Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Hybrid Vehicles Hybrid Vehicles - Archived Discussions Will ethanol E85 catch on in the US? Will we Live Green and Go Yellow? 
2104 messages, Last post on Oct 27, 2006 at 5:34 AM
You are in the Hybrid Vehicles - Archived Discussions Forum. Your Host is pf_flyer
This discussion is ARCHIVED. To reactivate the discussion, post a request in the Lost? Ask the Hybrids Host for directions! discussion.
|
|
|---|---|
|
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. I believe that the vast majority of hybrid owners would I welcome the ability to plug-in and derive some of their miles from grid power. In addition I suspect that there are many that crunch the numbers and conclude that hybrids, in their current form, don't make financial sense. That might not be the case if they could substitute 30 miles per day with grid power, which ends up costing the driver about 3 cents per mile. How much would this feature add to the price of a car? Hybrid owners are getting a bit panicky, the 20-30% price premium hurts all hybrid owners. The other day there was a Toyota Prius and Honda Civic Hybrid for sale in the Honda Used car lot. The salesman stated that the owners were trying to recoup some of their premium costs and to alleviate some of their fears about the cost of repairs and maintenance. They were for sale, but my salesman steered me away from them because of hybrids inherent problems. maybe someday...! A renewable fuel electrical recharge system would help the commuter hybrid market. To really keep it clean, it would be a great idea around here because the auto could charge up from our local Nuclear Power plant or from the grid that is powered by the wind farms in western Iowa. It sure is nice when I am going fishing in the Nuclear Plant's recreational lake and not see any smoke or pollutants from the plant.
|
|
|
Replying to: seniorjose (Jun 22, 2006 8:28 am) Based upon reliability surveys, these cars have been highly reliable. They may not prove to be durable over the long run, but it's too soon to tell. |
|
|
|
|
AMES, Iowa: This press release issued by EurekAlert says that they're only 250 billionths of a meter in diameter. But fill them with the right chemistry and Iowa State scientists say the tiny nanospheres they've developed could revolutionize how biodiesel is produced. The researchers are after a new, high-tech catalyst that takes some of the energy, labor and toxic chemicals out of biodiesel production. They've come up with a technology that works in the laboratory. And now they're working with the West Central Cooperative in Ralston to test their discoveries on a larger scale. They're also working to establish a company that would move the new technology into biorefineries. The Iowa State research team is led by Victor Lin, an associate professor of chemistry. The team also includes George Kraus and John Verkade, both University Professors of chemistry at Iowa State. The researchers are part of Iowa State's Center for Catalysis. Their project is being supported by a $1.8 million, three-year grant from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, a $120,000, two-year grant from the U.S. Department of Energy and a $140,000 grant from the Grow Iowa Values Fund. "This is a project that's definitely relevant to the state's economy," Lin said. "I thought as a scientist I could contribute something to the state." Current biodiesel production technology reacts soy oil with methanol using toxic, corrosive and flammable sodium methoxide as a catalyst. Getting biodiesel out of the chemical mixture requires acid neutralization, water washes and separation steps. It's a tedious process that dissolves the catalysts so they can't be used again, Lin said. So Lin and his research team started looking for technologies that would create an easier, more efficient and more economical process. They were also hoping to find technologies that would effectively make biodiesel out of raw materials such as used restaurant oils and animal fats – materials that are much cheaper than soy oil, but also contain free fatty acids that can't be converted to biodiesel by current production methods. |
|
|
Replying to: markcincinnati (Jun 22, 2006 7:21 am) I guess that all depends on how you look at it. The Lexus hybrid is rated at 25/28 city/hwy mpg. I'll make the assumption that this person would have also been interested in the Lexus GS430 rated at 17/25. He probably wasn't in the market for any 30+ mpg vehicles. This driver will save essentially as much fuel per 100 miles driven as the person who chose a Prius over a Corolla. In addition you are now targeting the people that are not willing to sacrifice performance for fuel efficiency. Of course this is also based on the assumption that hybrids achieve their EPA mileage ratings, which we all know they don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Mary Jo Pitzl The Arizona Republic Jun. 22, 2006 12:00 AM Biodiesel might fuel the path to energy independence, but it doesn't merit a stop at the tax-break rest stop. So lawmakers decided Wednesday as they killed a bill that would have reduced property taxes for biodiesel-fuel plants. It was unclear whether anyone is proposing to build such a plant, and state senators were equally unclear on many of the potential consequences of granting favorable tax status to biodiesel production. advertisement Others lamented the death of a bill that would have further reduced a corporate property tax. Biodiesel is a blend of diesel fuel and vegetable oil that burns cleaner than pure diesel fuel. Its big claim to fame is that it can be made from castoff french-fry grease. Senate President Ken Bennett voted for the bill, saying it would be a step toward weaning America off foreign oil. "I don't produce biodiesel in my business, but I do sell it," said Bennett, a Prescott Republican who runs a family oil business. "I support energy independence, and I vote 'aye.' " The bill would have allowed biodiesel plants to be assessed for taxes at 5 percent of their full cash value. Most businesses are assessed at a much higher rate, currently 24.5 percent. Sen. Ron Gould, R-Lake Havasu City, pointed out what he felt were vaguely defined criteria for reaping the tax break, and questioned whether he could get a break if he blended fryer grease with diesel fuel on a vacant lot. Sen. Robert Blendu, R-Litchfield Park, lamented the bill's demise. "We just failed a corporate property tax here," he said. Such failures, he said, are a key reason why Arizona has trouble attracting a strong manufacturing base. "I am hopeful this bill will come back next year, or a (broader) corporate property tax bill," he said. |
|
|
|
| Biodiesel is a domestically produced, renewable fuel that can be manufactured from vegetable oils, animal fats, or recycled restaurant greases. Biodiesel is safe, biodegradable, and reduces serious air pollutants such as particulates, carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, and air toxics. Blends of 20% biodiesel with 80% petroleum diesel (B20) can generally be used in unmodified diesel engines; however, users should consult their OEM and engine warranty statement. Biodiesel can also be used in its pure form (B100), but it may require certain engine modifications to avoid maintenance and performance problems and may not be suitable for wintertime use. Users should consult their engine warranty statement. | |
|
|
|
Replying to: tpe (Jun 22, 2006 8:45 am) The question, if you believe the Rand Study, may not be as far fetched or hypothetical as it may seem at first blush. For, what if, instead of spending so much of our capital on Ethanol and Diesel and Bio this and hybrid that, we spent our money (or more of it) to determine the feasibility of getting our known oil into our vehicles (and other uses?) Is this a "we're running out of stuff arguement or a pollution argument?" The pollution argument seems to be getting us nowhere as the use of E85 seems to be heading in the direction of being insignificant to reducing pollution, to say nothing of the folks who claims there are few, if any, pollution benefits to using E85 in the first place. So, if we had "long range" access to oil would we be attempting this for the purpose of cleaning up the joint? Just wondering what impact "no shortage" (more or less) would make. Or is it higher prices rather than shortage that is driving all of this (no pun intended?) The report by the RAND Environment, Energy and Economic Development program says that between 500 billion and 1.1 trillion barrels of oil are technically recoverable from high-grade oil shale deposits located in the Green River geological formation, covering parts of Colorado, Utah and Wyoming. The mid-point of the RAND estimate – 800 billion barrels – is three times the size of Saudi Arabia's oil reserves. This is enough oil to meet 25 percent of America's current oil demand for the next 400 years. The benefits of a competitive oil shale industry are substantial. For an output of 3 million barrels per day, the study estimates direct economic benefits of about $20 billion per year. Federal, state and local governments would receive about half of this amount in the form of lease payments, royalties and taxes. Production at 3 million barrels per day also could likely cause oil prices to fall by 3 to 5 percent, saving American oil consumers roughly $15 billion to $20 billion annually, according to the report. A multimillion-barrel per day oil shale industry could also create several hundred thousand jobs in the United States. The study further states: The RAND report recommends that the U.S. government take the following low-cost steps to advance oil shale development, even before the long-term future of oil shale is determined: Add oil shale to the Department of Energy's research and development portfolio. Establish a national oil shale archive to hold and preserve information on oil shale resources, technologies and impacts of development. Analyze lease program implementation options, such as combining adjacent lease tracts and fostering extensive resource recovery in lease tracts. When private firms are willing to invest in oil shale development without appreciable government subsidy, government decision-makers should address core environmental, leasing policy and oil shale development issues, according to the study. The report recommends that the federal government should then: Develop and implement a research plan to establish options for mitigating ecological damage. Conduct research aimed at mathematically modeling the subsurface environment, along with long-term hydrological, geochemical and geophysical monitoring programs. Conduct research aimed at establishing and analyzing options for long-term spent shale disposal. Model regional air quality to determine preferred locations for federal leasing and to inform decisions on air quality permits for initial plants. Develop a federal oil shale leasing strategy for the Green River Formation. So, lots of "proven" quantity. So, lots of potential risks (and rewards). So, it may become economically possible sooner rather than later. Sounds like a combination of events and circumstances that, if history is any guide, will motivate us to go for the high fat content stuff rather than the lo cal stuff (if you get my drift.) How many of the billions spent on E and H and D and BD and EV and a partridge in a pear tree if spent on development of known reserves would compress time? And, perhaps more importantly, do we want to use oil even if we found a thousand, million, trillion bbl reserve? Give me strength. E85 seems like using $20 bills to keep your house warm -- THUS FAR. Who would do such a thing, especially if the stuff is made from FOOD, not waste by-products or other non food biomass?
|
|
|
Replying to: seniorjose (Jun 22, 2006 7:59 am) Instead of assisting and helping all Americans to try to get some form of energy independence from the dictator oil cartels...it is business as usual, no alternative fuels are good enough or scientific facts are creditable enough. Biodiesel might be ok, but I am sure that biodiesel fuel will be rationed to our diesel trucking industry not some experimental diesel auto. Corn crops here where I am look like a bumper crop this year and estimates in this state show a 20% increase in yield over last year's semi-drought conditions in the midwest -- Illinois was a disaster for corn production last year...this year looks great. This has been covered a kazillion times before on this forum/thread. I live in Nebraska, I know farmers, ag economists, water experts and farm group leaders, and I can write it in stone that there are environmental consequences to growing corn. This is not even in dispute among the farmers who grow it. Without the federal price supports and the cheap prices they pay for irrigation water, they're growing something else. And, if we keep upping the ante on corn for ethanol, it will not be long before food prices head upward, too. That is a given in the market -- when and how much is uncertain, but it will indeed happen.
|
|
|
Replying to: markcincinnati (Jun 22, 2006 9:56 am) It's a bit of both, plus it's a political argument (resource dependency on anti-western fragile dictatorships in the Muslim world is a dangerous thing.) Unfortunately, we are so dependent on fossil fuels for so many things in so many places, we have to accept the reality that we are going to be burning this stuff for many years to come. Hence, I think that the short-to-medium term solutions rest in (a) discouraging people from using it, (b) getting what we do use to use it more efficiently, and (c) using technologies to stretch more use out of it and to make it less harmful. The medium- to long-term should include aggressive R&D to find alternative versions of the same stuff, or completely new technologies to replace the technologies of old, but this will take a long time. We really ought to start yesterday, but even if we do, it will take time, particularly if you expect the free market to do it. (The free market has little incentive to clean the air without regulatory pressure, for example.) What might be best would be to have our governments in the west jointly form a sort of Manhattan Project for energy. But we don't seem to have the political will, foresight, budgets or guts to do it. |
|
|
Replying to: fireball1 (Jun 22, 2006 10:06 am) http://money.cnn.com/2006/06/21/news/economy/cellulose_ethanol/index.htm |
|
You are here:
Forums
Hybrid Vehicles Hybrid Vehicles - Archived Discussions Will ethanol E85 catch on in the US? Will we Live Green and Go Yellow?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Chevrolet Impala
2007 Chevrolet Monte Carlo
2010 Chevrolet Avalanche
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
