WHILE THE AVERAGE ANNUAL DEFLATED PRICE FOR ENERGY ITEMS DECREASED FROM Changes for energy consumption and wholesale prices computed from third quarter 1976 to third quarter 1977. Other changes are from year to year. Source: President of the United States, Economic Report of the Alternate Fuels At present, transportation in the United States is almost totally dependent on petroleum-based products. As discussed in Sect. 5.1 through Sect. 5.3, our domestic oil resources are diminishing. This fact, along with increased energy demand, has resulted in a continuing increase in the importation of crude oil and petroleum products. In recent years the United States has been importing more than 40% of its crude oil and petroleum products, which compares with about 25% of all energy imports of ten years ago. Not only has the rise in petroleum imports had a direct effect on U.S./world economic stability, it also creates a climate for price escalation by exporting countries. Cost Based on projections of world oil production (Fig. 5.11), the need to develop alternate fuels and fuel systems to meet future transportation energy needs has been recognized. This section provides a general summary of work funded by DOE in the development of alternate fuels. considerations of alternate fuels and the timing and degree of penetration of alternate fuel products into the transportation sector are also discussed. The DOE has estimated that the time needed to develop, demonstrate, and produce (commercially) new fuels and fuel system designs ranges from ten years and up and that market penetration factors for the automobile/truck fleet may amount to another ten years. Therefore, the predicted peak in world oil production precedes the time anticipated for development and implementation of alternatives to petroleum-based transportation in the United States.* Two feasibility studies were conducted to determine the most logical alternatives to petroleum-based fuels for transportation. The *University of Miami and Escher Technology Associates, for Department of Energy, Transportation Energy Conservation Division, Alternative Fuels and Intercity Trucking, Alternative Fuels Utilization Program, Washington, D.C., June 1978, p. 289. F. H. Kant et al., Feasibility Study of Alternative Fuels and Automotive J. Pangborn and J. Gillis, Alternative Fuels for Automotive Transportation A Feasibility Study, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report EPA-460/3-74-012 (3 volumes) July 1974. Preceding page blank candidate fuels were evaluated in terms of economic, technical, performance, and implementation criteria. These studies produced a list of alternative fuels and their penetration into the transportation sector divided into three time frames: Near Term (1975-1985) Gasoline from oil shale or coal • Distillates (diesel) oils from oil shale or coal Nuclear-based hydrogen fuel from water These studies focused on fuels that could provide a major portion of our national fuel needs for which implementation is feasible on the national level. Therefore, fuels that could be derived from forest, agriculture, and municipal solid wastes, or from crops grown specifically for biomass conversion, do not appear in the summary. It has been noted elsewhere, however, that synthetic fuels from these and like sources could contribute significantly to local and regional transportation energy needs. Based on studies conducted recently under the Alcohol Fuels Program, DOE has determined that alcohols (primarily methanol) could play a major role in filling future transportation energy needs. In the short term, methanol can be produced from coal; but beyond the year 2000, it would be produced by conversion of energy crops and agricultural and municipal wastes. Ethanol is now being produced through the fermentation of sugar cane or grain. The DOE has estimated that it would be possible *Department of Energy, Office of the Under Secretary, Task Force on Fuels, Alcohol Fuels Program Plan, Alcohol Fuels Program, Washington, D.C., March 1978, pp. 1-5. to build ten methanol-from-coal plants with a daily capacity of 6,000 tons by 1990. At this rate of production methanol could provide about 5% of the energy needed to meet projected transportation gasoline demand in the year 1990. Adding one new plant per year with the same capacity at a cost of $450-$500 million per plant, by 2000 methanol could supply about 8%-9% of the projected gasoline demand. On the other hand, ethanol production (based on 10-30 million gallons per year fermentation plants) would be able to supply less than 1% of the total 1985 liquid-fuels demand. While it is generally acknowledged that alcohol from coal, and petroleum-like liquids from shale rock and coal, can provide a significant percentage of our transportation fuel by 2000, little hard data about the post-petroleum-era energy systems has been accumulated. alternatives do seem more feasible than others:* Some • Hydrocarbon Synthetic Fuels - Synfuels from coal and oil shale; methanol produced from coal, biomass or biosolar conversion, and organic waste. - ● Electricity Generated from coal and nuclear power, and ultimately from geothermal and/or solar energy. Hydrogen Producible from coal, biomass or biosolar conversion, organic waste, and from any electrical source including nuclear, geothermal, and solar energy systems by electrolysis of water. The tables and graphics presented in this section represent findings from some of these DOE projects. *University of Miami and Escher Technology Associates, for Department of Energy, Transportation Energy Conservation Division, Alternative Fuels and Intercity Trucking, Alternative Fuels Utilization Program, Washington, D.C., June 1978. |