Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Scottish Scientists Develop Whisky Biofuel

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the you-mad-geniuses dept.

Transportation 172

RabbitWho writes "It gives a whole new meaning to the phrase 'one for the road.' Whisky, the spirit that powers the Scottish economy, is being used to develop a new biofuel which could be available at petrol pumps in a few years. This biofuel can be produced from two main by-products of the whisky distilling process – 'pot ale,' the liquid from the copper stills, and 'draff,' the spent grains. Copious quantities of both waste products are produced by the £4bn whisky industry each year, and the scientists say there is real potential for the biofuel, to be available at local garage forecourts alongside traditional fuels. It can be used in conventional cars without adapting their engines. The team also said it could be used to fuel planes and as the basis for chemicals such as acetone, an important solvent."

cancel ×

172 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

ethanol (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33282468)

ethanol

Re:ethanol (2, Informative)

mweather (1089505) | about 4 years ago | (#33283470)

Butanol, actually.

Butanol ... (3, Interesting)

Ungrounded Lightning (62228) | about 4 years ago | (#33283740)

Butanol, actually.

I hear butanol has a vapor pressure, ignition point, flame propagation rate, and energy content that let it be dropped in essentially straight as a substitute for gasoline, without retuning modern engines.

Does anybody have better info than this rumor?

30% more power out than ethanol ... w/ethanol? (1)

lpq (583377) | about 4 years ago | (#33284392)

I don't think AC bothered to click through to the article at all.

Photo by-line says 30% more power than ethanol -- so if they are doing that with ethanol, doesn't that imply (through recursion) a new source of infinite energy?

Cool!

Mmmm (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33282470)

One for my car... one for me...
Two for my car... two for me...

Re:Mmmm (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33282502)

Next thing ya know, black scientists will develop fried chicken biofuel.

Re:Mmmm (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33283048)

And redneck scientists will invent a way of extracting energy every time you fuck your sister!

Scotty, we... need... more... POWER (4, Funny)

garyisabusyguy (732330) | more than 3 years ago | (#33282614)

Aye, ittle be just a weee bit Captain, I have to make sure the fuel is of an acceptable quality... *hic*

Re:Scotty, we... need... more... POWER (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about 4 years ago | (#33283482)

I had a coworker who one time actually did try the fuel-grade ethanol. Strong stuff. Unfortunately for him, they need to put benzene in fuel grade ethanol, and he got very sick. Turned green. Didn't move for a few days.

Re:Mmmm (2, Informative)

Dynedain (141758) | more than 3 years ago | (#33282830)

Should be:

1 for my car,
1 for me.
2 for my car,
1, 2, for me.
3 for my car,
1, 2, 3, for me...(hic)

Re:Mmmm (1)

CAIMLAS (41445) | about 4 years ago | (#33283756)

Nonsense.

What a horrible waste of scotch whiskey. :-/

Re:Mmmm (1)

tverbeek (457094) | about 4 years ago | (#33283922)

The term for this is "alcohol abuse".

Misleading headline. (4, Insightful)

w0mprat (1317953) | more than 3 years ago | (#33282480)

IANMOFWF (I am not much of a whisky afficcionado) but I was worried for a minute there. The headline is misleading. They are turning byproducts of the whisky making process into biofuel and not the whisky itself, which would be a travesty indeed.

Re:Misleading headline. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33282562)

I agree, the headline is terribly misleading. The more important headline is... Since they would presumably need to produce ever more whiskey as demand for the fuel increase, these guys have finally found a use for Scottish people [bbc.co.uk] too.

Re:Misleading headline. (1)

Renraku (518261) | more than 3 years ago | (#33282630)

The lower and middle class people would fill up with whiskey-flavored spirits, while the rich would 'treat' their cars with cognac and Glen Livet.

Re:Misleading headline. (1)

Moryath (553296) | about 4 years ago | (#33283084)

Basically, we do this already.

What did you *think* the difference between 87, 89, and 93-octane "ethanol enriched" gasoline was? They might as well replace the word "Ethanol" with "Jack Daniels" in American gas stations.

Re:Misleading headline. (1)

sortius_nod (1080919) | about 4 years ago | (#33283334)

I don't see how octane content is akin to a better drink.

Some cars run really bad on low octane fuel. I know my Peugeot hates lower octane fuels.

Re:Misleading headline. (5, Funny)

oldhack (1037484) | about 4 years ago | (#33283418)

No kidding - the French complains about everything.

Re:Misleading headline. (1)

Dahamma (304068) | about 4 years ago | (#33283800)

My old Integra would run on any crap I put in. I was of the same opinion as you for years. But then I replaced it with an '02 Xterra (with a supercharger, which I think was just tacked on because the '01 engine was really anemic - basically, you get a bit more power for a lot less economy and more expensive gas) and the one time my girlfriend put 87 in it (only 1/2 tank luckily) it sputtered and knocked all the way back to the gas station...

It's a fact that engines can and are built to require higher octane gasoline. Octane is just a measure of resistance to auto-ignition (aka "knock") in an internal combustion engine. Many luxury cars that recommend 91+ octane just do it to inflate mileage numbers (since 91 octane gas usually but is not required to give *slightly* better mileage), but some engines just won't run well without it.

Re:Misleading headline. (1)

Sulphur (1548251) | about 4 years ago | (#33283452)

And fill the radiator with bottled water.

The history of petrochemical plants is to move toward using waste products. Several commented that they could make a potable plonk. It is refreshing to see distillers moving similarly.

Re:Misleading headline. (1)

demonlapin (527802) | about 4 years ago | (#33284280)

Petrochemical plants can, in theory, produce absolute ethanol without a dehydration step. Not merely potable, but chemically pure!

Re:Misleading headline. (5, Funny)

Scarletdown (886459) | more than 3 years ago | (#33282704)

I was worried for a minute there. The headline is misleading. They are turning byproducts of the whisky making process into biofuel and not the whisky itself, which would be a travesty indeed.

Aye, burning whiskey as fuel would be a serious case of alcohol abuse.

Re:Misleading headline. (1)

CAIMLAS (41445) | about 4 years ago | (#33283762)

Just think of it this way... with whiskoline, you'll always blow an over the limit level. :-/

Unfortunately... (1)

Colin Smith (2679) | more than 3 years ago | (#33282756)

There are a lot more cars consuming more fuel than the whisky industry will be able to service.

i.e. this is an irrelevant but amusing story.

btw. Try this one:
http://www.oldpulteney.com/whisky.php [oldpulteney.com]

They don't half talk a load of bollocks on their web page, but their 12 year old is better than many distilleries 18year malts. It won't rip your throat out or make you want to boak. It will however give you a blinding headache the following day if you drink one too many, but they all do that.
 

Re:Unfortunately... (2, Insightful)

timeOday (582209) | more than 3 years ago | (#33282856)

There are a lot more cars consuming more fuel than the whisky industry will be able to service.

Even a couple percentage delta in demand for fuel might impact the price dramatically due to inelastic demand [about.com] : "That is, a 10% hike in the price of gasoline lowers quantity demanded by 2.6%. In the long-run (defined as longer than 1 year), the price elasticity of demand is -0.58; a 10% hike in gasoline causes quantity demanded to decline by 5.8% in the long run." I suppose whether the reverse is true - a 5.8% decrease in demand is necessary to decrease prices by 10% in the long run - depends on how efficient you believe the market for gasoline to be. But there's no good reason to believe decreasing demand by 1% would equal only 1% reduction in price.

Re:Unfortunately... (2, Interesting)

Colin Smith (2679) | about 4 years ago | (#33283062)

Even assuming it's cheaper than oil, unfortunately Jevons Paradox pretty much ensures that any reduction in cost will simply result in an increase in usage. It is predicated on efficiency gains, but is effectively cost reduction.
 

Re:Unfortunately... (4, Insightful)

timeOday (582209) | about 4 years ago | (#33283320)

Whether you take the benefit as a decrease in cost or an increase in mobility doesn't really matter in this case. This waste is currently being dumped into the environment anyways, so the net environmental impact of using it as fuel instead should be very small.

Re:Unfortunately... (1)

RabbitWho (1805112) | about 4 years ago | (#33283858)

Did you read the article? They explain how the cars won't need special engines and how this could reduce the fuel requirements of the nation by 10% And it uses a by-product that would otherwise go to waste.

Re:Misleading headline. (2, Funny)

sexconker (1179573) | more than 3 years ago | (#33282816)

IANMOFWF (I am not much of a whisky afficcionado) but I was worried for a minute there. The headline is misleading. They are turning byproducts of the whisky making process into biofuel and not the whisky itself, which would be a travesty indeed.

You're also not much of a speller, anagram creator, etc.

But basically what's going on here is that the Scottish have found yet another way to pinch their pennies.

Re:Misleading headline. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33283222)

IANMOFWF (I am not much of a whisky afficcionado) but I was worried for a minute there. The headline is misleading. They are turning byproducts of the whisky making process into biofuel and not the whisky itself, which would be a travesty indeed.

You're also not much of a speller, anagram creator, etc.

But basically what's going on here is that the Scottish have found yet another way to pinch their pennies.

They're not Jewish you know.

Oh wait, making fun of Scots is "Funny". Mentioning blacks or Jews is automatic "Flamebait".

Moderator: "Why no, we *nervous tic* don't have any sort of *tic* cognitive dissonance regarding our stance on ethnocentrism. *tic* We are completely self-consistent *tic*."

Re:Misleading headline. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33283232)

the cheap drunk bastards.

Re:Misleading headline. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33284404)

Really, no wonder the wankers down south colonized them.

Re:Misleading headline. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33282824)

It gets even better. Whiskey will become a byproduct of automobile fuel production. Supply will grow dramatically and you'll be able to afford as much of it as you could possibly want.

Re:Misleading headline. (1)

ZigiSamblak (745960) | more than 3 years ago | (#33282836)

Indeed, Oil would have to rise quite a bit in price before you would ever consider tanking up on single malt.

Re:Misleading headline. (1)

Sulphur (1548251) | about 4 years ago | (#33283372)

Use the ice level to tell if its bonded or blended.

Re:Misleading headline. (1)

Local ID10T (790134) | about 4 years ago | (#33283450)

ICE?!?! In scotch? You pervert...

(yeah, I do adulterate my scotch with ice on exceptionally warm days.)

Re:Misleading headline. (1)

Sulphur (1548251) | about 4 years ago | (#33283634)

I did not consult a lawyer before committing the crime, Your Honor.

Re:Misleading headline. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33282874)

They are turning byproducts of the whisky making process into biofuel and not the whisky itself

I just wonder how an alcohol powered car would jive with ignition interlocks [slashdot.org] .

How tiresome. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33282524)

Is anyone else getting just a little shell shocked over all these wonderful new bio-fuel stories? This one's made of left overs from scotch distilleries. Hoorah. Just find a way to produce the dang stuff at a price that makes it competitive to good old gasoline and put it on the market. Quit haranguing us with all these wonderful expectations. Nothing's come up as cost effective, energy dense and ready to use in the current infrastructure yet. When it does, then we'll have news.

Re:How tiresome. (3, Insightful)

SEE (7681) | more than 3 years ago | (#33282730)

Well, butanol at least meets the energy density (pretty close to gasoline) and ready-to-use (can be used in most gasoline infrastructure as-is) criteria, which means it makes a hell of a lot more sense than ethanol. If, of course, they can make it cost-effective.

Energy density (3, Informative)

by (1706743) (1706744) | more than 3 years ago | (#33282530)

Butanol has almost the same energy density as gasoline, and burns with less air. [wikipedia.org] Send me a few gallons, and after I rich out the mixture (no fancy computer-controlled mixture for me...), I'll report back!

Re:Energy density (1)

russotto (537200) | more than 3 years ago | (#33282564)

Don't forget to retard the shit out of the timing to handle the reduced octane.

Re:Energy density (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33282710)

Don't worry, enough alcohol and it will act retarded on its own

Re:Energy density (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33282724)

Don't forget to retard the shit out of the timing to handle the reduced octane.

Actually Ethanol has a greater Octane rating than Standard Gasoline !

Re:Energy density (2, Informative)

by (1706743) (1706744) | more than 3 years ago | (#33282902)

Actually Ethanol has a greater Octane rating than Standard Gasoline !

Sure, but we're talking about Butanol, not Ethanol. And while Butanol does have a reasonable RON octane rating, it has a less favorable MON octane rating.

Re:Energy density (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33282600)

...almost the same energy density as gasoline...

Well, within ~10% from the source you cited...

Re:Energy density (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33282804)

Why not? Fancy computer control systems are awesome.

Wait, wait, wait ... I've seen this before ... (2, Interesting)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 3 years ago | (#33282554)

Oh yeah, here it was: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tight_Little_Island [wikipedia.org]

One of the guys poured a bottle of scotch into the tank of his truck, to escape the police that were looking for the, um "stolen" whisky that was removed from a banked ship.

Re:Wait, wait, wait ... I've seen this before ... (0, Troll)

BitZtream (692029) | about 4 years ago | (#33282988)

You do realize that Scotch isn't Whiskey ... RIGHT?

Re:Wait, wait, wait ... I've seen this before ... (2, Informative)

cawpin (875453) | about 4 years ago | (#33283058)

He didn't say "Whiskey" but "Whisky" which is correct.

Re:Wait, wait, wait ... I've seen this before ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33283378)

scotch is as much a whiskey as a bourbon is a whiskey.

butanol isn't really anything new (1)

RandomChars (1455331) | more than 3 years ago | (#33282604)

people have been trying to make this stuff cheaply and efficiently for a while now -> http://parts.mit.edu/igem07/index.php/Alberta [mit.edu] was one such attempt that I heard about

Blended or Single Malt? (1)

filesiteguy (695431) | more than 3 years ago | (#33282624)

I can see the filling stations now.

On one pump you have gas with 87 octane, one with 92 octane and then single-malt or blended whiskey...

What about the Americans? Will we develop a fuel based on Budweiser or Tequila?

Re:Blended or Single Malt? (1)

TheDormouse (614641) | more than 3 years ago | (#33282838)

What about the Americans? Will we develop a fuel based on Budweiser or Tequila?

Bourbon.

Re:Blended or Single Malt? (3, Insightful)

uvajed_ekil (914487) | more than 3 years ago | (#33282918)

What about the Americans? Will we develop a fuel based on Budweiser or Tequila?

Since this was about whiskey, how about using the byproducts of Bourbon, Tennessee, and other American whiskies, just as can be done with the byproducts of Scotch whiskey? American production dwarfs that of Scotland, tequila is gross, and no one educated about beer likes Budweiser.

Re:Blended or Single Malt? (5, Insightful)

lewiscr (3314) | about 4 years ago | (#33283256)

This can be done with the Budweiser by products too. The first step in making Whiskey is to make beer. Then you distill the beer, and age the grain alcohol to get whiskey. "pot ale" is the beer left over after distillation. "draff" is the spent grains, used to make the beer. So Budweiser has tons (many thousands) of draff, but no pot ale.

Re:Blended or Single Malt? (1)

TooMuchToDo (882796) | about 4 years ago | (#33283760)

It would be brilliant for brewers to have outlet stores that sold both their product and fuel right at the brewery. Or power the distribution vehicles off the by-products.

Re:Blended or Single Malt? (1)

TubeSteak (669689) | about 4 years ago | (#33283590)

Since this was about whiskey, how about using the byproducts of Bourbon, Tennessee, and other American whiskies, just as can be done with the byproducts of Scotch whiskey?

I believe that, in America, we feed distillers grain (the leftovers from the distilling process) to cattle.
http://www.google.com/search?q=distillers+grain+cattle+feed [google.com]

Re:Blended or Single Malt? (1)

NekSnappa (803141) | about 4 years ago | (#33283876)

But a certain amount of the mash is reused in bourbon, and Tennessee whiskey. Hence the term "sour mash". The point being to help ensure consistency of taste.

Re:Blended or Single Malt? (1)

c6gunner (950153) | about 4 years ago | (#33283068)

What about the Americans? Will we develop a fuel based on Budweiser or Tequila?

Nope, you've already contributed your fuel idea: French Fry Grease [usda.gov]

Re:Blended or Single Malt? (1)

filesiteguy (695431) | about 4 years ago | (#33283770)

Well, according to my wife, I'm much more efficient at creating methane-based fuel.

I've researched the heck out of a grease-powered (frybrid/lovecraft) mercedes or even truck.

ATM, I'm spending less on simple gas.

I have filled up twice on ethanol, but I have to drive ten miles to the only E85 station near Los Angeles and I get crappy mileage for the effort.

Re:Blended or Single Malt? (1)

mjwx (966435) | about 4 years ago | (#33283112)

Will we develop a fuel based on Budweiser or Tequila?

Alcohol content is too low.

Straw please. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33282634)

Can I get a straw installed to the tank please?

No better time to start (1)

Gohtar (1829140) | more than 3 years ago | (#33282668)

I had better pick up drinking to save our mother earth.

Meh. (3, Interesting)

SEE (7681) | more than 3 years ago | (#33282690)

Making acetone and butanol with the Weizmann organism is downright ordinary. People stopped doing in the the 1940s mostly because hydrocarbon cracking was cheaper than ABE fermentation. The feedstock isn't particularly unusual. Wonder what they're specifically trying to patent.

Re:Meh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33282850)

Wonder what they're specifically trying to patent.

Thank god it's Scotland

Re:Meh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33282960)

If they were looking to patent some innovation, they could patent controlling it by computer instead of by hand!

(I kid, I kid)

Re:Meh. (2, Funny)

phantomfive (622387) | about 4 years ago | (#33283530)

Heh....I can think of four or five patents for that no problem. Here's a sample:

Making acetone and butanol with the Weizmann organism.......on a computer.
Making acetone and butanol with the Weizmann organism.......on the internet.
Making acetone and butanol with the Weizmann organism.......on the cloud.
Making acetone and butanol with the Weizmann organism.......using XML for that extra sharp angled taste.
Making acetone and butanol with the Weizmann organism.......using a protocol.

If you don't think those will work then you don't know the patent system.

byproduct (3, Insightful)

DaveGod (703167) | more than 3 years ago | (#33282708)

Scottish Scientists Develop Whisky byproduct Biofuel, is what the headline should read. The current one announces a ridiculous insanity involving using one even more scarce resource when the actual significance is that they've created a use out of a waste product. This is better than something from nothing, since the waste product was itself a problem (though I understand some distilleries were already converting it into fuel to power the plant).

p.s. I never understood the draw to whisky when I'd tried and found "meh" even the supposed coveted bottles that are semi-widely available until I was signed into the Whisky Society in Edinburgh one night. Sure selling whisky by number without identifying the source is probably another marketing tactic but this was one of those rare "wow" moments where all the hype and marketing hyperbole actually seemed understated. Water of life indeed.

Re:byproduct (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33283424)

I love the Edinburgh Whisky Society. The difference in the whisky alone is worth it, but the surroundings are stunning, especially the one down in Leith. A proper "gentleman's club" (i.e. old fashioned, not sexist), but one in which you can comfortably turn up in a hoody and jeans.

Re:byproduct (1)

John Hasler (414242) | about 4 years ago | (#33283580)

This is better than something from nothing, since the waste product was itself a problem

The pot ale may be a problem but spent distiller's grains are excellent livestock feed.

Drink more whiskey! (1)

P0ltergeist333 (1473899) | more than 3 years ago | (#33282718)

Support the environment. Drink more whiskey!

Re:Drink more whiskey! (1)

Alanonfire (1415379) | more than 3 years ago | (#33282748)

Support the environment. Drink more whiskey!

This is going to be on a tshirt.

So... (1)

Some.Net(Guy) (1733146) | more than 3 years ago | (#33282720)

...getting drunk and saving the world could become synonymous?

YOU FAIL IT (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33282744)

any partin6 shOt, the NetBSD project,

Hey hey! (1)

MaufTarkie (6625) | more than 3 years ago | (#33282784)

Great news! I'll drink to that!

Scottish ingenuity (1)

WinstonWolfIT (1550079) | more than 3 years ago | (#33282860)

Better than vegemite from beer castoffs in Oz.

Re:Scottish ingenuity (1)

adamofgreyskull (640712) | about 4 years ago | (#33283146)

Better than vegemite from beer castoffs in Oz.

Better how?! To run a car on? Yes. To consume? No. Vegemite and Marmite are yet two more good reasons, as if reason were needed, to brew beer.

Fuel grades (1)

Caerdwyn (829058) | more than 3 years ago | (#33282862)

"Regular or premium?"

"Cask strength!"

And, of course, if you're running a turbo with about 20 pounds of boost... Talisker 10. If that don't kick your car in the teeth, nothing will.

Mind you, none of this is really all that new to the automotive industry. I mean, Irish whiskey has been good only for washing engine parts for years now... and this is the part where I go run and hide from offended Bushmill's partisans

Re:Fuel grades (1)

Wizard Drongo (712526) | about 4 years ago | (#33283078)

You'd risk precision-engineered engine parts by putting them in Bushmills?

ethanol sucks (1)

Alien Being (18488) | more than 3 years ago | (#33282892)

They say you can use it in conventional cars without a problem. It's a lie. If the fuel system was designed for it and you don't let it sit in the tank for more than a few months, then it's won't hurt anything. But it still doesn't perform as well.

This crap is causing more damage than it's worth in everything from lawnmowers to racecars.

Re:ethanol sucks (1)

OrangeCatholic (1495411) | about 4 years ago | (#33283110)

>ethanol sucks

I suspect it does, but since I'm not allowed to buy anything else (pure), how can I tell?

Re:ethanol sucks (1)

Amouth (879122) | about 4 years ago | (#33283202)

this isn't ethanol it's Butanol

different substance - different properties...

but i agree Ethanol is shit - and i make a point not to buy gas from places that have it.

Re:ethanol sucks (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33283306)

In turbocharged engines (where you can run more boost) or ones retrofitted with high-compression heads/pistons, it actually performs on par with gasoline in miles/gallon (less energy density, but more efficient due to higher compression -- just about balances), and the reduced air requirements coupled with more compression/boost mean serious increases in power from the same block.

Yeah, it's not the drop-in substitute for gasoline some people like to think it is, but it's damned good in a vehicle properly set up for it.

Then again, since tfa's about butanol, not ethanol, I guess you were trolling rather than looking for a meaningful discussion in the first place.

Ah, the King's English (1)

Shag (3737) | more than 3 years ago | (#33282928)

I've been to Scotland numerous times, and have never heard of a "garage forecourt" but can only presume it's a petrol station. I'm curious about the performance of this proposed biofuel, and whether vehicles would achieve the same efficiency as on petrol. How many furlongs to the mutchkin are we talking about here?

Re:Ah, the King's English (1)

NekSnappa (803141) | about 4 years ago | (#33283838)

There are a couple of teams using it in the American Le Mans racing series in the US. One of them even won the last round a week or so back.

Re:Ah, the King's English (1)

SEE (7681) | about 4 years ago | (#33284130)

Butanol is pretty near gasoline in energy density, doesn't have the hydrophilic tendencies or corrosion levels of ethanol (so it can be used in existing gasoline infrastructure, like tanks and pipelines), and 100% pure butanol has successfully been used in cars designed only to burn gasoline. Of pretty much all the alternative fuels that have been proposed, it's the one that could replace gasoline with the absolute least difficulty and infrastructure adjustment.

On the other hand, nobody's managed to get the fermentation process cheap enough to be competitive with gasoline. Pretty much all commercially-available butanol is made synthetically from natural gas feedstock, because that's cheaper.

A toast (1)

Dave Emami (237460) | about 4 years ago | (#33283008)

"Whiskey for the gentlemen that like it, and for the gentlemen that don't like it... whiskey! "
-- Colonel Jock Sinclair (Sir Alec Guinness), Tunes of Glory

Cheaper than Brazilian Ethanol? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33283076)

Brazil has the answer, with sugar cane ethanol. And, if that isn't enough, try some unaged cachaca distilled at 50%+ alcohol. Woooooot!

The "Pizza-baking truck" phenomenon? (2, Informative)

brasselv (1471265) | about 4 years ago | (#33283158)

Am I the only one noticing a pattern here.

        1. Reputable scientists publish research "X".
                --> e.g.: "On some possible applications of AI-blabla to improve car safety"
        2. Same scientists explain X to mainstream journalists, and in the process they simplify the message (sometimes in good faith, sometimes to get PRs).
                --> e.g: "Cars will become more intelligent in the next 5 years"
        3. Mainstream journalists write articles where X is further stretched.
                --> e.g: "May be cars will drive themselves in the next 5 years"
        4. Headline of such articles go a further mile in stretching X.
                --> e.g.: "Are drivers obsolete?"
        5. by the time X morphs on /. it has totally become Y.
                --> e.g. "Scientists claim that uber-intelligent robotic cars have made drivers redundant. And my home-assembled truck overlord is also baking pizzas. It runs Linux."

Re:The "Pizza-baking truck" phenomenon? (1)

sayfawa (1099071) | about 4 years ago | (#33283444)

It's a well studied cycle [phdcomics.com] .

Homer the Wise (1)

jimmydigital (267697) | about 4 years ago | (#33283212)

Here's to alcohol: the cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems.

-HJS

Progress? (1)

NemoinSpace (1118137) | about 4 years ago | (#33283332)

So they're going to take "waste products" (which they already have plenty of uses for) and substitute a more expensive fuel to replace gasoline. Which also happens to provide 10% less energy - (which means you'll have to burn that much more of it) While increasing the amount of emission by products.

Yeah, I bet they'll have plenty of patents on it.

Of Course They Would! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33283906)

What else would they make? Tequila fuel? (Saki fuel?) Duh!

Does it work with bourbon byproducts? (1)

Posting=!Working (197779) | about 4 years ago | (#33284022)

Speaking for the people of Kentucky, I'd like to say:
Please, please, please work with bourbon.
There's about a dozen distilleries within 50 miles of where I live. I'd love to use locally produced fuel.

Plus, drinking bourbon would be considered an environmentally friendly act.

Re:Does it work with bourbon byproducts? (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about 4 years ago | (#33284416)

There's about a dozen distilleries within 50 miles of where I live. I'd love to use locally produced fuel.

If it works, they're not going to give it to you for free. Although, I can see running their own fleet off it and saving a bunch of cash on trucking expenses.

Of course, if your tailpipe smelled like bourbon, I can see a lot of people in Kentucky asphyxiating as an unfortunate side effect of this. :-P

Powers the economy, eh? (2, Informative)

moosesocks (264553) | about 4 years ago | (#33284236)

"It gives a whole new meaning to the phrase "one for the road". Whisky, the spirit that powers the Scottish economy, is being used to develop a new biofuel which could be available at petrol pumps in a few years.

Whisky accounts for approximately £2bn of Scotland's £86.3bn GDP.

Nice try though. Check your references before making absurd generalizations like this one. (I'll bet you also didn't know that there are also large swaths of the country that neither produce nor consume Whisky in meaningful quantities. )

Floyd Landis was right!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33284330)

It WAS whiskey that powered his breakaway on the TdF, not PEDs! In your face, WADA!

Uncle Jesse (1)

sharkey (16670) | about 4 years ago | (#33284412)

Wasn't this a Dukes episode?

Temperature dependant? (1)

ksandom (718283) | about 4 years ago | (#33284528)

I'll be interested to see how well cars running this mix perform in the cold. Many years ago I was in Brazil where they have Alcohol powered cars, and during winter there it was a problem getting these cars to start. To put that in perspective a cold winters day in Brazil is a like a warm summers day in New Zealand. This was many years ago and may well be solved by now.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>