The use of alternative fuel is common nowadays because it is cheaper than gasoline or diesel. Also, alternative fuels contain substances which are environment friendly, as such, it can help save and conserve natural resources that are used in order to produce gasoline and provide efficient and clean fuel combustion.

One basic thing to know about alternative fuel is it may be readily used today. The most common machine that is powered by alternative fuel is a car or vehicle. There are many forms of fuel alternative available that may be used in one’s vehicle; it includes liquefied petroleum gas, ethanol, methanol, compressed natural gas, and electricity. The good thing about alternative fuel is that it cost less but without sacrificing the mileage. In addition, its components are made of substances that reduce the risk air pollution. A classic example is electricity. If your car is powered by electricity, there is no chance that air pollution may be emitted.

As stated a while ago, alternative fuel helps save the environment. It removes the risk of creating carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides, unburned hydrocarbons and other particulate materials. The poisonous emissions stated usually come from gasoline and diesel powered vehicles and machineries. Alternative fuel minimizes these kinds of emissions, if not absolutely obliterate it.

Another thing to know about alternative fuel is that its materials can be found anywhere, including your own backyard. Some materials include old frying oil, used vegetable oil, recycled paper, plant wastes, animal manure, and other recyclable materials. However, don’t even think about putting vegetable oil in your vehicle. There is a process in converting these materials into alternative fuel.

Some fuel alternative uses a specific vehicle or engine in order to completely operate. This is commonly called as alternative fuel vehicle. Alternative fuel vehicles use a specific alternative fuel in order to work. Am example is an electricity powered car. When using this kind of vehicle, one must charge its battery in order to use it. It is like charging the battery of a digital camera or a cellular phone. The problem with alternative fuel vehicle is that they have a lower energy output. This means that gasoline or diesel vehicles provide farther mileage as compared to alternative fuel vehicles on a full tank basis. Another thing to take note is that alternative fuel vehicles cost more than the conventional gasoline or diesel automobile.

Fuel alternatives are not only used in vehicles, it may also be used in one’s industry or for the industrial operations. Some industrial machines use gasoline or diesel in order to function. Since diesel or gasoline is used, alternative fuel may be used as a replacement. Other industries are compelled by a law or a local ordinance to switch from gasoline to alternative fuels not only to minimize air population, but also to help the government to reduce the production of gasoline and diesel.

Globally, countries opt to operate every machine using alternative fuels. Air pollution is a big problem that a country needs to remedy. Through the use of alternative fuel, it will not only save our environment, but also, be an effective way to conserve our very limited resources.

Find More Alternative Fuel Articles

With gas prices continuing to stay high, many people are looking at other fuel options, such as, for example, diesel fuel. Ethanol is another alternative fuel option that can also save you some money at the pump.

Ethanol, grain alcohol made mostly from corn in the U.S., has seen a resurgence in interest lately, including new federal mandates to produce at least 36 billion gallons of biofuels by 2020. Most ethanol today is blended into gasoline in a mixture called E10, 10 percent ethanol to 90 percent gasoline. All new cars can use E10.

More controversial is a small amount that is blended into a mixture of 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent gasoline called E85, which only a small percentage of cars can use without damage to their fuel systems.

Engineers are developing ways to make ethanol out of material other than food stocks, such as wood chips and old tires. This cellulosic ethanol will be needed to meet upcoming mandates for ethanol production, and will work in cars the same way corn ethanol does.

More than 7 million vehicles today can run on E85, and new biorefineries are increasing capacity. This has the added benefits of reducing dependence on foreign oil.

However, using ethanol as an alternative fuel source has a number of disavantages: firstly, cars running on E85 get 27 percent worse fuel economy than they do on gasoline, and less than 1 percent of U.S. gas stations currently sell E85. Secondly, federal fuel economy credits for ethanol may actually be reducing fuel economy in cars overall. And thirdly, increasing demand for ethanol has been blamed for driving up food prices.

The main problem, however, with ethanol is that the majority of engines on the road today are not designed for it. One exception is the Saab 9-5 Biopower engine, which IS optimized for ethanol. It outperforms gasoline, getting 20% more power, 16% greater torque, and 10% better mileage. The Lotus Exige 265E gets 45 more horse power on E85 than it gets on gasoline. Within the next two years, Suzuki, Ford, GM and numerous other car makers will introduce engines which exploit the advantages of ethanol for (a) its higher octane, (b) faster flame speed, (c) lower burn temperature (d) less heat loss, and most importantly (e) for its compatibility with water.

Our system of blending 15% gasoline into ethanol is not necessary. Ethanol can be denatured without using gasoline. That was how politicians created an incentive for oil companies to distribute ethanol, by giving them a 51 cent per gallon tax credit to blend it with gasoline. The problem is, ethanol performs better when it’s mixed with water rather than gasoline. This is called hydrous ethanol.

This is nothing new. In the 1920′s, the model A Ford cars and trucks ran on 165 proof ethanol, 17.5% water and 82.5% ethanol. Recently, a Hyatt Community College engine testing team lead by instructor Frank Petri, mixed 20% water with pure ethanol, and efficiency in the combustion chamber doubled. When the ethanol explodes, the water instantly turns into additional power in the form of steam and also provides hydrogen and oxygen inside the cylinder. Next year, Ford is introducing the EcoBoost engine, which may also have advanced ethanol technology that improves efficiency even more. Brazil has been using 4% hydrous ethanol for years.

John Roseby, Mechanical Engineer, University of Missouri said: From 1981 to 1989, I worked with Sean Hanley, who had been an engineer on a WW II submarine, and a former captain of a nuclear submarine. We developed two prototype cars, a Ford Pinto Station Wagon and a Mitsubishi Sedan, that ran as well on 65 proof ethanol (2/3 water and 1/3 ethanol) as they did on unleaded regular gas.

So if we can dilute pure ethanol with 2/3 water and run our vehicles on it, why aren’t we doing that? Its coming. The State of Louisiana is now planning an experimental hydrous ethanol program that may also be replicated in other states. Dongfeng, a major Chinese auto maker is introducing a car this year, with a slightly modified fuel system, that runs on 65% ethanol and 35% water. They claim hydrogen is formed. Toyota also has a similar hydrous ethanol prototype that produces on board hydrogen.

The argument that ethanol is inferior to diesel and gasoline is not valid. Pure ethanol has higher octane, faster flame speed, lower burn temperature which translates into less heat loss, and most importantly, it mixes with water. With advanced engine technology, it can outperform gasoline 2 to 1 or better. Major automakers are scheduled to produce smaller, lighter, high compression, turbocharged ethanol optimized engines that are a lot more efficient than current gasoline and diesel engines. The fuel will be cheaper, cleaner and made in the USA.

If you prefer an ethanol powered fuel cell, the Tacton Direct Proton Fuel Cell developed by Pinto University’s Research Park in Savannah, Georgia is about ,000, only 1/10 the price of a hydrogen fuel cell. No need to compress hydrogen into ultra high pressure hydrogen tanks, which increases the cost of the fuel and the vehicle. Put safe and friendly ethanol in your conventional liquid fuel tank. Maybe that’s why Toyota is building ethanol plants in Brazil, and GM is investing in ethanol development in the U.S. They must know something we don’t know about ethanol.

Alternative Energy refers to the electrical energy derived from the renewable resources like wind and solar energy. These resources can be used all over again unlike the single use resources like coal and uranium. Some benefits of using Renewable Energy Resources are that these are non-emission sources and do not produce any harmful or toxic by products.

Another good point is that these resources can be put to task at homes as well to produce electrical energy. As the sources don’t get used up, you can use it again and again without any worries. So solar energy, there are solar panels, wind mills and generators for wind energy, and turbines for water energy. The solar panels can be installed at homes with less cost and save on the electricity bills.

The wind generators and turbines are a bit costly and can be used for an area or group of homes. But if you are wondering why renewable energy sources and systems are not that common, it is due to the financial reasons. The cost of a wind or solar energy farm for a large scale use can prove costly for the installation and maintenance. But now the governments are coming up with subsidized loan programs to promote alternative energy development.

Now-a-days, with the advancement in technology people have found cheaper ways to install wind turbines and solar panels. After installing the system, you will see considerable differences in your electricity bills. So we must move to Alternative Energy Sources before our fossil fuel resources get used up.

Generating Wind Energy

Just like solar energy, wind energy is another eco-friendly and economical energy source. With almost 40% of wind energy sources of Europe in the United Kingdom, there is immense potential to use wind energy as a source of energy.

Generating power through wind is not only efficient but also renewable like solar energy. The only downside is that a tall, moderately sized generator can be a sore eye and spoil the visual landscape, leading to murmurs of disapproval among neighbours. Think about this before you go ahead and think about how to generate wind energy in your area. However, if you do not live in a very populated area and your neighbors consent to your wind energy project, there could be nothing more beneficial to harness the potential of such a natural and renewable resource called wind.

Getting Help in the Start

If you are wondering how to generate wind energy, the British Wind Energy Association or BWEA is a good professional source of services and information for initiating projects related to wind energy. This professional body continuously organizes and manages several initiatives to propagate the use of wind as a source of energy across the country and its residences. It has information on local suppliers of wind systems and information on grants and permissions.

The ‘Energy Saving Trust’ which is backed by the government also provides provide advice on several issues for both companies and individuals and companies desiring to install wind generators on a small scale.

Other Practicalities like Cost and Savings

The cost of wind generators should fall in the range of 3000 pounds -15000 pounds for each kilowatt. This is as competitive as solar and actually slightly cheap when compared to the high output it generates. It is also expected to generate higher output in a year compared to its output in the previous year. Your wind generator should break even in about five years and the way the prices of normal energy sources are increasing, the returns of a wind generator will surely increase over a period of time.

How to Position Your Turbine

It is best to place the turbine high if you want to get the most of the wind strength without any obstructions. Also make sure to measure the wind strength in your locality so that you can place the turbine facing the direction where the wind is prevailing. To measure the wind strength, you can either buy or hire an anemometer. You can also get the person installing your wind generator to do that.

Battery or Grid?

A battery can be connected to wind generators of small scale to provide electricity to your house. The other option is to connect the wind generator to the National Grid. The decision to do the former or the latter depends totally on the circumstance. As such there is no major difference except that it will affect the direction of your energy. If you happen to stay in an area that is remote with no access to the National Grid, energy should then be directed to the battery which in turn will be connected to your residence’s mains. If you can easily access the National Grid, get the generator connected to the grid. By connecting to the grid not only will you be benefited from power savings by not using the supply of electricity from the grid, you will also be able to sell surplus electricity to the grid.

Thousands of people and companies have discovered a great way to decrease emissions and save money at the same time. There doesn’t have to be a tradeoff between protecting the earth and enjoying cheap, convenient travel and commerce. Rail travel and shipping are very obvious ways to decrease the environmental impact of our way of life without new economic costs. An extensive network of tracks rivaling our interstate highway system already exists, and lays waiting for us to use its full capacity.

Many individuals and commercial entities have already caught on to the benefits of railway use. Ridership on Amtrak, our nation’s only high-speed intercity rail line, has increased an average of 1.8 percent each year since 1991. Likewise, since 1980, freight rail use as a percentage of all available modes of transportation has gone from 30% in 1980 to 42% in 2006. Shippers and travelers have consistently been drawn to rail travel over recent decades.

The Obama administration has identified infrastructural improvement as a key aspect of its economic recovery plan, and has gone as far as to allocate funds for rail projects and empower the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) to develop a national rail plan for long term development. The FRA’s Preliminary National Rail Plan identifies safety, reliability, and relatively lower logistic costs as key features driving the increased use of our railways. In other words, users do not select rail because of their environmental concerns; they select it because of practical considerations of cost, convenience, and whether they or their shipments will arrive on time. The plan highlights pronounced environmental benefits as secondary effects of the increased use that will come with infrastructural improvement. For example, passenger rail travel uses an average of 21% less energy per passenger mile than automobile travel; freight transportation is between 1.9 and 5.5 times more energy efficient than trucking, with greater benefit at longer distances; and easily accessible intercity rail reduces highway congestion and creates attractive urban living environments, which have a host of environmental benefits of their own.

The railway industry stands alone among forms of overland transportation in that it finances the construction of its own infrastructure. Where highways are financed by federal, state, and local agencies and provided as a public good, rail freight companies have been largely responsible for investment in track laying, procuring right-of-way, and providing connections with other modes of transport. The industry even pays property taxes for land it owns and operates on. All of this is financed through shipping charges and fares. This proven viability under market conditions means that the rail industry is more than adequately poised to take advantage of funds made available by the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act.

Our railways present an easy opportunity to significantly reduce our national carbon footprint. Even given the need for expanded capacity and new passenger lines, right-of-way is already long established along the lines of our present rail corridors. With all these advantages, intercity rail may seem like a cure-all for our transportation problems. However, a straight line from point A to point B is rarely an easy or unobstructed route, no matter how you travel.

National promotion of rail shipping and travel is sure to encounter opposition from the automotive and petroleum industries. The automakers and oil producers depend on our continued use of personal cars to get to and from work, shopping and tourist destinations, and anywhere else we go (as well as government handouts and continued instability in the Middle East). They have a long history of opposition to railway use; between the late 1930s and 1950, GM, Firestone, Standard Oil, and a couple other companies even went as far as to form monopolistic holding companies to buy floundering electric streetcar lines and replace them with bus services in these areas.

Even without industry conspiracy, Americans’ own attitudes may be the greatest barrier to increased rail use. Millions of people ride the rails every day, but millions more drive to work, the store, and other destinations. Whereas the value or moving freight by rail is becoming increasingly evident to many companies, passenger rail use requires lifestyle adjustments. First, a rail commuter or traveler is constrained by a train schedule. She may have to walk a couple blocks from a train station to her destination, rather than travelling directly from door to door. She might have to go through transfers, interchanges, or worst of all, have to spend time in close proximity with her fellow rail travelers on a daily basis. Whether we care to admit it or, our love of convenience is a cornerstone of the culture of the car, and a major barrier to the widespread adoption of passenger rail.

Increased rail use and capacity is inevitable. Commercial freight companies can and do invest in the infrastructural improvements necessary to their industry, and enjoy an increasing share of the overland shipping market. However, on the passenger side, we’ve got a lot of catching up to do. U.S. ridership, average speed, and access to passenger rail all lag behind all other industrial nations. Hopefully nothing will derail the administration’s attempts to at least give us the option of enjoying fast, efficient intercity rail travel.

Source:

1. FRA Preliminary National Rail Plan, http://www.fra.dot.gov/Downloads/RailPlanPrelim10-15.pdf

President Obama, along with the U.S. Department of Transportation and the Environmental Protection Agency, is working to set new emissions standards ensuring that U.S. automakers’ fleets run at 35.5 miles per gallon by 2016. Did the Car Allowance Rebate System, known popularly as “Cash for Clunkers,” bring us any closer to this goal?

According to the summary press release from the U.S. Department of Transportation, the average increase in fuel efficiency for trade-ins under the program was 58%, from 15.8 miles per gallon to 24.9 MPG. 84% of vehicles traded in were trucks, and 59% of new vehicles purchased were passenger cars. That’s quite a shift. Those happy drivers of new cars are going much further on a tank of gas and releasing far less greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere.

So far, so good, right? Now let’s look at the numbers. In 2008, an estimated 242 million registered vehicles in the U.S. averaged 20.7 MPG (136 million cars at 22.7 MPG and 106 million trucks at 18.2 MPG). Ignoring non-trade-in sales for 2009, if you scrap 690,000 cars running at 15.8 MPG and add 690,000 new cars that get 24.9 MPG, the average MPG of all registered cars only increases by 0.125 percent. That’s one eighth of a percent!*

What about emissions? In 2007, motor vehicles in the U.S. emitted 321.9 million metric tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Again, the difference made by the replacement of less than a million clunkers is negligible.

When you look at Cash for Clunkers this way, it tells us just how much is required to really reduce our environmental impact. The administration wants automakers to increase their new models’ fuel economies by about five percent every year. New car fuel economy, as well as actual economy of cars already on the road, has not changed significantly since 1990, so the new benchmark should spur growth in a stagnant area. It will, however, be decades before the entire American fleet is replaced with fuel efficient models; many consumers prefer to buy used vehicles or keep their current one running as long as possible.

34% of U.S. carbon dioxide emissions are from transportation. It won’t cost us anything to make these changes and reduce the impact of our highway lifestyle. Consumers will save an average of $3000 during the life of a new vehicle, automakers will implement technology that already exists for the most part, and our economy will stop leaking so much money for foreign oil.

The media are right to applaud CARS for its economic effects. It was probably a more effective economic stimulus than the bailouts, and more viable in the long term than many automotive decisions made over the last two decades era. The new fuel economy standards are a great map, but CARS has shown us just how long the road ahead may be.

*Statistics extrapolated from 1990 – 2007 data where unavailable.

Sources:
1. http://www.cars.gov/files/official-information/August26PR.pdf
2. http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_statistics/ Tables 1-11, 4-23, 4-49
3. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/16/business/energyenvironment/16cars.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

In hopes of driving big change by creating political awareness and catalyzing individual contributions EcoDriving USA is already making a difference by facilitating a nationwide discussion and providing valuable resources.

There are many tips and facts that can make it easy to recognize where we can make minor adjustments in our personal driving and vehicle maintenance habits, that not only help us save money on fuel, but also on maintenance costs. Of course the main goal is to reduce carbon emissions, but we can also reduce congestion and personal stress on the road if we all just relaxed a bit behind the wheel.

For example:
Did you know that every 5 mph you drive over 60 mph is equivalent to paying 20 extra cents per gallon of gas?

Visit their website: http://www.ecodrivingusa.com, or download the Eco Driving Manual (PDF 1.4 MB) to learn of many useful and simple suggestions on how you can save money and reduce emissions.