Sign In Join 



Will ethanol E85 catch on in the US? Will we Live Green and Go Yellow? - READ ONLY

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.

What is this discussion about? Chrysler, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz, Mercury, Chevrolet Impala, Chevrolet Monte Carlo, Chevrolet Avalanche, Alternative Fuels, Hybrid Cars, Coupe, Hatchback, Truck, Sedan, SUV


Messages Page 210 of 212
1
...
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#2083 of 2104
E85 by odie6l
Oct 19, 2006 (6:17 am)
I think it's kind of funny now in our area (near Hershey, PA) since the farmers are now harvesting all their corn, we are NOT hearing very much about E85 vehicles any more. We have only 1 station down in Lancaster that carriers it (the only station in ALL of Central PA), so there really is not that much of a demand even around the State Capital.
 
Odie
Odie's Carspace
#2084 of 2104
maybe we should revert back to something from an earlier age by kw5kw
Oct 19, 2006 (10:33 am)
such as steam power.
 
Water is plentiful, and we now have the technology to be able to use plain recycled garbage (Magazines, newspapers, shredded documents that are processed with some sort of plastic covering that would burn very hot for example.) as fuel.
 
With modern technology and materials we should be able to have a much higher pressures attained or attainable than in the previous endeavors with steam.
 
Pollution would not be as great, as one item would only be water--pure water. The burnt items (newsprint, etc) would be basically recycled trees; i.e.: wood, another very natural fuel.)
 
After all, nuclear powerplants operate by heat producing steam; steam which powers the submarines, aircraft carriers of our modern navy and...and steam powers the nuclear powerplants as well.
 
It might not be as performance minded as we'd like, being accustomed to the high output of gasoline and slightly less of diesel, but it will still allow us to use the automobile for transportation, and not at some distant time in the future force us back into the mode of transportation that the human race had known for all of the centuries previous to the twentieth.
 
 
#2085 of 2104
Re: maybe we should revert back to something from an earlier age [kw5kw] by rockylee
Oct 19, 2006 (10:55 am)

Replying to: kw5kw (Oct 19, 2006 10:33 am)

1-Nuclear Powerplant, produces enough hydrogen to power "X" amount of cars a yr. (It's a very significant #)
 
Rocky
#2086 of 2104
E85 pumps lose UL safety rating by rockylee
Oct 19, 2006 (4:03 pm)
Stations may have to halt sales of fuel
 
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061019/BUSINESS01/610190316/10- 14/BUSINESS01
 

 
Rocky
#2087 of 2104
Re: E85 pumps lose UL safety rating [rockylee] by gagrice
Oct 19, 2006 (4:48 pm)

Replying to: rockylee (Oct 19, 2006 4:03 pm)

Very interesting indeed. Same reason Toyota is balking on FFVs. Corrosion of anything aluminum. Good thing FFVs can run on regular gas.
 
A move by the nation's largest product-safety laboratory to remove its approval of ethanol fuel pumps has frozen the rollout of new ethanol stations and cast doubt on the legal status of the roughly 1,000 stations already selling E85 fuel.
 
Without certification from Underwriters Laboratories, the company that tests thousands of products for safety and manages the "UL" symbol, state officials and ethanol industry executives say E85 pumps may run afoul of state and local fire codes that require "listed" equipment for pumping fuel. A fire marshal in Columbus, Ohio, ordered two E85 pumps shut down last week because of a lack of UL approval and Michigan officials are wrestling with the question as well.
 
Mark Griffin, president of the Michigan Petroleum Association, which represents 1,500 stores, said state officials were still wrestling with the question of whether the pumps at Michigan's 26 E85 stations still met state standards, and new pumps wouldn't be available until UL clears up the confusion, which "could be a matter of weeks. It could be months or years."
 
"Somebody asked whether this thing is heading toward a train wreck," Griffin said. "Well, I don't know."
 
In a statement, UL said it had no reports of problems with E85 systems, but withdrew its certification due to concerns about how ethanol can corrode parts of the fueling system.
#2088 of 2104
Re: E85 pumps lose UL safety rating [gagrice] by rockylee
Oct 19, 2006 (4:51 pm)

Replying to: gagrice (Oct 19, 2006 4:48 pm)

gagrice, as you already know pal I like to add topics to the forums pal. I try to read every post I can most of the time when I'm on my days off from work.
 
Rocky
#2089 of 2104
Re: E85 pumps lose UL safety rating [rockylee] by gagrice
Oct 19, 2006 (4:58 pm)

Replying to: rockylee (Oct 19, 2006 4:51 pm)

This may be a blessing. It will make the price of ethanol come down and gas with it. Much of the last gas price run up was refiners looking for sources of ethanol to mix with gas. To fulfill the mandate for 2.97% ethanol in all unleaded gas.
 
Keep reading and posting interesting auto stuff.
#2090 of 2104
Re: E85 pumps lose UL safety rating [gagrice] by rockylee
Oct 19, 2006 (6:03 pm)

Replying to: gagrice (Oct 19, 2006 4:58 pm)

Keep reading and posting interesting auto stuff.
 
Will do my best when time permits.
 
Rocky
#2091 of 2104
Re: maybe we should revert back to something from an earlier age [kw5kw] by stevedebi
Oct 19, 2006 (6:49 pm)

Replying to: kw5kw (Oct 19, 2006 10:33 am)

"The Freestyle was intended as one of the Bold Move vehicles to get them on a turn-around path, but it turned out to be little more than Bold Talk. The next Bold Move will probably be to Mexico."
 
You might better explain that to Indonesia, where the forest fires are making it impossible for planes to land.
 
You are proposing burning items that are carbon based and will produce a lot of CO2 and other pollutants, including ash.
#2092 of 2104
Re: Stupid US Consumers.. [snakeweasel] by jae5
Oct 20, 2006 (9:47 am)

Replying to: snakeweasel (Oct 16, 2006 10:08 am)

I'm out in aurora now, so this past summer has been cooler than last year. But my thing is sitting in traffic to/from work, which is very hairy on the way home. I'm looking at a minimum 38 mile loop. So a range of 50 miles would not do it for me. I'd like more than a 10 mile cushion. Most likely this would be a summer car for me, like a toy to drive on good / not so bad days. In the winter I'd probably park the thing.
 
Again, there are things about an EV that I really don't like and need these things figured out and presented in an all-around manner. Meaning, just don't give me the good, give me the con as well. Myself and others would be more accepting of it if alternatives were presented in that manner.

Messages Page 210 of 212
1
...
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

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