Sign In Join 



Is Ethanol good for the environment?

165 messages,  Last post on Sep 24, 2008 at 5:25 AM

You are in the Ethanol - E85 FlexFuel Forum. Your Host is pf_flyer

What is this discussion about? Alternative Fuels


Messages Page 6 of 17
1
...
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
...
17
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#51 of 165
Re: my view [mxer] by gagrice
Aug 16, 2005 (9:57 pm)
Reply

Replying to: mxer (Aug 16, 2005 1:19 pm)

My question is. If E85 is a better fuel, why do the vehicles designed to use it get worse mileage on E85 than regular unleaded? The Silverado is EPA rated 12/16 on E85 and 16/20 on unleaded regular. My understanding is that ADM is the largest producer of Ethanol. I could be wrong. I agree that bio-diesel can and does lessen our dependence on fossil fuel. I am not convinced on Ethanol with all it's problems.
#52 of 165
Re: my view [gagrice] by falconone
Aug 17, 2005 (2:30 am)
Reply

Replying to: gagrice (Aug 16, 2005 9:57 pm)

Isn't ethanol a type of hidden subsidy from the government. It benefits the farmers and it cost more energy to produce than it yields. This is what I read, but I can't believe it is true. Wouldn't make sense.
#53 of 165
Re: my view [mxer] by john500
Aug 17, 2005 (6:22 am)
Reply

Replying to: mxer (Aug 16, 2005 1:19 pm)

I'm not convinced of ethanol as a solution either. It can, however, provide some relief from total reliance on crude oil. To obtain ethanol, one must ferment corn or some other sugar-containing material. Fermentation releases CO2. The amount of CO2 released must be considered when selling ethanol as a fuel.
 
At the vehicular level, and assuming that the energy of ethanol and (as an example) iso-octane are equivalent, the amount of CO2 released by the complete combustion of an equivalent weight of ethanol will be about .67 that of iso-octane (the burning of any chemical with a lower overall carbon content will release less CO2). However, with ethanol, the CO2 released from fermentation must be included. With MTBE, there is no indication that the emissions are cleaner (ie less unburned hydrocarbons) than gasoline, however, there is clearly less CO2 being generated because the starting chemical has less carbon.
#54 of 165
Re: my view [gagrice] by bhill2
Aug 17, 2005 (11:43 am)
Reply

Replying to: gagrice (Aug 16, 2005 9:57 pm)

I believe that the reason that the Silverado in your example gets worse mileage on E85 is because is actualy a dual-fuel design. That is, it isn't designed to use ethanol, it is designed to be able to use ethanol. If it was actually designed to use ethanol (or E85), with the higher compression and the advanced timing, it wouldn't be able to use gasoline. Your second statement, comparing ethanol and biodiesel for their environmental advantages, is of considerable interest to me as well; especially since a biodiesel mix (up to 100%) can be used in any diesel engine without modification.
#55 of 165
Re: my view by mxer
Aug 17, 2005 (8:17 pm)
Reply
"I'm not convinced of ethanol as a solution either. It can, however, provide some relief from total reliance on crude oil. To obtain ethanol, one must ferment corn or some other sugar-containing material. Fermentation releases CO2. The amount of CO2 released must be considered when selling ethanol as a fuel."
John
That is one of the things that make Ethanol production more efficient now - The CO2 is captured during the fermentation process and used to make Dry Ice or the carbonation that goes into the Soda.
 
bhill2 is right, The Silverado is designed to run on both fuels, therefore compromising the motors effeciency on Ethanol. The motor must be able to run on 87 Octane of Pump fuel and 106 Octane of E85. Manufactures are experimenting with Turbo's and SuperChargers on newer multi-fuel applications. Adding Boost when running E85 and turning the Boost off when running regular pump fuel. Adding Boost when running E85 takes advantage of the Higher Octane rating of the E85 resulting in more power and effeciency. This then would be an engine built to run E85 that is capable of running regular gas instead of an engine built to run regular gas that is capable of running E85.
#56 of 165
Re: my view [mxer] by bhill2
Aug 19, 2005 (11:56 am)
Reply

Replying to: mxer (Aug 17, 2005 8:17 pm)

Hey, that would sure get people use ethanol. "Yes, you can burn gas in the car, but you will lose about 20% of your horsepower"
#57 of 165
by mxer
Aug 19, 2005 (12:51 pm)
Reply
Interesting read on Popular Science: http://www.popsci.com/popsci/automotive/article/0,20967,1069364,00.html
 
Here's the just of it:
Liquor Does It Quicker
Saab’s BioPower engine gives ethanol a kick in the pants
With all the buzz about hybrids, it’s easy to ignore our homegrown alternative fuel: ethanol. Clean-burning and infinitely renewable—we’re talking grain alcohol—ethanol is dear to environmentalists and economists alike. The standard 85/15-percent ethanol/gasoline blend (E85) is widely used in Sweden, but there are only 313 E85 fueling stations in the U.S. And motorheads aren’t clamoring for more, because E85 typically delivers inferior fuel economy; it has about 75 percent of the potential energy of gasoline, so it takes up to 20 percent more hooch to keep horsepower on par. But E85 also has a high octane rating (around 110), and Saab realized that a turbocharger could harness it. Turbos push extra air into the cylinder, and higher octane allows a fuel to better endure the increased pressure. So Saab cranked up its fans and created the BioPower engine, the first commercially available ethanol turbo. A computer samples the fuel mixture and adjusts boost pressure—from 5.8 psi for pure gasoline to 13.8 psi for E85. Running straight gasoline, the engine produces 148 horsepower, but E85 jacks it up to 184, with no penalty in fuel economy.
SAAB 9-5 2.OT Biopower Sedan
 
  
SPECS GASOLINE E85
POWER 148 hp 184 hp
TORQUE 177 lb.-ft 207 lb.-ft
MAX. BOOST 5.8 psi 13.8 psi
0-62 MPH 9.8 sec 8.5 sec
TOP SPEED 134 mph 140 mph
PRICE $35,000 $35,000
*based on exchange rates at press time
 
Average price per gallon in the U.S.*
Biodiesel $2.27
Diesel $2.24
Gasoline $2.11 (I believe the average cost is higher now $2.50 ish?)
Ethanol $1.86
Natural Gas $1.47
#58 of 165
Energy used to produce unleaded. by f111d
Sep 04, 2005 (4:41 pm)
Reply
Anyone run across info as to how energy is used to produce unleaded vs E85? Google gave me way too many, I'd be there til I die.
It's not all that economcial producing unleaded, but quantity produced now days makes it profitable and the commodity market traders.
 
$1.85 in Rockford, IL. Unleaded still $3.39 according to my eldest son. Too bad the manufacture's didn't make more engines with E85 capable. His 2002 S-15 only offered with 2.2L 4.
I think it's a good idea in the corn belt areas to be pushing this. Work out bugs and see if it can be viable for wider use, but looks like manufacture bottom line got in the way. Why not a multi-fuel hybrid?
That new Saab engine design sounds promising, any multi-fuel capability hopefully will increase, be it spark ignition or compression.
  
Hopefully some battery technology break thru will come along, hybrids are not cost effective but we have to start somewhere. Hopefully those who can afford to will get the bug? My many retired electrical engineer friends all refuse to even think about such a vehicle. I guess it's something similar to "been there done that----technology's not ready". Not to mention the service folks, scary!
 
Paul
#59 of 165
Flexible Fuel Hybrids by f111d
Sep 05, 2005 (1:39 pm)
Reply
Just got a e-mail from the Project Director for the National Ethanol Vehicle Coalition that the recently signed Energy Bill allocated grant programs specifically for Flexible Fuel Hybrids. Without quoting, He made special note towards Ford and GM.
From what he said Honda and Toyota are not to eager to offer Flexible Fuel. Nissan Titan truck will be E 85 capable.
Now have to see if this grant programs includes Flexible Fuel Diesels?
 
Paul
#60 of 165
Rep Roscoe Barlett from Maryland on Cspan by f111d
Sep 08, 2005 (9:53 am)
Reply
Live on C-span last night gave a very good report "Peaking Oil". If you interested on finds it can be found on his web site. Briefly the part about ethanol was enlightening.
Even though the net energy benefit is just negative or just postive, depending on which authority his committee was interviewing at the time, the effect on the land and food production is a concern. However we need all the alternatives now no more affordable oil has been found since 1980 and the scared Alaskan find is not near enough.
http://www.bartlett.house.gov/default.asp I'm just so glad to see the concern and efforts taking place. I love horsepower and torque BUT the era of cheap energy is over and the sooner all on the planet gets the message sooner all can get serious.
Paul

Messages Page 6 of 17
1
...
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
...
17
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion
To POST a message, please Sign In.

New? Join Now!

Forum Tools

Please sign in.
Email Address:

Password:

Forgot Password?

Search Forums

Enter Keyword(s)

Advanced Search

Browse by Vehicle



View All Vehicles
Advertisement
Ask the Community
See What People Are Asking

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic


View All Topics

Today's Chats

Advertisement