SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Onboard separation technology set to improve fuel economy:
A technology developed by researchers at the U.S. Department of Energy's Pacific Northwest National Laboratory could pave the way for increased fuel economy and lower greenhouse gas emissions as part of an octane-on-demand fuel-delivery system.
Designed to work with a car's existing fuel, the onboard separation technology is the first to use chemistry—not a physical membrane—to separate ethanol-blended gasoline into high- and low-octane fuel components. An octane-on-demand system can then meter out the appropriate fuel mixture to the engine depending on the power required: lower octane for idling, higher octane for accelerating.
Studies have shown that octane-on-demand approaches can improve fuel economy by up to 30 percent and could help reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 20 percent. But so far, the pervaporation membranes tested for octane on demand leave nearly 20 percent of the valuable high-octane fuel components in the gasoline.
In proof-of-concept testing with three different chemistries, PNNL's patent-pending onboard separation technology separated 95 percent of the ethanol out of commercial gasoline. The materials are also effective for separating butanol, a promising high-octane renewable fuel component.
More information: Katarzyna Grubel et al. Octane-On-Demand: Onboard Separation of Oxygenates from Gasoline, Energy & Fuels (2019). DOI: 10.1021/acs.energyfuels.8b03781
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Tuesday May 26 2020, @05:42PM (2 children)
They can when fuel is taxed to also pay for road construction and maintenance, etc. Not saying this is an ideal situation, but it is the situation we have.
No it's not, not in America. In America, we subsidize roads with other funding sources. Sure, we pay a lot of gas taxes for roads and bridges, but they don't come close to all the funds needed for that purpose. This is why the Federal government always holds states hostage by threatening to withhold highway funding if they don't comply on various other things. That funding isn't coming from fuel taxes, it's coming from income taxes.
We'd be a lot better off if we reduced, year-by-year, the amount of subsidization, and increased gas taxes to pay for what the roads really cost. This would cause people to drive less, and to move to denser locales, and use more public transit. Of course, then we'd have to do something about the NIMBYism that keeps supply too low and real estate costs too high in cities.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday May 26 2020, @06:03PM
In 'murica we subsidize energy, oil in particular, and food, which explains all the fat asses cruising the Taco Bell drivethroughs in their SUVs and pickup trucks.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 27 2020, @12:47AM
> and increased gas taxes to pay for what the roads really cost.
Since damage to the road is approximated by the load on the tires...to the 4th or 5th power, by rights only heavy trucks should be taxed for road construction. Normal car traffic does negligible road damage.
Our suburban street was paved about 15 years ago and it stayed nice (just a few cracks/patches where shaded by trees). Then last year the county put in a new water main--lots of dump truck traffic carting away what they dug/drilled up (6 foot deep trench, partly in bedrock) and a roughly equal number of dump trucks bringing in loads of gravel and top soil to re-fill the trench. The street is coming apart all over, big cracks and starting to pothole.
Expect the price of anything shipped by truck to increase (and probably some strikes by trucking companies too) if diesel is taxed according to road damage...