Clean Diesel - Coal to Ultra Clean Diesel

[penokee]

The Energy Bill is in conference and will be going to the President before long. Interesting to note that what many refer to as "Dirty Coal" can be converted to the Ultra Clean Diesel that we will be required to use in our Tractors and other Diesel powered equipment, before long.

For anyone interested, click on the attached thread, then click Coal and read page 19. Just maybe it's a start towards Energy Independence, using our vast supply of coal.

penokee [img]/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Link

MikePA: Cleaned up long URL. Please review your message before posting it. It's simple not to do this. Just insert a descriptive word or two between the {url=http://whatever}<font color="red">Enter words here</font>{/url} instead of the entire URL. Replace parentheses with brackets in previous example.

[sneaky_pete]

I'd be interested to see how much energy it takes to convert it. Biodiesel and Ethanol fuels are a net energy loss to manufacture - it takes more energy to produce them than you get out of the finished product. Other than that, more power to them.

[penokee]

sneakey_pete - That's certainly an issue that is debateable, but since I have no real knowledge in that area can't inteligently comment, but perhaps our country could afford to run a negative cost benefit on this so that we can slowly break away from being held hostage to the miidle east oil powers? Perhaps part of The funds spent on our military to protect/insure our oil supply could be used for this purpose until such time something more advanced comes along such as Fuel Cells, etc. Just a thought.
penokee [img]/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[RodgerF]

I have no real knowledge in this area either but I don't think cost is what he meant. From what little reading I've done on the subject I think it takes more energy to produce alternative sources than you get from them.

The best way to reduce dependance on foreign oil is to not use it. Most people don't seem willing to take that step based on the number of large trucks and SUVs being used as commuter vehicles.

Rodger

[penokee]

This looks promising.
penokee [img]/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

http://energycommerce.house.gov/108/...62005_1610.htm

[sneaky_pete]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( This looks promising.
penokee [img]/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

http://energycommerce.house.gov/108/...62005_1610.htm
)</font>

It's definitely a step in the right direction, but like most political compromises it doesn't go far enough and it's full of platitudes that sound good but have no real chance of impact on the problem.

The most encouraging part (to me) is the last paragraph:

"Encourages more nuclear... power production by authorizing the Department of Energy to develop accelerated programs for the production and supply of electricity; setting the stage for the lengthy process of building new nuclear reactors by offering risk insurance incentives..."

If the country embarked on an all-out effort to build a whole bunch of nuclear recators ASAP, we might be able to make enough electricity to: 1) drastically reduce the amount of natural gas and coal we burn to generate electricity, and maybe even 2) generate enough cheap electricity to get Hydrogen from the electrolysis of water for fuel cells, or at least make more electric cars feasible.