IndyCar Is Moving To 100% Renewable Ethanol In 2023 (arstechnica.com) 43
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: The IndyCar racing series is switching to an entirely renewable fuel next year. On Friday, ahead of Sunday's Indianapolis 500 race, IndyCar announced that starting next year, the race cars will be powered by a new, second-generation renewable ethanol race fuel developed by Shell. The manufacturing process for IndyCar's ethanol will be slightly less exotic than that seen in the low-carbon fuel that Formula 1 is considering for 2026. Rather than carbon capture and electrolysis, Shell will use sugarcane waste and other renewable feedstocks, which are hydrolyzed and fermented at a plant in Brazil operated by Raizen (Shell is a co-owner).
Shell says that the switch "enables at least" 60 percent less carbon dioxide emissions than fossil fuel gasoline, although IndyCar currently runs on an E85 blend of gasoline rather than 100 percent fossil fuel or the 100 percent methanol that powered the sport for so many years. [...] Among other changes to help green the sport is the installation of a 150 kW DC fast charger at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway. And the roughly 5,000 tires that Firestone will transport to the track by Sunday will be hauled there from the tire maker's central Indiana warehouse by one of Penske's electric Freightliner eCascadia trucks.
Shell says that the switch "enables at least" 60 percent less carbon dioxide emissions than fossil fuel gasoline, although IndyCar currently runs on an E85 blend of gasoline rather than 100 percent fossil fuel or the 100 percent methanol that powered the sport for so many years. [...] Among other changes to help green the sport is the installation of a 150 kW DC fast charger at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway. And the roughly 5,000 tires that Firestone will transport to the track by Sunday will be hauled there from the tire maker's central Indiana warehouse by one of Penske's electric Freightliner eCascadia trucks.
Makes sense (Score:2)
E100 is a high octane fuel which is quite well suited to high compression engines.
Re: (Score:2)
But does an engine running on it develop the same horse power as when on conventional fuel? About miles per gallon?
I am seriously asking, I don't know. I am thinking if not they will now have to test the winning cars to make sure they didn't cheat by using some conventional fuel.
Re: (Score:2)
If you want high MPG in races... then we should be running diesel or kerosene.
Re: (Score:2)
It makes sense, I don't have time to search about it right now but I am aware that "octane rating" has no relation with actual octane content so I found his answer doubting. I guess more horse power must be right now although. One more thing for me to eventually search to make my own mind about.
Also, I believe that preventing knocking has nothing to do directly with more horse power or more mpg IIRC. It's just that the fuel can be compressed more before exploding with a spark. Diesel explode really quickly
Re: (Score:2)
To fill in a bit more. The octane rating is related only to octane being used as a reference standard. E.g. a fuel with an octane rating of 90 is able to be compressed to the same ratio as a mixture of 90% iso-octane and 10% heptane. It doesn't mean the fuel contains iC8.
The parent's are a mixture of both correct and incorrect. Gasoline typically has more favourable characteristics in terms of energy produced, however high octane rating enables engine designers to design higher compression engines which und
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.motortrend.com/how... [motortrend.com]
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Gasoline has a higher K value (BTUs/lb) but it also has a higher stoichiometric (Air/Fuel) rato.
So you run the lower K value fuel at 10:1 AFR (lower MPG but more HP) or the higher K value fuel at 14:1 (higher MPG but less HP) all that really matters is the 10:14 ratio because it directly relates to how much power you can make with the available oxygen in the cylinder.
That 10/14 ratio of the two fuels when multiplied by the specific K value for that fuel will determine which combination will provide more out
Re: (Score:1)
At least sugarcane ethanol actually is net positive energy production unlike corn ethanol that is a pure pork crop.
The main concern with this fuel is water absorption... so it doesn't keep well its totally fine if sealed in a waterproof container but moisture can permeate even some plastic containers.
Re: (Score:2)
At least sugarcane ethanol actually is net positive energy production unlike corn ethanol that is a pure pork crop.
Corn ethanol is slightly energy-positive these days, but it's an ecological catastrophe because it's grown continuously and fertilized synthetically.
Re: (Score:1)
In any case the fact remains that its a pure pork crop... having nothing to do with any real ecological benefits as you say its a disaster.
Re: (Score:2)
I can see a few good things about ethanol fuels.
Corn ethanol may be energy negative but it gives us options from being "dual use" as a source of food and fuel. We can make up for food shortages quickly by shifting corn from fuel to food.
The problem is that politicians are treating our food supply as a reserve for our fuel supply. We can't eat coal but we can eat corn. Don't tell people to burn more food to make up for high prices of fuel. Go get more fuel.
Permits for power plants and oil/gas wells might
Re: (Score:2)
It's not just all about octane. (1) as mentioned elsewhere, it takes a LOT more alcohol to run a race. (2) I do hope they'll add something to the ethanol that will make it visible when it burns. MAJOR problem the entire life of the Indy 500 races when they were burning alcohol. Nothing like being burned alive by a flame you can't see.
Re: Makes sense (Score:2)
I think you're thinking of methanol, which burns with a pale blue flame that basically disappears in daylight. Ethanol has a decently bright yellow flame under normal conditions:
https://youtu.be/cxd_CH2NIWE [youtu.be]
Good! (Score:2)
I'm no expert on mechanics, but in my neck of the woods absolute alcohol (ethanol, E100) engines were known for over 30 years and they usually provide more acceleration than gasoline engines. One of their downsides, though, is that they're more thirsty...
So besides being "greener" this could be a great move.
Re: (Score:1)
So besides being "greener" this could be a great move.
Greener than what?
Ethanol is still a hydrocarbon molecule, C2H6O and sometimes written as C2H5OH.
Combustion of most hydrocarbon molecules releases carbon dioxide (CO2), water vapor (H2O). Any additives to the Ethanol fuel may generate additional combustion products.
Ethanol combustion is no different - C2H5OH + 3 O2 -->> 2 CO2 + 3 H2O + heat
Perhaps you think Ethanol is GREENER because it produces less greenhouse gases by volume? Just what standard are you using to make your claim?
.
The next thing I expe
Re: (Score:3)
No, I think it's pretty well established that making a gallon of Ethanol requires more burning of fossil fuels than just burning a gallon of gas. (Though that would largely stop if farm equipment migrated to electric vehicles. However if you can get farm equipment moved to electric, you probably have the vast majority of passenger cars and trucks moved to EVs since those are easier problems.) ..."about 70 percent more energy is required to produce ethanol than the energy that actually is in ethanol. Every
Re: (Score:2)
I'm pretty sure your quote is referring to ethanol made from corn, which is notoriously inefficient. Making ethanol out of sugarcane is not.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm pretty sure your quote is referring to ethanol made from corn, which is notoriously inefficient. Making ethanol out of sugarcane is not.
Making it from sugarcane may be less inefficient.
But packing up and shipping little batches of the stuff all the way from Brazil certainly won't be.
Re: (Score:2)
My first thought was unit trains of Everclear, but then I remembered you get rum from sugar cane, and that of course leads straight to Mr Gibbs "Not the Rum!"
Thanks for a merry train of thought.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, for starters, recycling waste into an energy source is greener than just letting it rot away. This ethanol is made from waste.
Re: (Score:2)
Forgot to add: combustion of ethanol produces less noxious pollutants such as sulfur or nitrogen compounds, or aromatic organic substances (benzene derivatives). So, from this standpoint, that's also greener.
Moreover, for many countries, fossil fuels must be imported. My country produces ethanol locally and, again, from sugarcane waste, so this is much better for our environment.
Of course the whole equation is a lot more complex but this serves as illustration of why ethanol could be greener than gasoline.
Re: (Score:1)
If you believe that I have a Moon to sell to you.
THAT'S NO MOON!
(That's also a joke apropos of nothing. This is mostly some added text to avoid the Slashdot filters.)
The next thing I expect someone to post to /. is a story claiming there is a battery fairy that will create and deliver all of the lithium-whatever batteries we will need for a Green Future and do it all without harming the environment anywhere on our planet.
Batteries are energy storage mediums, not an energy source. If we are to replace fossil fuels then we need to replace the energy storage aspects of fossil fuels, they are convenient ways to store energy as well as being convenient, and high EROEI, sources of energy. High EROEI sources of energy are onshore wind, hydro, geothermal, and nuclear fission. Anything solar does not have an EROEI
Re: (Score:2)
One of their downsides, though, is that they're more thirsty...
So besides being "greener" this could be a great move.
You'll be happy to learn, then, theat ethanol fuel for automobiles is actually energy-negative. That's right, it's not a 'green' solution! it costs more energy to produce a given amount of ethanol than that amount of ethanol can deliver, in terms of energy. This is especially true when the petroleum-based fuel that your factory-farm equipment is factored into the equation!
That sugarcane ain't gonna harvest itself, now, is it?
Why you'd be 'against' fuel efficiency is beyond me, though. We're cooking ourselve
What a waste (Score:1)
We need all the ethanol we have to cope with idiots running the world.
Re: (Score:1)
25% of Brazil's automotive fleet runs on ethanol or bio diesel.
As such we have incredible amounts of ethanol available... all the problems getting ethanol you might run into are logistical as its a plentiful commodity.
Wait.. (Score:2)
I thought Indy ran on methanol already? (Yeah, I know, it's a different alcohol).
A good development (Score:3)
If you have ever been to one of these races, you will know that the cars emit a huge amount of exhaust gases that slowly spread out above the track and waft into the bleachers. This won't fix the localized pollution problem, but at least it will have come from a source of carbon that isn't fossil.
Re: (Score:2)
It will help a lot, actually. The emissions from alcohol are far more benign. Of course, the burning synthetic oil is not great. There is such a thing as veg oil based crankcase lube, but I don't know if it would be suitable for these uses.
Can't See Alcohol Fire (Score:2)
Why not electric? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Aren't electric cars faster than petroleum ones? Why are they still using loud, dirty, smelly, polluting ICEs?
Specifically because they are loud, dirty, and smelly. The pollution is just a bonus.
Electric racing is gaining speed, ha ha, and it can be expected to take over eventually. In the mean time, moving to less-polluting, sustainable, carbon-neutral fuels is a reasonable way to reduce environmental impact. The tires are still a big gross problem. However, since all the racing in the world pales compared to the morning commute, it's hard to get arsed about it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The result will depend on the race, the race can be tuned to favor either one, it's like asking how long is a piece of string.
Re: (Score:1)
I see two problems with that. One, the races won't be about driver and pit crew skill but who can push the rules on propelling a car the most. Second, any accident will be a roll of the dice on how to respond. Alcohol fires respond well to just water but electrical fires with water dumped on them could electrocute the driver and start hydrogen fume fires.
Maybe on a drag strip we could hold open spec races because there's two cars on the track, sometimes just one racing the clock, so if anything goes wron
Re: (Score:2)
The tires are still a big gross problem
They're working on the tires [nbcsports.com] too: Firestone plans to switch to the guayule shrub [wikipedia.org] as a more sustainable alternative to traditional sources of tire rubber. It grows in the desert, doesn't need much rain, and is naturally pest-resistant.
Yes, they still have to figure out how to make tire disposal a more eco-friendly process...
OK INDY (Score:2)
Let’s STOP consuming petrochemicals creating CO2. START the race consuming FOOD creating fuel for cars as more cropland goes out of production to feed the world.
Don't burn food. (Score:1)
Any biomass fuel is burning food. I mean all of them. Corn, sugarcane, trees, whatever, if it is doing photosynthesis then it is food for something.
I had someone point me to algae fuels as some way to avoid petroleum or ethanol fuels. I watched a YouTube video about it and in the listed uses for the algae was jet fuel and diesel fuel. Great! But there was more. Other uses was fish food, cattle feed, and fertilizers. Not great.
No matter how we try to harness solar power for use on the electrical grid