E85 is stupid

Come on guys, ethanol is carbon neutral. Can't anyone see that's a good thing? The western world using E85 would seriously slash carbon emissions. Don't you care about the environment of the wider world?

Next point: You're not FREE to make any choice you like, if you have any sense of moral responsibility. Sure, laws allow you to drive round in an SUV wasting petrol, but that is NOT without consequences, especially for those less fortunate.

And finally: The government NEEDS to tell you what to do, because history has shown that people will make the wrong decisions if it's left up to them. People WILL drive SUVs and trucks when petrol is $1.00 a gallon, even though there are negative consequences. So to help out OTHER PEOPLE, the government needs to step in and legislate.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(molgrips @ Sep 5 2006, 09:52 AM) [snapback]314479[/snapback]</div>

Ethanol suffers from the same problem as hydrogen - looks great at first glance but when you do the sums it's very obvious that it just takes far too much energy and carbon to make the fuel in the first place. For every 1 unit of ethanol energy that comes out of the farm -> factory chain, you had to put in 0.7 units of fossil fuel energy to make it.

Burn 4 gallons of ethanol in your E85 vehicle, and, quietly, somewhere else in the US, 3 gallons of fossil fuel are also burned to make it.

Far better to use straight vegetable oil, which yields far more fuel per acre with a much better energy balance than ethanol. Palm oil is already cheaper than crude oil and my car can run on it un-modified.

 

Ethanol is viable but will require firm regulation by government to make it so. If actively pursued teh large corporate farms will take over and it will be no better than fossil fuels. With good regulatory guidance it could be put into the hands of smaller farms.

#1 This will allow small farm families to once again make a profitable living.

#2 It will keep rural communities together and slow urban migration.

#3 Reverse some of the wealth distribution problems in the US.

#4 pollution regulations would be easier to enforce because small farms lack the huge sums of money needed to sway the political system like a concentrated corporate industry.

Our technology in this area is growing and once we master biofuel production I think we will have a much better option to make this truely viable. We are looking at Brazil and their efforts both good and bad right now since they are the leader in biofuels.

We had a post about this a couple weeks ago here: Ethanol could leave the world hungry.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Alric @ Sep 1 2006, 11:56 AM) [snapback]312772[/snapback]</div>

Principally from the fact that hybrid technology isn't especially useful in large vehicles. Most commuters who drive long distances to and from work should be driving a Prius or a Honda Civic hybrid. The most effective way to deal with energy use in vehicles, in general, is to use the type of energy that is most effective with the given type of vehicle. E85 has its drawbacks, sure, but it is also one of the many pieces of the puzzle to keeping our country from running out of energy all together.

 

Agreed.. look at our wonderful justice system!

 

Hi All,

I am with Clett regarding Ethanol. You know that some American Ethanol producers are burning COAL to distill corn mash into Ethanol! In Brazil they use the waste products of sugar extraction - the woody cane remnants - for this AND electricity production. This is how they get such excellent efficiency, and how it actually reduces petroleum importation. Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel_in_Brazil . If we were really serious about reducing green house gases in the US, we would be allowing tarrif free importation of Brazillian ethanol. But not for E85!

Coal would be better used as a liquified fuel or petroleum refinery feed stock (with the mercury extracted) than for distilation heat.

As far as a gasoline substitute biofuel, Butonol appears to be better. It can run in gas vehicles without dilution, or in any fraction. There are modern enzymatic ways to make it right now. Gives better mileage for the similar amount of processing overhead, and has high octane. It also does not require special anti-corrosion plumbing at gas stations. And it burns cleaner than gasoline, due to the oxygenation, as well as being made from the same bio matter as ethanol is.

I want to see somebody run their Prius on Butanol to see if the Prius system will adapt to it and how much better the mileage gets. I am not well enough heeled myself to try it, however !

 

I think the food vs fuel issue will be defunct within a decade. Cellulosic plants as starting to appear. They're still modest in size < 100 mgy but many appear to be well beyond the pilot plant also. I would love to see bio butanol as well. If it can be produced in large quantities at a cost competitive rate then I don't see ethanol sticking around much longer.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(donee @ Sep 6 2006, 07:50 PM) [snapback]315517[/snapback]</div>

But not all of them. There's one in Minnesota that operates using waste SAWDUST instead.

That is definitely a step in the right direction. Of course, people still have to learn to accept the reality that future fuel won't yield as much of a return as fossil fuels... which we exploited & wasted because it was cheap & abundant.

 

It depends on which side of the proverbial coin that you're on. It's not stupid if you're one of the American auto companies that gets a nice little tax credit for every gas guzzler you sell, whether the FFV ever sees a tank of ethanol or not. It's not stupid if you're an ethanol-producing company. As usual, though, the only one who ever gets it in the end is the consumer/taxpayer. Government and big business have a way of protecting themselves from the downside of the issue while failing to protect the consumer/taxpayer. The other issue that comes to mind recently is the off-topic ARM debacle getting ready to rear its ugly head. The only person who gets screwed is the poor sap who didn't read the fine print before signing that mortgage.

 

Ah.. good news.. we just found one of the biggest oil reserves ever off of the coast in the gulf of mexico.. they estimate it will supply up to 50% of our needs.

Only problem is, now they won't be under so much pressure to develope alternatives, since necessity is the mother of invention and brings the financiers for it too.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(windstrings @ Sep 11 2006, 12:22 PM) [snapback]317884[/snapback]</div>

Wrong. Not 50% of our needs, it is 50% increase in our RESERVES. That means we have 3% of the world's oil instead of 2%. This is just a drop in the bucket. Nobody is really going to benefit except Chevron on this fine.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dipper @ Sep 11 2006, 03:32 PM) [snapback]317999[/snapback]</div>

Aye, and it'll take at least 10yrs to ramp up production to get us to even that point. Its all rather quite silly really.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(F8L @ Sep 11 2006, 04:12 PM) [snapback]318024[/snapback]</div>

That is why we still need to conserve and look into alternatives. I will drive a Tesla if it only cost me to replace my $32k Honda s2000... but $100k is way too deep for my pocket book.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dipper @ Sep 11 2006, 05:07 PM) [snapback]318056[/snapback]</div>

Man, a Tesla recharged off solor paneling on your home would be very nice indeed.

I think, I dont know if there are any other major destructive procedures in building/owning one.