• On TechRepublic: 10 cool USB flash drive tricks
May 8, 2008 2:32 PM PDT

For $9,995, your car could run on sugar and tequila

by Caroline McCarthy
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 13 comments
Share

The E-Fuel Micro-Fueler, on display in New York. Click for photo gallery.

(Credit: Caroline McCarthy/CNET News.com)

NEW YORK--"Henry Ford had it right all along," E-Fuel founder and CEO Thomas Quinn declared, referring to the fact that many original Model T Ford automobiles ran on the ethanol, not gasoline. But that was before the era of Prohibition, which banned production of the biofuel along with other forms of alcohol.

Now, he hopes ethanol can have a real revival.

In a press event at Revel, a Meatpacking District restaurant that features a greenhouse-like roof and trees growing inside, Quinn and his fellow executives unveiled the EFuel100 MicroFueler. It looks like a cross between a gas pump and an old-fashioned refrigerator, it'll cost $9,995, and it'll be available for customers in the fourth quarter of 2008 (if all goes well).

What is it, exactly? It's a home ethanol refinery. Connect it to a power source and a water source, add sugar "feedstock" and yeast or discarded alcohol (yes, that could mean last week's tequila) and in a week it can produce 35 gallons of ethanol that Quinn said any car can run on.

"I'm from Silicon Valley and I've worked with some very talented entrepreneurs in my lifetime," explained Quinn, whose previous start-up Gyration was responsible for a patent in Nintendo's "Wiimote" controller. "A couple years ago, I sensed this paradigm shift that we're all feeling today." He was referring to fossil fuel shortages and the rising cost of gasoline. With gas prices well over $3 per gallon, and no real middle ground in the market between industrial biofuels (there are still only 1,200 ethanol stations in the U.S., and only three in the entire state of New York) and "moonshining" operations that can be difficult and dangerous, he saw the opportunity to create the EFuel100.

"It's almost third-grade science to make ethanol," Quinn said. Anyone in the U.S. can obtain a license to produce alcohol, ethanol included.

Click for gallery

But ethanol, for better or for worse, has gotten a bad rap. Some have connected rising food prices to the fact that corn-based ethanol means crops are going toward fuel rather than human consumption, and some reports have claimed that ethanol's carbon footprint isn't as "green" as it appears.

E-Fuel's executives have attempted to counter this rumor by saying that its sugar-based ethanol won't hurt food prices because sugar is a surplus crop, and that sugar ethanol is inherently more efficient than corn. And it's safe to make at home, because no combustion is involved.

Throughout the press conference on Thursday, Quinn reiterated that there's nothing unusual about making car fuel in your backyard.

"We're already in the ethanol business," he explained, gesturing to the bar at the back of the restaurant, "but we're using it as a beverage drink."

Originally posted at Green Tech
Caroline McCarthy, a CNET News staff writer, is a downtown Manhattanite happily addicted to social-media tools and restaurant blogs. Her pre-CNET resume includes interning at an IT security firm and brewing cappuccinos. E-mail Caroline.
Recent posts from The Social
Friendster gets a face-lift, looks for love?
Facebook notifies members about Beacon settlement
Orangutan takes photos, shares them on Facebook
Another news tweak for Google
Groupon: We're profitable and we just raised $30 million
Mark Zuckerberg's grand missive: The translation
Twitter founder formally unveils 'Square' project
This year, you can stalk Santa from your car
Add a Comment (Log in or register) (13 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
by chad.armstrong May 8, 2008 4:54 PM PDT
umm, thanks, I think I'll drink last weeks tequila ;) Kidding, machine looks cool and useful.
Reply to this comment
by 42istheanswer May 8, 2008 5:18 PM PDT
Because it seems so useful and innovative, it will never happen. This type of stuff will get used only after the last drop of oil has been squeezed out of the Earth AND the oil companies own the patents and profits to this device. They'll probably make it subscription based and lease the device to you. Suckers.
Reply to this comment
by LastAvailableName May 8, 2008 6:15 PM PDT
I don't know about this...I can get an awful lot of sugar and tequila to fuel MYSELF for ten grand.
Reply to this comment
by strategynode May 8, 2008 7:46 PM PDT
I think of how America responded during World War II to the call to recycle and save for the war effort - specifically, the women would save their cooking oil in a tin, then take it to the local butcher who would pay her a nominal fee. This grease in turn would be used by the military for making bombs, if I'm not mistaken. The point being, America rallied for the war effort. Why isn't America rallied for, well, America.

<body>

Heather Shimmin


Director of Creative Services


Strategy Node - Utah SEO / Utah SEM / Utah SMM / Utah Analytics

www.strategynode.com

Reply to this comment
by SmokinWrek May 8, 2008 8:40 PM PDT
Does this mean that if I use this, I'll have a worm in the bottom of my tank?
Reply to this comment
by WineMaker5000 May 8, 2008 8:43 PM PDT
Those of us with passion for wine making, it takes on the average, the equivalent of 17 lbs of sugar to make the equivalent of 1 gallon of pure ethanol. This is based on actual measurement of average normal fermentation, and not theoretical calculations. Yeasts and other microorganisms will consume part of the sugar and not turn them into alcohol. Some alcohol will also volatilize, enhanced by the carbon dioxide that is produced alongside.

Sugar at retail is $22.10 per 50 lb bag, from Costco. And that comes to $0.4422/lb retail price. So it would cost me $7.52 per gallon of ethanol. Add to it the electricity consumed in the refining process. Not counting my cost of hauling the 50 lb bag from the store, loading it up to the device. The $7.52 is pretty too steep a price to pay for a gallon of ethanol. The $7.52 is cheap, however, compared to a gallon of Bacardi 151.


And for $10K device... A very good distillation setup that is available from retail, right now, can be had for $299 with free shipping and handling. These are available from Brewhaus.
Reply to this comment
by Commander_Spock May 8, 2008 9:38 PM PDT
How about the use of "MOLASSES" for making ETHANOL! I grew up nearby a sugar cane plantation and actually served an apprenticeship in the sugar industry; and, guess what was one of the primary "feed stock" for the production of the "ALCOHOL" that was produced next door to where the sugar was produced - "MOLASSES"! Duh!
Reply to this comment
by willdryden May 9, 2008 2:20 AM PDT
It would be better if it made butanol.

http://www.butanol.com/
Reply to this comment
by vanbrua May 9, 2008 8:50 AM PDT
I think this is a very bad idea.

1) If commercial ethanol plants are not able to break even without subsidies, why would a small scale personal version be able to?

2) As pointed out by WineMaker5000, sugar is very expensive in America. That is why ethanol producers use corn instead of sugar. It turns out that it is artificially expensive because of huge tariffs.

Molasses is no cheaper since it is mostly sugar and water. The increased weight of the water makes it more expensive to ship. It is used to produce rum because of theextra flavours in molasses.

3) America does not and cannot economically produce sugar. Increased sugar production increases Amazon rain forest destruction and dependence on foreign sugar. Really no advantage over oil.

4) Fermentation stinks. It produces all sorts of nasty smells and toxic byproducts. Everyone hates it when an ethanol plant is built in their town because of the smell. See the diagram of the device on their website. It includes a waste port and two vents.

5) I would worry about the safety of having a large tank of volatile fuel sitting around. What if it gets a leak, catches on fire, or tips over?
Reply to this comment
by maxwell2755 May 9, 2008 11:22 AM PDT
Nice idea. However, there is not a town in the U.S.A. that would allow fuel mfg in a residentially zoned district. This is why we have residential zoning, to keep away and buffer "industrial" land uses. Ever heard of NIMBY? To promote home brewing with such a volatile fuel is not ethical without the caveate of letting your readers know this is ILLEGAL.
However, if one were to live in an Industrial Zoned District, and home brew, I'm sure this would be more legal. I just would not buy a residential home next to an ethanol manufacturer!
Reply to this comment
by steinpiaz May 9, 2008 12:58 PM PDT
An interesting idea but really just an overpriced gimmick. The home wine maker went into some of the issues, but as a home distiller would know there are many other issues as well. First is that if you ferment a sugar solution up to 15-20% ethanol, it will take you about 1 week using a special yeast & nutrient mix (something like Turboyeast). This will give you about 1 gallon ethanol per five gallons of brew. The next problem is that may be plenty clean for drinking, but you can't put it into a car. To do that you have to "dry" the ethanol. Ethanol, as it comes from a still, is only about 90% to at best 96.48% as ethanol is hydroscopic and aseotropic which makes it impossible to get to 100% purity (please look these up as I don't have time to explain, but it is interesting) . The rest is water that must be removed chemically by further processing before the ethanol is useful as fuel.

To make a long story short, from the looks of the unit, I would suspect it is capable of producing 1 to 2 gallons of ethanol per week. Even ignoring the cost of the sugar (which may or may not be cheaper then corn) and the cost of energy to distill the "hootch." I would think 1 or 2 gallons per week would not be enough to really make a dent in most peoples gas usage. As for cost of the unit, you can get a distillation column off ebay for about $200, put that on a used $50 beer keg and heat it with a $30 gas ring from Walmart and have the same thing at a much cheaper price. I suspect this is a very cool way to make vodka if you don't mind paying $10,000 for the best still in the neighborhood, but I hardly see it taking the world by a storm.
Reply to this comment
by vanbrua May 9, 2008 4:13 PM PDT
I don't see any reason to believe that they cannot produce ethanol at the rate quoted since they have a huge 250 gallon fermentation tank. There really is no problem with having 5% water in your fuel. E100 is actually only 95% ethanol and 5% water. It is a problem with petroleum fuel because oil and water don't mix and if the fuel pump gets to a patch of only water, the engine stops. A 80-20% ethanol-water mix would probably run just fine.
by MD_Willington February 3, 2009 9:17 AM PST
Ah jeez the gol darn revenuers will be all over ma fancy new still...

The "license" is a tax stamp from the BATFE...
Reply to this comment
(13 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
advertisement

The yogurt makers of tech: Gadgets to avoid

Don't buy these one-trick ponies--unless you like gizmos that gather dust.

Google wants to unclog Net's DNS plumbing

The Net giant, ever eager for a faster Internet, debuts its Google Public DNS service. With it, Google could become even more central to the Net.

About The Social

CNET News' Caroline McCarthy is a downtown Manhattanite who believes that, despite popular opinion, the Web can actually help your social life. She's happily addicted to fun social-media tools from Twitter to Yelp to Facebook, sends an inordinate number of text messages, and has a tendency to waste time at the office reading restaurant blogs. Here, she explores all facets of the Web's gregarious side, as well as the unique tech culture in her home city of New York. (Don't call it Silicon Alley.)

Add this feed to your online news reader

The Social topics

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right