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.
|
|
|---|---|
|
A sampling of Hoosier ethanol users: Name: Aaron Pierce, 17, Carmel, high school student. Drives: 2003 Chevy Tahoe. E85 user: Since May 2. Why: "Not only does it burn cleaner, it is a fuel that literally comes from the backyards of many Americans." Performance: "It seems like I burn 2-3 miles per gallon less than I would with gasoline (but) newer E85 engines get better mileage out of the fuel." Patriotism: "If we all switch to E85 as our primary source of fuel, the United States will control production, refinement and distribution. I look at how rich the Middle Eastern counties got from oil and I see our potential with E85." Name: Doug Boner, 40, Indianapolis, plumbing manager for Earl Gray & Sons. Drives: 2005 GMC Yukon. E85 user: Two years. Why: "Engine lasts longer and stays cleaner, (uses) less oil use and prices were lower." Performance: "When using regular gas I get 15 miles to the gallon city driving. With E85 I get 13 miles to the gallon. On the highway, there is very little difference. I have noticed that I seem to get a little more get up and go with E85." Patriotism: "We have made ourselves into slaves of foreign oil." Name: Greg Cooper, 45, Carmel, real estate broker. Drives: 2004 GMC Yukon. E85 user: Two months. Why: "Frankly, my initial impulse was paying back those who have been sticking it to us for a long time when it comes to oil." Performance: "City mileage is slightly worse (but) highway actually is a little better." Patriotism: "This helps reduce our countrys dependence on foreign oil." Name: David Gray, 22, Fort Wayne, communications grad student at IPFW. Drives: 2003 Ford Taurus. E85 user: Two months. Why: "It burns much cleaner than gas and helps our economy." Performance: "I have heard horsepower improves with E85 due to higher octane levels, but I have not noticed." Patriotism: "It helps create Indiana jobs at production facilities and get our nose out of the Middle East and South America." ETHANOL PRODUCTION POISED TO RISE Indiana has one ethanol plant in operation, New Energy Corp. in South Bend. But at least 12 others are either under construction or in the planning stages, including: Putnam Ethanol, Cloverdale. Cargill/Demeter, Linden. Iroquois BioEnergy, Rensselaer. Central Indiana Ethanol, Marion. The Andersons, Clymers. Rush Renewable Energy, Rushville. Central States Enterprises Inc., Montpelier. ASAlliances Biofuels LLC, Tipton. Cardinal Ethanol, Harrisville. Premier Ethanol LLC, Portland. ASAlliances, Mount Vernon. Advanced BioEnergy, Rochester. Source: Indiana Lieutenant governors office.
|
|
|
Replying to: markcincinnati (Jun 18, 2006 8:32 am) It's the same reason that your local dealership won't have pink-and-purple striped cars with green polka dots -- because almost nobody would want one. If the manufacturers don't offer a product, it's because nobody wants it, or else because they can't sell it for a high enough price to make a profit from it. Again -- you have automakers that sell diesels in other markets, yet either sell them here in very small quantities, or else don't sell them here at all. Ask yourself why that is, particularly in the case of the large makers such as Toyota that are extremely profitable and obviously quite savvy about what US customers want.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: socala4 (Jun 18, 2006 8:50 am) I do not think things will change overnight, but the advent of clean fuel just this month, 17 days ago in fact, may make the cars that wouldn't "run right" on our fuel, run "fine as wine" and that, plus the EAC of 2005's incentives may (I did NOT say "will") start the ball rolling. Only "issues of taste" are involved in the example of cars with the polka dots. Until June 1, 2006, we actually had practical issues working against the automakers. Now, not so much. We had, perhaps a more apt analogy, only AC electricity, yet there were "superior" DC cars out there, but the trouble in trying to find enough DC to run them on wasn't worth the effort or expense. Zap! Someone turned on the DC -- now, perhaps within the next 2 years, we may see a change. Of course, I would agree, there still won't be many cars sold with green polka dots diesel, ethanol, fuel-cell, gasoline, hybrid, nuclear or solar. But, even then, I could be wrong -- paisley came and went and came. 
|
|
|
Replying to: markcincinnati (Jun 18, 2006 9:18 am) I have seen no data that indicates that the primary issues have been with a lack of supply, rather than with a lack of demand. There has never been a period of time in recent US history when diesel was popular. If you outlawed diesel cars tomorrow, very few people would miss them or even care. Economics are largely demand driven, as producers can't produce things that people don't want and stay in business for very long. Diesel is obviously the fuel of choice for heavy trucks, so I don't see why biodiesel devotees simply don't look to it for leadership in spurring the transition to biodiesel. But that has quite a long way to go -- biodiesel production in the US is currently equivalent to about 5/100ths of one percent of the total US demand for diesel, so it's going to take a whole lot of vegetable oil to get us there. You could focus on serving the trucking industry without worrying about cars, and still prove out whether the business model makes sense. There isn't enough production capacity today for biodiesel to impact petroleum consumption, so how would expanding the pool of passenger cars do anything to alleviate the problem? |
|
|
Replying to: seniorjose (Jun 18, 2006 8:50 am) 
|
|
|
Replying to: seniorjose (Jun 18, 2006 8:24 am) A handful of irrational opponents? Huh? Just skimming off some stuff I've read lately, corn ethanol opponents include a wide range of thinkers such as Environmental Defense, the Heritage Institute, the Sierra Club, The San Diego Union-Tribune, Michael Pollan, the Washington Times, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Iowa Environmental Council, CorpWatch, the Wichita Falls Times Record, the Detroit News, the Cato Institute, Foundation for Research on Economics and the Environment, Charlie Munger (Berkshire Hathaway), Christian Science Monitor, Pennsylvania Citizens for a Quality Environment, John Deutch (director of energy research in Carter administration), Los Angeles Times, Toronto Star, Joel Schwartz (American Enterprise Institute), Environmental Working Group, American Institute of Biological Sciences, Taxpayers League of Minnesota, author Richard Manning, author George Pyle (Salt Lake Tribune), etc., etc., etc. Darn! And I thought it was just a handful ... Lobbyists collecting millions from the obstructionists can block oil drilling, refineries, wind farms, and nuclear energy, but they CANNOT block Ethanol and, to some extent, Biodiesel raw supply from our American farmers or building Ethanol/Biodiesel manufacturing plant production...our American farmers hold the trump card on that one. Don't forget the corn lobbyists, also collecting millions. Some of them work for ADM, to be sure. Our American farmers hold the trump card? I'm not sure about that one, either. The trump card is being held by the aforementioned corn lobby, ADM and other big agribusiness. Barely 50 percent of ethanol plants are owned by the farmers themselves, and the percentage diminishes all the time.
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jun 17, 2006 8:31 pm) Farout
|
|
|
Replying to: fireball1 (Jun 18, 2006 12:14 pm) Makes me wonder why SUGAR BEETS haven't become a target yet, especially since the ethanol yield from them is greater than that of corn. JOHN
|
|
|
Replying to: farout (Jun 18, 2006 12:51 pm) I believe that since Detroit is so money hungry to make the quickest buck today by any means is dropping the diesel liberty simply because they make more % of porfit from the newer cherokee. Yea I know they would probally sell all they can make of both models but somehow, that logit would never ever fit inot Detroit's logic. As has been clearly demostrated by Detroit's last 30 years.
|
|
|
Replying to: gem069 (Jun 18, 2006 1:55 pm) That doesn't explain why Toyota, Honda and BMW don't sell these vehicles at all here, while those that do such as VW sell very few and do so little to promote them. Face it -- the smart, profitable automakers aren't expecting diesels to take over the US car market. The smart money is not betting on this technology taking off here. |
|
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
