I’ve never much thought there was much usefulness to waste vegetable oil used for automobile fuel, as there is a much more finite amount of waste frying oil available compared to petroleum. Ditto for chicken fat powered aviation. Would you want to fly on a plane that is chicken fat powered? Personally, it seems clucking ridiculous.
I just wish NASA would stick to space exploration.
Chicken Fat Fuel Emissions Look Cleaner, Greener
An emissions detection rake device is positioned behind the No.3 engine on NASA’s DC-8 flying laboratory during ground tests of an alternative jet fuel made from chicken and beef tallow. (NASA / Tom Tschida) NASA recently performed emissions testing on alternative, renewable fuels for a greener and less petroleum-dependent future. The search for alternative fuels is driven by environmental concerns as well as a desire for reduced reliance on foreign sources.
“Renewable” means that the fuel source isn’t some form of fossil fuel. The source could be algae, a plant such as jatropha, or even rendered animal fat. In late March and early April 2011, a team at NASA’s Dryden Flight Research Center in California tested renewable biofuel made from chicken and beef tallow in one of the four engines of a DC-8 airplane.
The airplane remained on the ground during the test, known as the Alternative Aviation Fuels Experiment, or AAFEX, while aeronautics researchers measured the fuel’s performance in the engines and examined the engine exhaust for chemicals and contamination that could contribute to air pollution. It was the first test ever to measure biofuel emissions for nitrogen oxides, commonly known as NOx, and tiny particles of soot or unburned hydrocarbon – both of which can degrade air quality in communities with airports. NOx contributes to smog and particulate matter contributes to respiratory and cardiovascular ailments.
“The test results seem to support the idea that biofuels for jet engines are indeed cleaner-burning, and release fewer pollutants into the air. That benefits us all,” said Ruben Del Rosario of NASA’s Glenn Research Center in Ohio. Del Rosario manages NASA’s Subsonic Fixed Wing Project, which sponsored the experiment through the agency’s Fundamental Aeronautics Program.
View full size photoResearchers check out emissions detection equipment set up behind NASA’s DC-8 flying laboratory during ground tests of alternative biofuels derived from animal fats at the Dryden Aircraft Operations Facility in Palmdale, Calif. (NASA / Tom Tschida) The team ran one engine using Hydrotreated Renewable Jet Fuel, or HRJ, and another engine using Jet Propellant 8, or JP-8, fuel, which is very similar to the industry standard Jet-A fuel used in commercial aircraft. They also ran one engine using a 50-50 blend of the two fuels.
The experiment’s chief scientist, Bruce Anderson of NASA’s Langley Research Center in Virginia, said that in the engine that burned the biofuel, black carbon emissions were 90 percent less at idle and almost 60 percent less at takeoff thrust. Anderson added that the biofuel also produced much lower sulfate, organic aerosol, and hazardous emissions than the standard jet fuel. Researchers will spend the next several months comparing the results and drawing conclusions.
The recent test came a little more than two years after the same team used the same airplane to test two synthetic, or man-made, fuels derived from coal and natural gas. Researchers found that the synthetic fuels significantly reduced particulate emissions at all engine power settings and also saw some smaller reductions in gaseous emissions at certain engine operating conditions.
“NASA Dryden was excited to contribute to the study of alternative fuels for aviation use,” said Frank Cutler, NASA’s DC-8 flying laboratory project manager. “The results of these tests will tell us a lot about emissions generated by modern turbine aircraft engines using these fuels,” Cutler said.
The test setup involved positioning the DC-8 at Dryden’s Aircraft Operations Facility in Palmdale, Calif., surrounded by ground support equipment, emissions sensors, and test equipment trailers to house the researchers and observers.
The AAFEX tests in 2009 and this year were funded through NASA’s Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate in Washington.
The experiments included investigators and consultants from private industry, other federal organizations, and academia. In all, 17 government, industry and academic organizations participated in the recent test.
Andrew30 says:
April 27, 2011 at 1:01 am
– That’s beautiful! Cue a cartoon from Josh, ideally in the style of one of Heath Robinson’s wonderfully implausible machines.
Stephen Brown says:
April 27, 2011 at 1:18 am
– A friend of mine had one of those Land Rovers too, wonderful piece of kit. Apparently, you can also use heating oil, paraffin etc. in lieu of diesel (same terms and conditions apply, of course). Diesel engines are great. They’re a sort of internal combustion version of the goat: usually a bit smelly, but will eat anything.
Hey Septic
Alberta, Canada calling:
we use chickens for Easter
dinner. Not jet gas.
Soylent Green?? HAH!! How about grandma and grandpa firing up the jet engines on your next flight to Cabo!!!
NASA takes a terrible risk operating the first DC 8 in the world that could come down with the chicken flu (LOL).
It makes no sense to let the caloric value of wastes go for nought. However, there is not enough land on earth to support animals, man, autos and jets and still to maintain some environmental semblance.
I guess the NASA boys are bored now that they’ve been grounded.
Why not repeat the test with a modern high bypass engine, not a dirty old one on a (30-40?) year old plane. I’m not surprised they saw a reduction in soot emissions – ANY reduction would be welcome improvement…
And what about low temperature performance – specifically the fuels ability to remain free flowing? After the B777 “Deadstick Landing” at Heathrow, frozen fuel is not something that is going to be well regarded by the travelling public, or the crew in the pointy end either!
Dr. Bob and Septic Matthew, reference site:
http://www.syntroleum.com/
They had to do research on this? Good grief. It has been known for a long time that for about $500 you can convert your diesel engine on your car to run on frier fat. Or perhaps they had some new ideas along the lines of soyent green and the obesity epidemic we have.
Septic Matthew says:
April 27, 2011 at 9:31 am
Anthony, Do you have a better use for all the waste vegetable oil, animal fat, and meat-rendering by products? Little by little, more and more of that waste is converted to fuel each year in the U.S. Fuel from vegetable oil has been tested in combat and passenger aircraft. Now this. Next they’ll test the fuel from the solid waste that comes from beef, pork and chicken packing plants. Do you actually have a well thought out objection, or is this just an anti-intellectual “drop in the bucket” dismissal?
====================================================
Supply and demand.
Right now, the people that create the waste oil/fat have to pay to haul it away. So many of the folks that are turning it into “bio fuels” can get it for free. But as soon as the demand for the “free” waste oil goes up, the price for it will soon go up too.
Back in the seventies, or thereabouts, there was a business in western Sydney that processed used oil from fast food outlets etc. They produced a range of products including fuel oil as I recall. I think the venture traded under the name Martin Refineries. If such a venture was economic in those days, before peak oil and the sustainability – eco – AGW scares, there is no reason that such processing would not be economic today. Does anyone have any information about that company. Google gives no results.
David L says (April 27, 2011 at 7:07 am): “Let’s bring back whale oil.”
“Futurama” beat us to it:
http://theinfosphere.org/Whale_oil
BFL, thanks for the link.
*ahem* Let the Univ of IL professor speak from his Ivory Tower:
a) food vs. fuel – any petroleum fuel is dirt-cheap compared to something you can put into your mouths, or into the mouths of any critters. Even at $4.00/gallon, gasoline is a bargain right now. Animal feed and foodstuffs have very strong export markets, and domestic demand is strong, so using any decent animal grease for ANYTHING except fuel is the best usage.
b) The animal grease biodiesel guys are driven to use very low-value fats, oils & greases including oils with high levels of volatile fatty acids, dark color, contamination with chemicals from rendering/wastewater treatment (ferric chloride especially), and/or temporary market gluts. Most of the processing companies I know are building biodiesel production systems into their rendering plants to accommodate these low-value fats. Their biggest source of income? Tax credits.
c) Fuel blenders and others haven’t yet caught onto some really exotic/trashy sources of oils including greasetrap waste, dairy fats, and a few other streams. These tend to be really low-quality (high VFA), carry lots of water, smell to high-holy heaven, and highly variable in quantity. There’s enough in certain geographic areas to build a business around, but you can’t build a national energy policy off of junk like this.
In my experience, these waste oils are a major PIA, heavily contaminated with particulates, water, and other contaminants. With a lot of work, they can be converted into a fuel. Some of my clients in TX would just ship the junk over the border to Mexico, for blending into animal feed (not allowed in the USA).
Who else remembers the Boston Legal episode where human fat from liposuction procedures was being shipped overseas to be made into biofuel?
That could make for another great Sir Richard Branson stunt: This Virgin Atlantic flight is entirely powered by Hollywood celebrities!
New NASA inspired Middle East Oil production strategy?
“Three charged with stealing 150 pigeons in UAE”
Seriously…
“Dubai: Two Pakistani men on Wednesday denied in court the charge of stealing 150 pigeons from a loft on a rooftop.”
“Prosecution records said the defendants placed the pigeons in bags, put them in their car and drove away to Sharjah where they left the pigeons at a friend’s house.”
http://gulfnews.com/news/gulf/uae/crime/three-charged-with-stealing-150-pigeons-in-uae-1.800055
The Hat Creek Radio Observatory in NE Calif. is shutting down.
No money to operate.
This was part of the SETI program.
I guess it’s more important to study climate catastrophe.
Poor NASA ain’t what it used to be.
Now they have the agency chasing it’s tail while Jim Hansen raves.
Murphys Law says that the signal so long searched for comes a day after the last receiver is turned off. No matter, the Aliens will arrive just as soon as the last of the CO2 is sequestered therby disabling Earths last defence.
Did I miss the part where NASA reported the differences in fuel consumption and power output?
Getting some energy from junk fuels is better than throwing it away. I suspect using it in heating plants would work better than using it as transport fuel. Perhaps we could shame Greenpeace, UCS, GE, and governments that claim to be going green into heating their buildings with this stuff.
chuck Bradley says: April 27, 2011 at 10:05 pm
“Perhaps we could shame Greenpeace, UCS, GE, and governments that claim to be going green into heating their buildings with this stuff.”
Uh newsflash Chuck, they have no shame. They just was you money and your loyalty, in that order.
“Would you want to fly on a plane that is chicken fat powered?”
Push up
Every morning
Ten times.
Push up
Starting low.
Once more on the rise.
Nuts to the flabby guys!
Go, you chicken fat, go away!
Go, you chicken fat, go!
Matthew W…,
“But as soon as the demand for the “free” waste oil goes up, the price for it will soon go up too.”
—the WVO might have been free forty years ago, but over the last decade the price has fluctuated from $0.11cents per pound to $0.26cents per pound and is currently $0.50 cents per pound.
Septic Matthew—WVO is not just thrown away, ever. Its value is animal feed and when used for something else the demand raises the price.
Would this make a pilot, an “Avianator”?
Stephen Brown says:
A friend of mine has got an old Land Rover which has an equally ancient Cummins diesel engine. He runs it on a mix of about 30% diesel fuel and 70% vegetable oil. The vegetable oil is usually waste oil from fish and chip shops (smells great when he drives by!) but he also uses new oil. New vegetable oil from the shops costs around 94 pence per litre, diesel fuel is now over 140 pence per litre at the pumps.
The only problem which my friend has is that it is illegal here in the UK to fuel your vehicle in this way. Why? Because the tax man is not getting his cut by way of the exorbitant taxes levied on motor fuels.
It would be legal if he paid the tax. Which might be cost effective with waste oil. It would also be ok to use vegetable oil in place of red diesel in non road vehicles.