On 17 Military Sealift Command fleet in July delivered USNS Henry J. Kaiser (T-AO 187) 700,000 gallons of treated water or renewable diesel fuel HRD76 to three ships of the strike group. Kaiser also delivered 200,000 gallons of water treated renewable jet fuel, HRJ5 to Nimitz. The fuels were from Solazyme and Dynamic Fuels made available.
Both fuels are a 50-50 mix of traditional petroleum-based fuel and biofuel made from a mixture of cooking oil and algae oils. Deliver 900,000 gallons of a 50-50 blend of traditional and modern biofuels petroleum-based fuel to the U.S. Navy aircraft carrier USS Nimitz (CVN 68) Strike Group. The fuel supply is part of the Great Green Navy fleet demonstration that the Navy to test, evaluate and demonstrate the cross-platform functionality and benefits of advanced biofuels in business practice allows.
"This week, as part of the international Rim of the Pacific exercise, the Navy embarks on the biggest demonstration of military operations, the use of renewable biofuels. In the modern age of warfare, is an energy basis of our warfare. Technological advances and demand, economies of scale and production volumes, lower can drive the cost of alternative fuels. Industry reaction
Advanced Biofuels Association president Michael McAdams participating in the RIMPAC Green Strike Group aboard the USS Nimitz demonstration
Advanced Biofuels Association President Michael McAdams
"This is a significant achievement for domestic biofuels American industry, and a proud moment for our nation, as we see the results of American ingenuity and innovation grew up in this house, advanced biofuel that successfully provided power to the largest state of the art warships are.
As a Reuters report notes, "Republicans in Congress have the military push green energy as another attempt by the Obama administration, denounced in order to promote alternative fuels, even if they make little economic sense, as in the case of government-funded solar panel maker Solyndra, which went bankrupt last year.
Myth # 1 Military
biofuels will cost an additional $ 1.8B per year.
True or false? Myth # 2 Advanced biofuels are 98 percent behind the objectives of Congress.
True or false? ". By mixing the definition of cellulosic biofuels with advanced biofuels. As it turned out, none of the fuels used in yesterday's practice cellulosic biofuels.
True or false? Myth # 2 Advanced biofuels are 98 percent behind the objectives of Congress.
True or false? ". By mixing the definition of cellulosic biofuels with advanced biofuels. As it turned out, none of the fuels used in yesterday's practice cellulosic biofuels.
Myth # 2 Advanced biofuels are 98 percent behind the objectives of Congress.
Advanced biofuels, as defined in the Congressional purpose include, specifically sugar cane ethanol and biodiesel, and more than 10000000000 gallon "of the stuff" went around the world produced last year - well above the Congressional goal.
How did Wired got their, uh, wires crossed? By mixing the definition of cellulosic biofuels with advanced biofuels.
Advanced biofuels, as defined in the Congressional purpose include, specifically sugar cane ethanol and biodiesel, and more than 10000000000 gallon "of the stuff" went around the world produced last year - well above the Congressional goal.
How did Wired got their, uh, wires crossed? By mixing the definition of cellulosic biofuels with advanced biofuels.
Myth # 3 there is no support production of biofuels in the U.S. military fuel can - its fantasy fuel.
Instead of modernizing oils to military explosives, this is for the upgrade of alcohol fuels. The Navy plans to use the DPA to ensure that it has a reliable and competitive supply of military fuels. DPA production capacity is invested, by contract, provision of fuel at an affordable and competitive price with a dedicated supply of the military.
The oil industry in Wyoming started really with the Teapot Dome complex, which was a Navy fuel depot production.
The British Navy has much the same when converting from coal to oil.
At the 40 percent figure, Wired has confused corn shipments to ethanol plants for use by corn-ethanol plants.
Myth # 4.
True or false? "In 1980, Congress began a major investment in the production of ethanol from corn with a 45-cent ger-gallon subsidy. The program has led to the recent study, a $ 1.09 per gallon reduction in the cost of gasoline by U.S. oil demand, has almost single-handedly support the agricultural sector, which costs U.S. taxpayers even more than the ethanol subsidy eliminated, and the ethanol subsidy was even set.
At the 40 percent figure, Wired has confused corn shipments to ethanol plants for use by corn-ethanol plants. It's true (well, not quite, but close enough for horseshoes) is supplied 40 percent of the corn-ethanol plants in U.S. - but only a third of the corn kernels, by weight, is used for ethanol production.
True or false? "In 1980, Congress began a major investment in the production of ethanol from corn with a 45-cent ger-gallon subsidy. The program has led to the recent study, a $ 1.09 per gallon reduction in the cost of gasoline by U.S. oil demand, has almost single-handedly support the agricultural sector, which costs U.S. taxpayers even more than the ethanol subsidy eliminated, and the ethanol subsidy was even set.
At the 40 percent figure, Wired has confused corn shipments to ethanol plants for use by corn-ethanol plants. It's true (well, not quite, but close enough for horseshoes) is supplied 40 percent of the corn-ethanol plants in U.S. - but only a third of the corn kernels, by weight, is used for ethanol production.
Myth
# 5 Biofuels
technologies will drive food prices, with the exception of technology that seem
to never reach.
Take, for example, Dynamic Fuels '75 .000.000 gallons-scale plant, which makes military fuel intermediates from animal waste - and much of the fuel made available for this demonstration 2012th
Take, for example, Dynamic Fuels '75 .000.000 gallons-scale plant, which makes military fuel intermediates from animal waste - and much of the fuel made available for this demonstration 2012th
Myth # 6 The former Green Tech supporters now lead the charge against advanced biofuels.
"One-Time Tech-Green supporters were now wildly on the biofuels program. Senate vote 125, 5/21/01.] McCain votes against the establishment of the National Renewable Energy Standard to promote wind, solar and other alternatives [Senate vote 141, 6/16/05, 3/14/02 50 Senate vote, the Senate voting 55 21/03/02, Senate Vote 59 3 / 21/02]. If the Green Strike Group - much less the Great Green Fleet - sail again?
If the Navy has its way, yes. If the Navy to get its way?
The ways that the military uses the Alternative EnergyThe
U.S. military knows that its branches have their thinking about how in
"battleground" in the new, post-Cold War world of the 21st Century commitment to bring the front man. One
thing that the military leaders of the desire to stress the forces in
the theater used to be able to more energy-independent. Currently,
the U.S. military have policies and procedures to interact with allies
or sympathetic local populations to help its forces in the field, their
energy needs and clean water when engaged in a foreign military
campaign. However,
this is not entirely reliable, because the U.S. might find itself
against unilateral military activities, or have been in a situation
where its allies can not help, it can with the resources it needs for
its military actions successfully.The
U.S. military is very interested in certain alternative energies that,
with the right technological research and development, make it energy
independent, or at least much more so on the battlefield. One
of the things that have great interest in the military is in this
direction is the development of small nuclear reactors to be portable,
could be used for producing theater-local electricity. The military's clean-burning, such as nuclear reactors are and how energy efficient they are impressed. Makes
it acceptable for the typical warfare of today is very mobile,
small-scale military operations is something to explore what they do. The
most prominent thing that the U.S. military thinks these small nuclear
reactors would be useful for involves the removal of hydrogen (fuel
cell) from seawater. He
also thinks that converting seawater to hydrogen fuel in this way would
have less negative impact on the environment than the current practices
of remaining supplied out in the field.The sea water is, in fact, the highest military interest when it comes to the issue of alternative energy supply. Sea water can be "mined" for hydrogen are endless, which in turn powers advanced fuel cells. Using OTEC, seawater can also scroll in desalinated, potable water can be converted. Drinking water and hydrogen for energy are two of the things that require a near future the use military force in particular.In
the cores of nuclear reactors, which, as stated above devices are
highly interesting, in portable form, the U.S. military-we encounter
temperatures exceeding 1000 degrees Celsius. If
this level of temperature with a thermo-chemical water-splitting
process is mixed, we have to break down on our hands the most efficient
type of water into its constituents, the molecular hydrogen and oxygen.
The
minerals and salts contained in sea water would be extracted via a
desalination in order to pave the way for the water splitting process. These could then be used, such as vitamins or sent to salt shaker, or simply return to the ocean (recycling). With
the power of nuclear reactors to extract this hydrogen from the sea, to
then input into the fuel cell as a drive for advanced aircraft, tanks,
vehicles and the like, is clearly at the top of the R & D priority
list of the military.
Post a Comment