I would like to be a soldier but I don't see any generals.

An enlightened General will appear in some emerging Economy where there is no more oil, no Dollars , no multinational oil companies, but whose soldiers want to get along like everybody does--to PROGRESS!!

Guess who?

Well, innovative ideas can enter society from the bottom up.

I suppose you'd need a permit to put a methane generator in your back yard. I wonder how big it needs to be to make enough gas to drive even a small generator. maybe you could compress it and use it for the barbie.

I'd like to see a solar array you could just lay over your roof peak, glue under 4 shingles and plug in for up to N watts max free power. Each one would be a start, and an investment. Mass produced and with little or no installation cost, they might make a good investment.

I wish there was solar that also collected heat from the solar array. They're black and they get hot!

Ever wonder if an IR solar cell is possible, so you could generate power from a flame, radiantly, with no moving parts and without touching the combustion gasses? Even the junk they burn off at the top of refineries could make some power as it left. The lower frequency waves have less energy, but as they say, "all is grist that comes to the mill". The sun does not shine at night, inside, underground or under water, where radiant heat might be harvested.

I suspect that ethanol is most easily made from sugars and other high quality hydrocarbons, whereas methanol can be made from cellulose, and so not compete for calories with people. I am not sure how the methane processes compete with the *anols for net output and carbon footprint. I hear that a lot of farmers do some methane generation, which is probably a more compatible place for it than the back yard.

Of course, cattle eat more corn than people, and it takes 21# of plant protein to make 1# of meat protein. Now, cattle that graze, and animals that eat what people cannot, are OK until we put them out of work with genetically modified microorganisms. I understand most people have never eaten grass fed beef or acorn fed pork.

Well, enough rambling -- don't want to be judged entirely or predominantly off topic.

You are not rambling. And you are 99% ON topic!

<

I wish there was solar that also collected heat from the solar array. They're black and they get hot!> Your WISH is already being implemented.

<wonder if an IR solar cell is possible> Is indeed.

Come with more thoughts-whenever. CR4 is all about that.

Methane is CH₄ Molecular weight 16, so slightly more than half the density of air.

. . . which sounds good for boat and basement safety! (bad for poorly ventilated attics :-)

Thanks!