"Exactly mydesign, it is better to use combination of power sources. Because specially in engine it will use lot of energy to start it and after it is started it will need less power to operate that. "
Pubudu, now a day's most of the next generation vehicles are hybrid model, where two types of fuels can be injected. My car is also an hybrid model, where gas and petrol can be used, depends up on usage.
"the fuel being tested is a 50% blend, not 100% biofuel: 50% biofuel, 50% JP-8 petro-based standard jet fuel. In general, biofuel usually does not equal the performance of petro-based fuel, especially in transportation fuels. Jet fuel is the one possible exception. If NASA is using a blend, that means the biofuel they're testing is not, or not yet, high performance enough to be used in a 100% formulation."
Ann, thanks for the details. I think a right mix of these two can yield a better performance than individual yield.
Mydesign, the fuel being tested is a 50% blend, not 100% biofuel: 50% biofuel, 50% JP-8 petro-based standard jet fuel. In general, biofuel usually does not equal the performance of petro-based fuel, especially in transportation fuels. Jet fuel is the one possible exception. If NASA is using a blend, that means the biofuel they're testing is not, or not yet, high performance enough to be used in a 100% formulation.
"It's another relative of mustard and canola, in the Brassica family of plants, and also related to the oilseed plant the Canadians are using in a 100% biofuel jet fuel. The NASA fuel being tested, however, is a 50-50 blend with regular, petro-based JP-8 jet fuel."
Ann, you mean that they are planning to do the R&D with a mixture of these two. Any advantage in mixing these two.
"but hey, whatever works. As long as they are researching ways to replace gasoline and oil-based fuels with more environmentally friendly, fuel-efficient options, it's all the kind of work that needs to be done, and quickly"
Elizebeth, its only a suggestion for long run. Now a day's most o the automobile engines are converting to hybrid mode.
In my opinion NASA is one if not the most contributing organisation of new developments and transfer of these developments to general use.
What hurts to see is when an organisation like that is being taken apart piece by piece.
It is important for NASA to spend time of large globaly implicating project while also working on strange stuff ( reaching for the starts ). That what makes NASA this science giant. Imagination and risk should be put together, not political pondering.
I'm extremely happy that finally more and more useful projects are initiated at NASA.
Well yes, but let's not forget, NASA is behind some of the most useful technologies we have today, even though they are not always recognized for it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_spin-off_technologies
But you're right, much better to focus on something that will have use for a greater good than reach for the stars all the time (although those NASA efforts are quite interesting as well and spawn useful technologies while looking to the future).
Thanks for the clarification. I agree that it's good to see some useful and practical R&D coming out of the agency. I can imagine that it's taken quite awhile to recover from not only the staffing cuts, but what they represented in terms of institutional knowledge lost.
At this year's MD&M West show, lots of material suppliers are talking about new formulations for wearables and things that stick to the skin, whether it's adhesives, wound dressings, skin patches and other drug delivery devices, or medical electronics.
The US Congress has extended an important tax credit for solar energy, a move that’s good news for future investments in this type of alternative energy and for many stakeholders in the solar industry.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.