This was my response to the person who sent me this information:
"Dear Michael:"
"Good work! Maybe you have stumbled onto your possible legacy regarding Hawaii, for the future of aviation remains our greatest challenge. Renewable electricity is slowly happening, for this is where 95% of the effort is being expended. But two-thirds of our energy requirements are non-electricity, especially to bring tourists to Hawaii, which, unfortunately, remains our dominant economic problem."
"I watched the whole ARPA-E presentation and, finally, at least one organization is beginning to look at this biojetfuel need. However, while the funding allocated for biomass to jetfuel remains minuscule, at least there is now some progress. I'm fixated on a billion dollars, but this is the sum necessary to make a difference. Unfortunately for this field in general, as researchers and companies begin to get involved, they mostly then gravitate toward higher value products, for that is where the profits can be made. Energy remains, still, too cheap. But this is okay, for there is always a transitional need to better develop the science and engineering. At some point in the future, who knows what will become the price of oil when Israel bombs Iran, and the Middle East becomes an inferno. Without a catastrophic political stimulant, though, I suspect it will be slow business as usual until it is too late."
"By the way, I noticed that there was a comment to the Blue Revolution Hawaii article on marine biofuel, so I responded. You might want to click on that link. Keep up your efforts in this area."
"Aloha."
To summarize, there are two primary pathways for next generation aviation:
1. A sustainable and clean replacement for jetful.
2. A completely new flight technology, most probably with hydrogen as the fuel of choice.
Why hydrogen? It is the lightest fuel with high impulse, which is why space launches use liquid hydrogen. What is wrong with hydrogen? It is too expensive.
Some history about hydrogen-fueled aircraft:
" 1. In 1979 I joined the staff of U.S Senator Spark Matsunaga, and was asked to create some legislation for hydrogen. With the assistance of Willis Hawkins (who started Lockheed Missiles and Space Company and served as president") and Dan Brewer ("also of Lockheed, who in 1991 published HYDROGEN AIRCRAFT TECHNOLOGY--here he is at the age of 93, taken last year"), we created some language on hydrogen jetliners. This bill spurred the development of the National Aerospace Plane. The resultant Matsunaga Hydrogen Act stimulated a national hydrogen program that began at zero dollars, but at one point in the 2000's had a budget exceeding that of solar technologies in the Department of Energy.
2. In 1988 the Russian Tupolev Tu-155 was the first aircraft to operate on liquid hydrogen.
" 3. A NASA program was created for the National Aerospace Plane in the 80's, but was shifted to the Department of Defense, and is now a black (secret") program.
4. The European Union did a study called Cryoplane in 2003:
"The CRYOPLANE analysis concludes that hydrogen could be a suitable alternative fuel for future aviation. Based on renewable energy sources it offers the chance to continue the long-term growth of aviation without damaging the atmosphere. Importantly no critical barriers to implementation were identified in the study. Further research is needed, but implementation could take place within 15 to 20 years."
" 5. Nearly four years ago I posted an article in the HUFFINGTON POST" on The Future of Sustainable Aviation.
6. Just last month the U.S Navy broke a drone ("right") endurance record using hydrogen fuel.
7. There are various attempts at dirigibles, some powered by hydrogen. I've discussed with Rinaldo Brutoco prospects for the Hawaiian Hydrogen Clipper ("H2C"). Aeros Aeronautical Systems had Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) funding for:
However, there is no commercial hydrogen jetliner nor passenger blimp into the foreseeable future. DARPA and the Department of Energy, are making tentative efforts to develop clean fuels. Thus, biojet fuel appears to be the only viable option for near term ("within a decade or two") sustainability. Various airlines have experimented with biofuels and a range of companies is pioneering the effort:
" 1. BioJet Corporation and Great Plains Oil and Exploration (camellia")
2. JATRO ("jatropha")
3. RenewableJetFuels.org ("a web site advocating sustainability")
a. Lanzatech
b. SG Biofuels
c. Alt Air
d. Solazyme
e. Sapphire
The problem with all the above is the cost of biojetfuel. Jetfuel today costs 2.83/gallon. Keep in mind that to sell at 2.83/gallon means you will need to produce at the factory for less than 2/gallon, for there are added expenses like transport, profit, taxes, etc. This partly explains why jetfuel is much cheaper than gasoline, as the applied tax is less than half. But jetfuel increases in cost proportionally to gasoline, so what can be expected into the future?
Yet, before you get too depressed, note that the Chicago Mercantile Exchange has petroleum at 78.27/barrel in December of 2021!
Most of the current biofuel efforts struggle to reach 18/gallon, and the U.S. Air Force last year paid 59/gallon. Algae jetfuel? The Navy laid out 424/gallon. Cooking oil has been used, and this is relatively cheap, but this is a joke because a few flights would consume all the fuel available.
"Thus, nothing competitive looms unless the price of oil skyrockets...which certainly can happen if Israel bombs Iran, igniting a major war in the region. Discouragingly, even if oil doubles to 200/barrel (4.76/gallon"), how close is industry to producing sustainable substitutes for 3.50/gallon or less? JUST IN CASE, SHOULDN'T WE BE TAKING A CLOSER RE-LOOK AT HYDROGEN AND NEXT GENERATION FLIGHT OPTIONS? Oh, the bottom line to the question posed in the title is that as theoretically ominous as global warming might be, humanity is particularly screwed when it comes to available options for sustainable aviation.
-
0 comments:
Post a Comment