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 Ethanol - E85 FlexFuel The Inconvenient Truth About Ethanol
921 messages, Last post on Oct 07, 2009 at 10:53 AM
You are in the Ethanol - E85 FlexFuel Forum. Your Host is pf_flyer
|
Replying to: pf_flyer (Aug 31, 2009 10:45 am) Considering: tractors tilling the ground and planting the seed Power to irrigate the fields Tractors harvesting the crop transporting the crop by truck energy to convert the crop into ethanol trucking the ethanol to a facility to "mix" the ethanol with dino fuel poorer mileage from the finished product A lot of dino fuel is burned just to get 10% ready for our fuel tanks. |
|
|
Forbes Magazine dated September 07, 2009 If the U.S. insists on getting motor fuel from crops, it should think about putting them closer to the equator. Corn ethanol swallows tax subsidies, jacks up food prices and doesn't do much to reduce the world's carbon footprint. So what does one say about the newest contender in the biofuels industry, sweet sorghum? Perhaps the most compelling sales pitch that can be offered about it is this: It's no worse than the alternative. Federal law mandates that by 2012 gasoline refiners use at least 7.5 billion gallons of renewable fuel a year. If agribusiness executive Vikram Shroff has his way, sorghum will get a significant share of this market. Shroff runs United Phosphorus, an Indian firm founded by his father that sells sorghum seeds, as well as fertilizers, pesticides and industrial chemicals. He says many American farmers looking for a piece of the biofuels market should try growing sorghum along with sugarcane on their land. A sorghum-sugarcane mix, says Shroff, can yield double the ethanol per acre of land as corn, uses less fertilizer and doesn't raise food prices (not directly, anyway). Persuading farmers in the southern U.S. to give his fuel-producing plant a try would give his firm a nice boost but not have a huge impact. How much will spend to save on foreign oil? |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: pf_flyer (Jul 14, 2009 3:46 pm) ...then why aren't we building coal-gasification plants. Both the US and China have the world's largest supplies of coal. So if we convert it to gasoline, then we have rid ourselves of our dependence on foreign oil... ...saved the midwest aquifer, saved the Gulf of Mexico from the deadly algae plumes caused by the nitrogen-based fertilizer runoff coming out the Mississippi, reduced the chances of global famine, etc, etc, etc. Well, I guess environmentalists would say that it's good for the earth to kill off the sealife in the Gulf of Mexico, plow under wildlands for corn, and starve the poorest people on earth. Oh happy day! 
|
|
|
Replying to: gogogodzilla (Oct 01, 2009 2:52 pm) During the 2nd world war, a great deal of Germany's war machinery ran on "Liquified Coal". The technology has been around for quite a while. As you pointed out, we have plenty of it. We have huge deposits of light crude under the north mid-western states. Supposably larger than several of the "Oil Producing" countries combined. Also huge deposits of Natural gas in this region. Another huge deposit of crude and NG under ANWR. Huge deposits of oil shale in the Rocky Mountains. NOTE: FWIW, we get a lot of our oil from Canada. The main source of that oil is from OIL SHALE. That $700 billion, we are sending out of the country every year could supply a lot of good jobs here. Also stimulate the economy in a big way. Why can't the unions see and understand that and back someone that would actually help them Before he left office, President Bush lifted the Ban on California's offshore drilling. California is in serious financial trouble, and could probably drill their way out of debt. Yet they don't. WHY! I believe there is something going on bigger than we understand. Something to do with the ONE WORLD ORDER. President Obama promised the UAW that their jobs would return if he was elected, but they have not and most likely will not. Oldsmobile division of GM went away. Then Pontiac, and Hummer, and now recently announced Saturn. How many UAW jobs has that cost? No telling what type of death grip the FEDS have on GM and Chrysler. "Cap and Trade" will punish companies and force many out of business or out of country and raise the cost of living as even more jobs go away. In spite of all the promises that were made, It seems our government is setting this country up to fail. WHY? If we are honest in our thinking, we will realize that 535 people are responsible for the mess this country is in. They are the members of the House of Representatives, the Senate and the US Supreme Court. Any President can do little without the support of those 535. The corruption and greed and entitlement mind set is running rampant. Every time the administration changes, the other side has all kind of good ideas of how things could be made better. WELL? Why didn't they make them better when they were in control? "WE THE PEOPLE" keep those 535 in office and on the bench. So we share a great deal of the blame. Just as many believe the UAW is responsible for the D3 failures, "We the People" have our share of greed also, contributing to the failure of this country. Kip
|
|
|
Replying to: kipk (Oct 03, 2009 4:06 am) |
|
|
|
|
I usually buy whatever brand of gas that's cheaper but recently something happened to change my mind. When I bought the "no-name" brand I got 23mpg but when I bought a name brand (Mobil) I got 25mpg. Both stations have the sign that says "contains 10% ethanol". Someone suggested that the name brand had less ethanol and thus the milage was better. Is there any way to find out if different brands of gas contain less than the permitted 10%?
|
|
|
Replying to: oldfarmer50 (Oct 03, 2009 12:30 pm)
|
|
|
|
|
Germany's WW II machinery was dependent upon “liquefied fuels from coal” for transportation. Germany had neither sufficient oil reserves nor sufficiently advanced alternatives to petroleum to wage a prolonged war. Once the Allies destroyed Germany’s oil infrastructure, Germany lost the war. During WW II America was the world’s largest oil producer. Today America is at a strategic disadvantage, which off shore drilling and oil shale reserves cannot reverse. North America has just 3% of the world’s oil reserves, yet America alone has grown to use 25% of the world's annual oil production, 70% of which must be imported from other countries. 80% of the world's oils supply is controlled by OPEC, Russia, African Nations and Venezuela. The interests of these nations do not align with America or democracies in general. Our NATIONAL SECURITY and ECONOMY have more to fear from these countries controlling our energy future than we do from Midwestern farmers, ethanol producers, alternative fuels or even the gang on Capitol Hill. Dr. Robert Zubrin, an aerospace engineer , Senior Scholar to the www.setamericafree.org coalition and author of ENERGY VICTORY www.energyvictory.net/ sees alternative fuels such as alcohol as part of a plan to break the economic stranglehold the OPEC cartel has over America and the world. “Alcohol fuels” does not mean only ethanol. Ethanol does not mean only ethanol derived solely from corn. Dr. Zubrin explains "Coal can easily be made into methanol, which is why we need the FLEX FUEL MANDATE to include compatibility with methanol as well as ethanol and gasoline as part of the capability of the flex fuel engine.” “Making coal into gasoline is more involved. First you turn it into methanol, then you turn the methanol into dimethyl ether (DME), then you turn the DME into propylene which you can turn into gasoline. It can be done, but it is expensive. “ “That's why we need a methanol-inclusive flex-fuel mandate, as it will make it possible for us to readily use our coal to make vehicle fuel. In China right now they are making methanol compatible Flex Fuel Vehicles (FFV), and they are producing methanol from coal at a cost of $0.50/gallon, and selling it for $1/gallon. Methanol has about 55% the energy/gallon as gasoline, so that is equivalent to selling gasoline at about $1.90/gallon.” The OPEN FUEL STANDARD BILL (S.835 & HR.1476) now before Congress puts America on a path toward FUEL CHOICE similar to what Brazil has accomplished. The establishment of specific percentage of new cars by target dates offering flex fuel compatibility does not mean any individual MUST RUN the car on anything other than gasoline (as so many people on this blog worry about), it just means you could if you want to use a fuel less expensive than gasoline or American transportation would be able to continue in the event of another oil embargo, Iran’s threatened closing of the Strait of Hormuz, hurricanes closing oil facilities in Louisiana or Texas as has repeatedly happened or an act of terror at the Saudi oil facilities or American pipelines. It’s time to END CONGRESS’S MANDATE AMERICAN TRANSPORTATION RUN ON 70% FOREIGN OIL. |
|
|
Replying to: oldfarmer50 (Oct 03, 2009 12:30 pm) The ethanol testers I see are less than $10-15. I got mine on ebay, but I think you might find them for sale at small airports too - as the FAA does not allow ethanol in aviation fuel. The main disadvantage of these test tube testers is that the opening is so narrow that its easy to spill gasoline all over your hands. You have to improvise a way to pour the gas into the tube without going over the fill line and spilling gas all over yourself. |
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Oct 03, 2009 7:06 pm) The tank says "Up to 10% ethanol with regular grade gas". Don't know exactly how to take that, but mileage is definitely UP with the Shell. The Shell cost $0.05 a gallon more than what we have been using for years, But the 8%-10% increase in mileage results in less cost to use the Shell. I've also heard of better mileage with Chevron and BP, but haven't tried them. Kip
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Hybrid Vehicles Ethanol - E85 FlexFuel The Inconvenient Truth About Ethanol
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
