Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Miles to go for alternative jetfuel

 The price of oil has scientists hunting for something else. There are prospects, but no breakthroughs yet.

By ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published June 24, 2006

SEATTLE - The spike in oil prices has plenty of drivers to considering biodiesel-powered or hybrid cars, but what about that fuel guzzler we use to fly across country?

Government and corporate researchers are looking into ways to power commercial jet engines with alternative fuels, although many caution that its widespread use could be years or even decades away.

Scientists face myriad obstacles, including the difficulty of producing, transporting and using massive amounts of these fuels under harsh conditions such as extreme cold. And for now, at least, experts say many alternative jet fuels are more expensive than traditional ones.

"It's just so much easier to develop a fuel for automobile applications than for airplane applications," said Billy Glover, director of environmental performance for Boeing Co.

Still, rising oil prices are prompting increased interest, giving some researchers hope their preliminary efforts will someday pay off.

Boeing researchers say the practical concerns go beyond just the rising cost of jet fuel.

"We are interested in alternative fuels because we want to make sure that there's fuel available for the future," Glover said.

Today, most commercial airplanes use a fuel similar to light kerosene. It's heavier than the gasoline in most cars but not as heavy as diesel fuel, and is designed for the particular rigors of plane travel, such as cold conditions.

One alternative researchers are studying is biodiesel, which can be made from soybeans, corn and other products, and is used in some cars and trucks today.

A big problem, though, is that biodiesel freezes at a much higher temperature than traditional fuel, which could spell trouble in the frigid air at 35,000 feet. Scientists are working on ways to keep the fuel from freezing so readily.

But even if such efforts are successful, another big issue is supply. Scientists say there just isn't enough U.S. farmland to produce the crops needed to power jetliners, in addition to feeding people.

Robert Dunn, a U.S. Department of Agriculture chemical engineer who is studying biodiesel jet fuel, said he doubts airlines will be interested until it gets cheaper.

Glover thinks it's more likely that airplanes would fly with a mix of biodiesel and traditional fuel.

Another option, which has been considered for decades, is whether jetliners could run on hydrogen.

Gerald Brown, a senior research engineer with NASA Glenn Research Center in Cleveland, said it would require little modification to run a regular jet engine using liquid hydrogen. The hard part is storing it on board.

Liquid hydrogen has to be stored at minus 424 degrees. While lighter, it also takes up far more space than regular jet fuel. Airplanes would have to be redesigned to accommodate it.

Also, since hydrogen occurs mainly in combination with other elements, such as water, it's costly and takes a great deal of energy to produce it.

Hydrogen burns cleanly, releasing water as a combustion product. But Glover said that actually could be a concern: The amount of water released by a high-flying, hydrogen-powered jet could turn it into a cloud-making machine.

Another option, which is in limited use today, is to run airplanes on synthetics, made by turning coal, oil shale or natural gas into a liquid that can act like traditional jet fuel. Chi-Ming Lee, chief of the combustion branch at NASA Glenn Research Center, said rising oil prices mean synthetics could be a cheaper alternative.

But Glover said synthetics currently require more resources to produce than traditional jet fuel.

Still, Lee says synthetics could be used in ultra-efficient jet engines that are under development today, potentially saving energy. Another advantage is the United States has large coal and natural gas reserves.

[Last modified June 24, 2006, 06:47:37]