Mr Stiffy June 17, 2011 01:29 AM Oh a gas turbine engine burning a RANGE OF of near identical hydrocarbon fuels....So what?My toilet flushes my poop, my friends poop, the odd bit of cat poop and balls of hair from my hair brush.Again -so what? P.J.Clemons June 17, 2011 11:04 AM I\'m guessing the point is that petroleum based fuels are not sustainable (and getting expensive) so we need alternatives. To liberate a specific amount of energy you need to break a specific number of chemical bonds. The available number of bonds would presumably be different for the two fuel components, so the proportions of the mixture would be critical. The test shows they can accurately calculate a usable mixture made from relatively inexpensive components, and one that doesn\'t require modification of the engine. I\'ve seen other trials with other types of engines where that turned out to be the case. So the solution with biofuels may be in the fuel mixure chemistry, rather than the engine design. Todd Dunning June 17, 2011 02:29 PM We have enough petroleum to last 100 years, plus the gigantic natural gas reserves. But with approx. $3.00 per gallon in taxes, I can see why some senators would like to spend more of our taxes to subsidize agribusiness with this free handout. Slowburn June 17, 2011 03:34 PM Using crop land to grow fuel is just asinine. Robert Sawtelle June 17, 2011 05:12 PM The irony is that the internal combustion engine burned alcohol before there WAS petroleum based \'gas\'... so, good they are moving back to a more sustainable fuel! Oh, and for a LONG time after Standard Oil did have gas available for cars, the octane was too low so they continued to burn alcohol! Gadgeteer June 17, 2011 10:34 PM Slowburn, some would say that making uninformed statements is asinine. Camelina can be grown in poor soils with little water and fertilizer, conditions that wouldn\'t support food crops. There\'s no competition. Not only is it a hardy weed, it can control soil erosion in the same areas. Iosif Olimpiu June 18, 2011 05:52 PM Earth must now feed the aircrafts, that\'s the reason they can\'t reach the needs of food for the global population. Waste of time, resources, this biofuel. We need another concept than common internal combustion engines. Slowburn June 19, 2011 08:43 PM Gadgeteer - June 17, 2011 @ 06:34 pm PDT --- Camelina is used as animal feed, and for all either of us know it might be quite tasty. Mr Stiffy June 19, 2011 11:28 PM My gripe :\"Oh a gas turbine engine burning a RANGE OF of near identical hydrocarbon fuels....So what?\"In simplistic terms - -Gas turbine engines can digest almost anything - from hot tar to coal dust.I just have the shits up about seeing one more aircraft company // transport // PR exercise - saying \"Ohhhhh we tested our aircraft on biofuel - but we only ran one engine on it, and we taxied up and down the runway - never exceeding 20Kmh, so all the passengers were completely safe.... Oh, Oh, Oh etc.\"It\'s the insipidness of the whole damned report and the exercise it\'s self.To me it smacks of corporate masturbation.You get a fuel - run a heap of tests on it - for freezing point, flash point, compatibility with the whole chain of the fuel system components, run it on a static test bed, then progress to one engine of a working freighter... then pull it down during the normal overhauls - compare it to the other 3 engines running on regular fuel... If it all works - great.Put it into service.It\'s the never ending drama queen antics and the attendant side show circus \"Oh we ran our engine on biofuel\" - for the 500th bloody time - that shits me. Gadgeteer June 20, 2011 08:19 PM Slowburn, I strongly suggest you try to learn more before pushing your foot even further into your mouth. Camelina meal is FDA approved as animal feed (and no, people don\'t eat it). Meal is what\'s left after you\'ve pressed out the oil, which is what\'s used in this biofuel. And again, camelina is not grown on farmland. It\'s grown in areas that other food crops will not grow in.Mr. Stiffy, you\'re getting upset over nothing. Only external combustion gas turbines can run on the solid fuels you mentioned, and those are designed for things like ground-based power plants, where there can be lots of space for the external combustion chamber and fuel handling equipment and weight doesn\'t matter. Aircraft engines are internal combustion. You\'ll never get coal dust or hot tar to run through the fuel system of any aircraft.