Synththetic oil...

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Haztoys

Senior Airman
428
2
Dec 1, 2005
Prescott Arizona USA
Just found a copy of "Stranger in a strange land"...Yard sales are great..LOL..Got nine books for $4.00...8) ...

And they bring up the Leuna-Werk synthetic oil plant ...

Anyone know how much synthetic oil they used...

I've often wondered why it could be done in the 40's and not now...

(I know ..I know Its about greed of the oil companies)
 
The process to convert coal to gas is a well understood. After the war, truck loads of documents were grabbed by the allies and then translated and indexed for research.

The issue today is the cost to do the process. Its still to much to be competitive.
 
Haztoys,

Congrats on the books, "Strangers..." is great, ain't it

Synthetic oils cost more to produce than even $100/bbl oil.

"Since the invention of the original process by the German researchers Franz Fischer and Hans Tropsch, working at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute in the 1920s, many refinements and adjustments have been made, and the term "Fischer-Tropsch" now applies to a wide variety of similar processes (Fischer-Tropsch synthesis or Fischer-Tropsch chemistry)

The process was invented in petroleum-poor but coal-rich Germany in the 1920s, to produce liquid fuels. It was used by Germany and Japan during World War II to produce ersatz fuels. Germany's annual synthetic fuel production reached more than 124,000 barrels per day (19,700 m³/d) from 25 plants ~ 6.5 million tons in 1944.[2]" ~ Wik

Hi-octane fuels are especially difficult and expensive to produce. that's why German engines were tuned to run on lower octane fuel than that used by the Allies. If I remember correctly, poor fuel quality gave the Germans fits when testing Allied AC. I think they mention that in your new find.

JL
 
On the octane rating that's untrue, Kfurst had some good info on it, but the main difference is that normally the allied system listed the octane rating for rich conditions, while the German system for lean.

Hence the German "92-97" octane (C-3) would be similar to 100/130 octane by allied standards. (also a mix of B4/C3 making something like 92/115 octane)

I cant remember the exact equivelent for standard B-4 fuel, but it was similar to 87 octane. (~92 octane rich)

From Kfurst:
 
C-3 at times was quite good and at other times not so good, but better than B-4. At it's best the rich rating was over 140, but normal quality was 130+. THe real difference was C-3 had poor lean rating, but really how much time did the German's spend trying to get maximum range instead of maximum performnce.
 
Also:

 

Hmmmm ...... I learned something new today.
 

Users who are viewing this thread