Oil use: Air transport Vs. all other?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oil use: Air transport Vs. all other?
Anyone know what percentage of all oil that is used for transportation is used for air transportation/travel?
I would assume, as time goes by, that many forms of ground transport (cars, buses, trains, ships, etc.) will become greener and use solar or wind generated electricity for power, but I assume there is no future technology that is planned to replace jet engines that run from kerosene/jet fuel (e.g., oil).
Thanks.
I would assume, as time goes by, that many forms of ground transport (cars, buses, trains, ships, etc.) will become greener and use solar or wind generated electricity for power, but I assume there is no future technology that is planned to replace jet engines that run from kerosene/jet fuel (e.g., oil).
Thanks.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: on the Road
Age: 66
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just throwing out what I think I read, about 80% of greenhouse gas is from coal and oil electrical generation, about 20% from transportation. Close to what XP said, I heard 4% is from aviation, leaving 16% for other transportations. That's not only oil though, add coal to the electrical generation.
But robert, think of this. Doesn't liquid hydrogen have more energy per pound than avgas? Makes it ideal for airplanes that must generate the lift to carry the weight of their fuel, unlike trucks, cars
But robert, think of this. Doesn't liquid hydrogen have more energy per pound than avgas? Makes it ideal for airplanes that must generate the lift to carry the weight of their fuel, unlike trucks, cars
''I would assume, as time goes by, that many forms of ground transport (cars, buses, trains, ships, etc.) will become greener and use solar or wind generated electricity for power, but I assume there is no future technology that is planned to replace jet engines that run from kerosene/jet fuel (e.g., oil).''
I'm writing an article about this in my part time job as a journalist. (Actually, I should be but I'm not right now. I'm on PPruNe procrastinating and ignoring the editor's e-mails about passed deadlines.) It's mainly about ships going back to wind power, but I offer alternatives to other forms of transport. I reckon land vehicles will rely on electricity powered by batteries and/or fuel cells, ships by liquid fuels and or wind power, and large aircraft will have no alternative but to use liquid fuels. Bio fuels have been experimented with, 747s have been flown with an engine fueled by a kerosene substitute made from vegtable oils. The most promising so far being a Diamond Twin Star with deisel engines powered by bio-fuel refined from Algae.
I'm writing an article about this in my part time job as a journalist. (Actually, I should be but I'm not right now. I'm on PPruNe procrastinating and ignoring the editor's e-mails about passed deadlines.) It's mainly about ships going back to wind power, but I offer alternatives to other forms of transport. I reckon land vehicles will rely on electricity powered by batteries and/or fuel cells, ships by liquid fuels and or wind power, and large aircraft will have no alternative but to use liquid fuels. Bio fuels have been experimented with, 747s have been flown with an engine fueled by a kerosene substitute made from vegtable oils. The most promising so far being a Diamond Twin Star with deisel engines powered by bio-fuel refined from Algae.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doesn't liquid hydrogen have more energy per pound than avgas? Makes it ideal for airplanes that must generate the lift to carry the weight of their fuel, unlike trucks, cars
BTW, water vapor is as much a greenhouse gas as is CO2, if not worse...
Liquid hyrogen is very hard to handle. The Russians flew a hydrogen fuled TU154 about ten years ago, but the risks involved would be too high for commercial operations.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: north
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In a hybrid airship the hydrogen would not necessarily be liquid.
Even an insulated tank will leak about 2% energy pr day.
So, you get a storage and logistical problem on on the ground as well.
Large tanks in an aircraft means either
- Less payload
- More volume -> more drag & mass
XPM
Last edited by XPMorten; 6th Aug 2010 at 10:42.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In a hybrid airship the hydrogen would not necessarily be liquid.
And as you burn off fuel load, you decrease the lift.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: north
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, dis-advantage there as well. Due to huge drag, airships travel at
low speeds compared to airliners. So Airships would only be good for short flights and
most people would then prefere a highspeed train which travels faster instead..
XPM
low speeds compared to airliners. So Airships would only be good for short flights and
most people would then prefere a highspeed train which travels faster instead..
XPM
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought I read that hydrogen is the perfect fuel; very clean and effecient. Unfortunately, in order to produce hydrogen, you currently need to use lots of hydrocarbons to convert the raw material (H2O ??).
The stats on air transport using only around 4% of hydros is surprising to me. I would have guessed much higher - say 20%.
So the real problem with limiting fossel burns is to find a viable alternative to oil/gas for ground transport.
...interesting.
The stats on air transport using only around 4% of hydros is surprising to me. I would have guessed much higher - say 20%.
So the real problem with limiting fossel burns is to find a viable alternative to oil/gas for ground transport.
...interesting.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: north
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So the real problem with limiting fossel burns is to find a viable alternative to oil/gas for ground transport.
about the same amount as the entire private population in a small
european country including their air travel...
XPM
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: canada
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The real effort should be directed towards using the our hydro carbon resources more efficiently. We're not going to stop using them anytime soon, but in N. America, for example, we could be more than self sufficient if we did it efficiently, and think of the security bonus.
I've heard that the reciprocating engine that we all use is about 30% efficient. In other words, about 70% of the stored energy in a volume of fuel goes out the tail pipe. If we used the oil and coal to make and store fuel more efficiently and developed the infrastructure accordingly, we'd have something. Make hydrogen, or electricity, or whatever, and then use a more efficient method to change it to noise and motion.
I've heard that the reciprocating engine that we all use is about 30% efficient. In other words, about 70% of the stored energy in a volume of fuel goes out the tail pipe. If we used the oil and coal to make and store fuel more efficiently and developed the infrastructure accordingly, we'd have something. Make hydrogen, or electricity, or whatever, and then use a more efficient method to change it to noise and motion.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 464
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've heard that the reciprocating engine that we all use is about 30% efficient. In other words, about 70% of the stored energy in a volume of fuel goes out the tail pipe. If we used the oil and coal to make and store fuel more efficiently and developed the infrastructure accordingly, we'd have something.
Interestingly I was reading about a British hypersonic aircraft design from the 60s at the weekend and that included comparative drawings of a kerosene version vs hydrogen powered... the hydrogen version was enormous in comparison. Lockheed also considered hydrogen for the Blackbird but again from what I remember the huge fuel tanks and difficulty of refueling convinced them that relatively conventional fuels were the way to go.
What you can do with a fossil fuel power plant is to exploit the waste heat in a useful manner, for example by heating houses or greenhouses. That's harder to do in a plane or a car, though electric cars are going to have to work pretty hard to warm up the passengers on a typical -40 winter's day here, while fossil-fueled cars can just use the waste heat to do so.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Glorious West Sussex
Age: 76
Posts: 1,020
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone know what percentage of all oil that is used for transportation is used for air transportation/travel?