CO2 Free Trucks

[eh1eh]

Volvo displays CO2-free trucks
08/31/2007 STOCKHOLM, Sweden -- The Volvo Group says it has produced seven demonstration trucks that reportedly do not emit carbon dioxide, which, as climate change theory states, causes global warming.
These trucks were exhibited for the first time today in Stockholm this week and are equipped with diesel engines that have been modified to operate on seven different types of renewable liquid and gaseous fuels.
"Volvo is part of the climate problem, but today we have shown that carbon-dioxide free transports are a possibility and that we as a vehicle manufacturer both can and will be part for the solution to the climate issue," says Leif Johansson, CEO of the Volvo Group.

Volvo's seven new 'carbon dioxide free' trucks run
on everything from biodiesel to hydrogen gas.The seven Volvo FM trucks are equipped with Volvo’s own 9-liter engines that have been specially modified by engineers to illustrate the possibilities of "CO2-free" transport.
The trucks exhibited in Stockholm can be operated on the same number of different renewable fuels and-or combinations of fuels, such as biodiesel, biogas combined with biodiesel, ethanol-methanol, DME (Dimethyl ether), synthetic diesel and hydrogen gas combined with biogas.
Since all of these fuels are produced from renewable raw materials, they provide no carbon-dioxide contributions to the ecosystem when combusted, Volvo claims.
"The diesel engine is an extremely efficient energy converter that is perfectly suited to many different renewable fuels, liquid or gaseous," says Jan-Eric Sundgren, member of Volvo Group Management and Senior Vice President, Public and Environmental Affairs. "With our know-how in engine technology and our large volumes, we can manufacture engines for several different renewable fuels, and also create possibilities for carbon-dioxide-free transports in such other product areas as buses, construction equipment and boats."
However, the company adds that the supply of different renewable fuels is significantly limited and there is no large-scale production or distribution for the majority of the alternatives that could be utilized in carbon-dioxide-free transports.
"We also require large-scale production of renewable fuels and putting such production in operation requires extensive investments in research and development, and also well-defined, common guidelines from authorities in as many countries as possible," says Leif Johansson.
Source

 

[s243a]

I think the title is somewhat misleading.

 

[Tonington]

This is why I think the electric grid needs to be switched first. Producing these fuels still relies on technology which uses fossil fuels, so until such time when electricity is carbon free, it will be unrealistic to try to create the volumes needed and still call it CO2 free.

 

[eh1eh]

There is always a catch. We may actualy have to do something creative and expensive to do away with CO2.

 

[Tonington]

I heard a neat engineering hypothesis. If carbon sequestration can ever be made feasible, we could plant fast growing plants, burn them as biomass, and sequester the carbon emitted, effectively putting the carbon back from where it came, deep geological vaults if you will.

 

[CDNBear]

I heard a neat engineering hypothesis. If carbon sequestration can ever be made feasible, we could plant fast growing plants, burn them as biomass, and sequester the carbon emitted, effectively putting the carbon back from where it came, deep geological vaults if you will.

Can you expand on that Ton...seems interesting? Links?

 

[Tonington]

It was actually in a book I read, there are plenty of articles on terrestrial sequestration, basically putting it back into our depleted top soils.

The idea is that if we were to plant fast growing crops which take up lots of carbon, by extracting the carbon they take up through burning, we could capture the gaseous carbon and pump it into deep wells. Perhaps the power generated would be enough to keep the well site running, not 100% sure about that. I've heard of saline aquifers as the ideal storage site, but they aren't necessarily going to be found close to the sites. Anyways, this was more of a geo-engineering solution, for a time when we have little options left except to remove the carbon which is in the atmosphere. I'll cruise the internet to see if I can find anything similar.

Hmmm, seems to me there is a big prize for someone who can actually figure out how to do this sort of thing on a grand scale, I believe Sir Richard Branson funded the prize...

 

[s243a]

It was actually in a book I read, there are plenty of articles on terrestrial sequestration, basically putting it back into our depleted top soils.

The idea is that if we were to plant fast growing crops which take up lots of carbon, by extracting the carbon they take up through burning, we could capture the gaseous carbon and pump it into deep wells. Perhaps the power generated would be enough to keep the well site running, not 100% sure about that. I've heard of saline aquifers as the ideal storage site, but they aren't necessarily going to be found close to the sites. Anyways, this was more of a geo-engineering solution, for a time when we have little options left except to remove the carbon which is in the atmosphere. I'll cruise the internet to see if I can find anything similar.

Hmmm, seems to me there is a big prize for someone who can actually figure out how to do this sort of thing on a grand scale, I believe Sir Richard Branson funded the prize...

If we start taking all of the carbon out of the system should we expect decreased crop yields in the future?

 

[Tonington]

Doubtful. As I said this was a last ditch mechanism proposed in the book, so lets say that by 2100 we haven't reduced our emissions and CO2 is doubled. I'm not sure what future targets will look like, but lets say it is the pre 1990's levels. Crop yields were fine then.