The Methanol Story: A Sustainable Fuel for the Future

Development of vehicles that could operate on alternative fuels began in earnest as a response to the oil shocks of the 1970s. Of the various choices, methanol appeared to be the best candida ~ for long-term, widespread replacement of petroleum-based fuels. Initial support by the government was based on the desire for energy security, but the potential for improvement in air quality became an important driver as well. Experimental fleets of dedicated methanol vehicles did well in the field, but the lack of refueling infrastructure led to the development of the flexible fuel vehicle (FFV), a vehicle that could operate on either gasoline or methanol with only one fuel system Oll ' board. Legislation was put in place to encourage the auto industry to begin production, which started in 1993 for the M85 FFV at Ford. By the end of the decade, however, full production volumes had been transferred to the E85 FFV (gasoline or ethanol). The technical, economic and political reasons for this shift are emphasised and are discussed below, including visions for the future, and the direct methanol fuel cell. Unfortunately, all of the alternative fuels are less energy dense per volume compared to gasoline (Table 1). It is noticed that diesel fuel is the only fuel better than gasoline, which accounts for 12 per cent of the higher fuel economy (mpg) associated with the di~sel-powered vehicle. (111e compression-ignition (CI) engine is still more energy efficient than the spark-ignition (SI) engine, however). Since the public has been trained to think in terms of miles per gallon (mpg), it is hard for them to understand that most of the alternative fuels are more energy efficient than gasoline; i.e., the vehicle goes more miles per energy unit. In some cases, it just consumes more gallons to Table 1- Energy den:;ities compared to gasoline Natural gas Volume rati