Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 07:53:21 -0500
Reply-To: Harmon Seaver <hseaver@CYBERSHAMANIX.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Harmon Seaver <hseaver@CYBERSHAMANIX.COM>
Subject: Re: Running on Tap Water (was Re: Attention California
Vanagonites)
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020717082904.054e7dd8@pop1.attglobal.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
On Wed, Jul 17, 2002 at 09:15:42AM -0400, David Beierl wrote:
> At 12:52 AM 7/17/2002, Timothy Crooks wrote:
> >I many of the VW history books it is noted that some eary Kübelwagens and
> >VW
> >staff cars were modified with charcoal burners because petrol was very
> >short. I wonder how this was done? And in the 1940's. I do not think it
>
> This is done in a "gas producer" (or "gasifier" or "gazogene") in which the
> charcoal is burnt with insufficient air. The result is a gas containing
> one-third carbon monoxide and two-thirds (useless) nitrogen, plus small
> amounts of unburned hydrocarbons, CO2 (undesirable) and hydrogen. Gas
> made by this process is called "producer gas" and particularly in this
> case "air gas."
Most now use woodchips, sawdust, etc. instead of charcoal.
The normal makeup would be: CO 22%; H2 18%; CH4 3%, CO2 6% and N2 51%.
>
> A modified process probably not used with cars (my guess) involves
> injecting steam along with the input air. This results in "semi-water gas"
> containing roughly one-third each of CO, H and N2, a distinct improvement
> in quality (but still poisonous as heck).
No, it used in cars too. It's quite easy to create the steam in the
gasifier, and adds a lot. There is quite a resurgence of interest in this
technology, with commercial units being built and sold, especially in Third
World countries. Check out http://www.woodgas.com, or the biofuels list at
yahoo. Also check http://journeytoforever.org
>
> Both processes lose a good deal of energy in the partial burning of the
> charcoal, and the resulting gas is not something you'd burn in an auto
> engine if you had other choices available.
Actually it's a very good fuel, the exhaust from the engine is extremely
clean, just CO2, H2O, and, of course, NOx, which can be reduced with a cat
convertor. Much less polluting than gasoline or diesel. Also there is a great
deal of interest in using it with fuel cells, some are being produced in
Germany, I believe.
> I suspect you'd get a third or
> less of normal power.
Yes, you derate the engine about 40%. Best to use a diesel engine to start
with, since woodgas works best at high compression. People are either converting
the diesels to spark ignition or just using small amounts of diesel, vegetable
oil, or biodiesel to ignite it.
>
> There are currently efforts to build modern gas producers using biomass
> such as sugarcane leaves and bagasse as fuel.
Not just an "effort", they've been on the market for years. Very popular for
producing electrical power, in fact I'm building one to fuel a cogen set to heat
and light my house. Plan to build an even bigger one to sell electricity to the
power company.
>
> A google search on "gazogene" will turn up many references to
> gazogene-fueled wartime vehicles.
Also search on woodgas.
--
Harmon Seaver
CyberShamanix
http://www.cybershamanix.com
