Ethanol is a hydrocarbon with all hydrocarbon and air quality problems. It is short-term thinking (least cost, first use) compared to PHEVs or long-term thinking (least cost, end use).

It makes no sense to derive ethanol from cellulosic or maize plant materials, when greater efficiency can make use of renewable solar or hydrogen (from water). Ethanol is a "muddling toward frugality" solution for those who substitute oil for knowledge.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(skruse @ Apr 18 2007, 01:07 PM) [snapback]425393[/snapback]</div>

Well put.

I really wish that instead of running with something proposed by someone who claims expertise in a particular field, like, for instance W :lol: , that people would investigate issues for themselves. We could save a lot of trouble if ideas were thoroughly investigated by everyone taking them up. The old adage "Believe only half of what you see and nothing of what you hear" comes to mind on this one.

When "W" said "hydrogen" a few years back, everyone jumped on the bandwagon without stopping to investigate the state of the technology. It almost seems as if the same thing is happening now with the latest buzzword - ethanol.

IMHO, developing advanced ultra capacitors is the way to go. There's no intermediary that you have to rely on for inefficient storage.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Fibb222 @ Apr 18 2007, 12:42 PM) [snapback]425374[/snapback]</div>

whew... It's only respiratory related problems. I thought i'll be paying $2.99 per ear of corn and won't be able to eat corns.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Clar @ Apr 18 2007, 10:31 AM) [snapback]425414[/snapback]</div>

Awesome

I posted regarding ethanol vs. bio diesel in some other post. This sort of makes my point. The highly touted ethanol and hydrogen concepts sound good on paper, but in reality, there are a lot of issues that have to first be addressed before they become a viable resource.

First, Hydrogen is very expensive to produce in both quantity and emissions. The only viable way to produce Hydrogen for a marketable resource is through the use of Nuclear power plants. We all know a NPP will take a minimum of 10 years to come online, and then there is also the process of planning the supply/distribution system, training of use, etc that goes with a colorless, odorless, extremely flammable gas.

Second, Ethanol, though easy to produce, and has a positive production cycle where the output produces 34% more than what is put into it, produces less HP, Less effiency that its gasoline counter part, and this article, if true, shows that more planning is needed in the auto industry to produce a cleaner burnign exhaust design that will reduce the potent emissions.

OTOH, Bio Diesel production far exceeds input/output ratios dramatically, in fact with a properly setup plant, it is up over 300% gains but in to btu out. Cleaner emissions, same or better fuel efficiency than dino diesel, and it is non toxic. It has a side benefit of smelling like french fries.

I havent had a chance to cook up the emissions ratings between bio D, Diesel, Gasoline and E85 yet, it takes time to research all those factors and compare them so they are as cose to accurate as possible.

We don't need a different fuel, we need to burn less fuel, period.

Harry

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Earthling @ Apr 19 2007, 05:55 AM) [snapback]425921[/snapback]</div>

(comma) and make it cleaner, period

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TomorrowMatters @ Apr 19 2007, 08:24 AM) [snapback]425929[/snapback]</div>

Using less is cleaner.

Harry

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Earthling @ Apr 19 2007, 06:55 AM) [snapback]425921[/snapback]</div>

Like that would ever happen! Hey here's a thought, WALK MORE! eh, never mind, too many idiots in cars to do it safely anymore.