Talk:Butanol

"Butanol when consumed in an internal combustion engine yields no SOX, NOX or carbon monoxide all environmentally harmful byproducts of combustion. CO2 is the combustion byproduct of butanol, and is considered environmentally 'green'."

This would be true of any pure hydrocarbon. As far as I know butanol doesn't have major advantages in purification or elimination of sulfur and nitrogen contaminants.

It’s only available as a PDF Download (at least as per my current on a mobile phone late night “I don’t need sleep, i need answers” searching :3 ), BUT the paper:

“Additive Response and Intake Valve Deposit Control of Isobutanol - Gasoline Blends”

Was a VERY interesting read.

“SUMMARY:

In the past decade, government mandates have resulted in the development of a significant market for automotive fuels produced from renewable sources. Fuel blends containing low concentrations of ethanol have been the readily available choice for providing renewable content in gasoline fuels. Oxygenates blended into fuels are known to affect vehicle driveability performance the customer experiences.

Butamax has been developing technology that will allow for the commercial production of isobutanol from renewable sources. In addition to high energy density, high octane, and good material compatibility, isobutanol has low vapor pressure impact when blended with gasoline and lower water solubility. Butamax plans to introduce isobutanol-gasoline blends initially at 16 vol% (Bu16). This represents the same oxygen concentration in the blend as ethanol at 10 vol% (E10).

Butamax has sponsored a significant number of studies exploring the effects of isobutanol-gasoline blends on such diverse topics as permeation emissions, tailpipe and evaporative emissions, driveability and gasoline additives, as well as infrastructure materials such as metals, elastomers, plastics and resins. The company conducted fleet tests accumu lating about 80 million miles with 1.5 million miles under controlled conditions.

This report represents a summary of extensive testing of antioxidant and corrosion inhibiting additives, as well as intake valve deposit control additives and low-temperature valve sticking tests.

• The results confirm that isobutanol-gasoline blends:
  • can be stabilized adequately with the addition of common antioxidants
  • may be treated successfully against iron corrosion by the addition of common corrosion inhibitors
  • provide better keep-clean performance than E10 for representative deposit control additives (DCAs)
  • provide similar performance trends for DCAs compared to E10 blends, ie., lower deposits in E10 for a pass low-temperature valve-sticking tests with Top Tier DCA treatments for four different DCAs representing particular DCA correspond to lower deposits for that DCA in Bu16 three additive technology typer”

It Also Mentions:

“ANTIOXIDANTS

Two typical antioxidants, AO-37 a hindered phenolic type and AO-22 a p-phenylene diamine type, were tested in isobutanol-light catalytically-cracked naphtha blends. Table 1 shows the results of accelerated oxidation stability tests using the ASTM D525 standard method and ASTM D873 oxidation stability of aviation fuels (potential residue method). The light catalytically-cracked naphtha was a refinery component having a high olefin content that was treated with alumina to remove any antioxidants added at the refinery. It had poor stability and did not respond to the addition of hindered phenolic antioxidant (mixes A and B). The cat-naphtha responded to amine type antioxidant (mix C) that just met the 240-minute minimum specification for gasoline (D4814). Isobutanol blends at 12 wt% responded well to both types of antioxidants and the combination of both antioxidants (mixes D, E and F). The D873 test was performed by aging the fuel sample at 100°C under a pressurized oxygen atmosphere for a period of 240 minutes. In the D873 test, fuels with D525 induction times less than the aging period (240 minutes) generally become heavily oxidized and exhibit gum formation on the order of 1000 mg. Results of these tests show that mixture C is at the borderline of oxidation stability while the isobutanol-naphtha blends are stable. In summary, isobutanol-gasoline blends can be stabilized adequately with the addition of common antioxidants.”

ALL IN ALL this is basically saying:

• • Bu16 can be used as a “Drop In” Replacement for Top Tier Certified E10 Gasoline
  • WHILE not having the Water Adsorption/ Phase Separation issues of Ethanol
  • Bonus energy density and POTENTIALLY better Materials Compatibility
    • Unclear on the specifics of that, also probably more to toxicity/pollution of spilled concerns over Ethanol, although Gasoline isn’t safe from that perspective and is VERY widespread
  • Storability is also great, especially with Additives

Only real remaining question is Bu100 Fuel vs Ethanol Free Gasoline in terms of Storability

The role of Butane in the “Naphtha (petroleum), full-range alkylate, butane-contg., Low boiling point modified naphtha” / “Butanized Naphtha” / “Butane-Enriched Naptha” is interesting, as similar to how Carbonated Drinks “go flat”, eventually once that Butane leaves (as any Fuel Tank Venting - vented Fuel Tank will, it will have a lower RVP and potentially a different Octane / LEL etc too.

Being a “pure fuel”, (and UNLIKE ethanol one not prone to Water Fuel Contamination / Phase Separation ) Bu100 would NOT have this issue and thus may male an even better Ethanol Free Gasoline…than Ethanol Free Gasoline. All while being (mostly) renewable. Quite the Win-Win if it can get scaled up+rolled out

This ties into some of my thoughts with maintaining all these small engine machines at work/the Fuel Stabilizer stuff/a Start Cart based on a Small Engine such as a Chainsaw or Lawn Mower ( A Honda Push Mower etc) and an Alternator or BLDC derived Generator

Essentially have a VERY BASIC small engine that will start no matter what, and use it as a start cart for more finicky stuff (without needing Sealed Lead Acid Battery (or finicky/poor cold weather performance Li-Ion based Jump Starters etc)

This was SORT OF done with the Lear Charger , but conventional two stroke small engines do NOT store well and are a bit of a pain.

A 4 Stroke Engine with a high quality synthetic oil could be filled with Bu100 and run “as is” in a well storable condition. A similarly reliable system could be made with SOME modification if a conversion to Propane was made (thus no Fuel Vaporization issues or even the need for a cloggable Carburetor etc), or potentially an intentionally crude Fuel Injection system (thus not the issue of fine debris clogging fine high pressure injection systems, just one akin to an old dumb diesel etc)

--Eric (talk) 05:08, 15 December 2025 (UTC)