1 acre worth can produce over 1k barrels of fuel a year
Better check your sources. 1000 barrels per acre would be 35,000 gallons per acre. With current technology you can get about 250 gallons per acre of switchgrass.
Assuming no increase in vehicle efficiency and a continued growth in driving, the U.S. is on a path to consume 290 billion gallons of gasoline in our cars and trucks by 2050. The report found increasing vehicle efficiencies to 50 mpg or better and instituting smart growth policies could reduce consumption to 108 billion gallons by 2050. "Our goal is mobility, not energy consumption," says Lend. "For a given unit of energy, two-thirds can be replaced by efficiency and one third by supply. We are kidding ourselves if we think we can supply our way out of this. We can make the biggest impacts fastest by impacting the efficiency equation."
The "Growing Energy" report projects conversion efficiencies, the number of gallons of ethanol produced per dry ton of biomass, to improve from 50 gallons per dry ton to 117 gallons per dry ton. One hundred seventeen gallons of ethanol per dry ton equates to 77 gallons of gas equivalent per dry ton (one gallon of ethanol contains 66% of the energy content of gasoline). The bulk of the increase is expected to come from R&D driven advances in biological processing.
"The key to producing enough ethanol is switchgrass," says Greene. Switchgrass shows great potential for improving yields, offers environmental benefits and can be grown in diverse areas across the country. Current average yields are five dry tons per acre.
Your ignoring the fact that about a 100 years of refiment have gone into gass engines and e85 has not seen anywhere near that amount of investment.
In 1826 Samuel Morey developed an engine that ran on ethanol and turpentine. Henry Ford's first engine ran on pure ethanol in 1896. It has been around a lot longer than gasoline. Ethanol has some serious problems and was dumped for the much safer gas and safer yet diesel.
First of all I see you didn't even bother to go check out the results of the tests like the one from the Department of Energy. Documented and proven which is why Xcelplus is the only one that can legally say it increases gas Milage. As far as warranty goes. The treatment doesn't void your warranty and as far as the conversion all you have to do is unplug the Flextek and fill it up with gas as it isn't a permanent conversion as it is simple to install and uninstall. As far as the gas milage goes your right you probably still lose but it wouldn't be that much.
The problem with "Snake Oil" is because Slick 50 (The formula now) and all the others for years where claiming things that they had no hard proof of. That is why the government sued and the only one to survive was Bishop's formula (Xcelplus now)because they had the tests to prove it. This is the only company that sells Engine treatments that I know of that actually lets you see the tests results.
According to Toyota it is not a simple fix for an engine to use ethanol.
quote;
Toyota, a market leader in gasoline-electric hybrid vehicles, has resisted the technology amid worries about the impact of highly corrosive ethanol on rubber seals in the engine, the Financial Times said
I guess my question is why would anyone want to do that? The parts of the country that have most of the cars do not have any place to buy E85. There is only one station in California that sells E85. On average it is about 85 cents higher than unleaded regular. When you take into consideration the 25-33% hit on mileage it is a no win proposition. As long as it takes about a barrel of oil to produce 1.21 barrels of ethanol the price is going to be unacceptable. There is of course all this talk of other crops like switchgrass. If you go deep you find that is way off in the future. There are no facilities to produce ethanol from biomass. It is hard to get smart money to get involved in a very shaky enterprise.
I think you need to recheck your sources or read up on mine .
But I love how in your article it talks about using municpal waste to make e85. That is great , even less farming land needed.
Really? Thats less than what an acre of corn can produce. Switchgrass isn't as great as it appears. thats because the article is based off false data points . LIke many other reports painting negative pictures of corn , this too is wrong. There are many independent tests to back up what I have writen and the benfits of corn.
In 1826 Samuel Morey developed an engine that ran on ethanol and turpentine. Henry Ford's first engine ran on pure ethanol in 1896. It has been around a lot longer than gasoline. Ethanol has some serious problems and was dumped for the much safer gas and safer yet diesel.
Yet it never had anywhere near the amount of money dump into it each year that gas engines and refinerys have had . Gas has had over a 100 years of being the dominate fuel for cars and as such has had the most money poored into getting the most out of it both in the cars and in the refinerys . Its naive to think that e85 is as efficent as its going to get . Because that is far from the truth.
I guess my question is why would anyone want to do that? The parts of the country that have most of the cars do not have any place to buy E85. There is only one station in California that sells E85. On average it is about 85 cents higher than unleaded regular. When you take into consideration the 25-33% hit on mileage it is a no win proposition. As long as it takes about a barrel of oil to produce 1.21 barrels of ethanol the price is going to be unacceptable. There is of course all this talk of other crops like switchgrass. If you go deep you find that is way off in the future. There are no facilities to produce ethanol from biomass. It is hard to get smart money to get involved in a very shaky enterprise. Wow every time someone posts I see numbers going up. 85 cents higher than unleaded ?
Wow , my sister just payed 4.10 cents for regular unleaded up by ithaca college in new york. It was the cheapest she found. Because where she is there are 4 gas stations and they are all price gouging . I highly doubt that one gas station that sells e85 is keeping the price true to form.
Gas keeps going up, you can count that one gas station in califonia (which i doubt your prices are accurate) . I'm hearing talk that by the middle of the summer gas may hit 90$ a barrel .
The best part is you keep putting out the hit on mileage and in your insane world believe that this is going to allways be the case . Once e85 is widely avalible the engines will be built to run on e85 as the primary fuel source and they will make the engine more efficent with it .
The price will also come down as they switch to better crops and have more refinerys up.
e85 doesn't have to be made from just corn , or just switch grass.
It can be made from all that and municpal waste , which if you haven't been living under a rock for the last 20 years , you would know that we have more than enough garbage to go around
Gagrice and snakeweasel you have a funny way of looking at the future . Your taking today and believing this is how it will be 10 years from now . However that is not how it works .
In 10 years the refining process of e85 will be improved upon , e85 will be at many pumps around the nation , many states will be using municpal waste and local crops to refine e85. The engines runing on these fuels will fun more efficently than current engines .
What wont happen in 10 years is that normal gas prices will fall , there also wont be any sizable finds of oil and the prices will increase as more countrys fight over whats left of the oil
LIstening to the two of you is like going on the exxon ride at epcot in florida . They talk about all the new solar , wind and other alternative fuels and then at the end they say , but hey you should keep using oil like no tommorow !
That is not the way this works and we are going to have to change over to something else very soon and since neither of you have given any alternatives perhaps you shouldn't knock down a solid idea
First of all I see you didn't even bother to go check out the results of the tests like the one from the Department of Energy.
This is true simply because I couldn't find anything about it on the Department of Energy website other than people promoting it on a message board. FWIW the only studies that I have seen that support the claim are posted on web pages whose addresses start with www.Xcelplus hardly an unbiased source. And when I searched for the study on the websites of the places that supposively did the study either I couldn't find any information on the study or the organization at all.
So in short the only places that I found that supported the claim was trying to sell it. So until I can verify these so called studies its snake oil.
As far as warranty goes.
Using E85 in an engine that is not designed for it will void your warranty.
The problem with "Snake Oil" is because Slick 50 (The formula now) and all the others for years where claiming things that they had no hard proof of.
Gee according to Xcelplus slick 50 is what Xcelplus is currently selling. Formulas the same just different names.
That is why the government sued and the only one to survive was Bishop's formula (Xcelplus now)because they had the tests to prove it.
I remember mix-i-go from the early 80's that claimed it increased mileage, it didn't do it. Yet even today they are promoting the claim that they improve gas mileage. As for Xcelplus having studies to prove it, when I see it from independent sources I will believe it. So far no independent sources.
Its all snake oil.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
There are many independent tests to back up what I have writen and the benfits of corn.
What about the independent tests that debunk the benefits of corn?
The engines runing on these fuels will fun more efficently than current engines.
Will they make engines that violate the laws of physics? A gallon of ethanol has much less energy than a gallon of gasoline. That being the case it would be impossible for the technology of an ethanol engine to be more efficient (MPG wise) than a gasoline engine (unless you just stop any future development of gasoline engines).
Your taking today and believing this is how it will be 10 years from now .
I for one am not, thats why I advocate that E85 and hybrids are only s minor temporary fix and other energy sources need to be developed. Its the ones that believe that this is how it will be 10 years, 20 years or more from now are looking at the less than efficient solutions and saying "thats the solution".
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
The best part is you keep putting out the hit on mileage and in your insane world believe that this is going to allways be the case . Once e85 is widely avalible the engines will be built to run on e85 as the primary fuel source and they will make the engine more efficent with it.
Being widely available will not raise the energy in ethanol. Just as gas has less energy than diesel. Those are physical facts that will not change. You act like this is new. Check out the data on Brazil. They went to ethanol in the 1980s. Then it all but died out. Today they are going back to it. If you read some of the media hype you would think that Brazil is using mostly Ethanol to fuel their cars. NOT True, they are using about 10% ethanol. They found their own sources of oil and are now independent of oil imports.
I would like to believe that there is some magic source of energy. I just see government tax shelters & subsidies for wealthy companies, exploiting the followers of everything that comes along. If you read your own articles you will find our best chance is to cut back on fuel usage.
You should try to find the stations in CA that sell E85. I did and IT happens to be in San Diego. I called them and was told the price of E85 was 85 cents above unleaded regular. You are not seeing the picture here. If oil is $90 per barrel it still takes a refined barrel of oil to produce 1.21 barrels of ethanol. Ethanol is now and will always be at least 25% less energy than gas. Not to mention that gas is at least 25% less energy than diesel. Now if in the future they can get as you say 3.5 barrels of ethanol from one barrel of oil used. There is enough gain to offset the loss of energy. Our big gripe in CA is the FACT that ethanol has to be brought by tanker trucks from the source in the midwest. We are not going to use the most valuable farm land in the USA to grow corn or switchgrass. Maybe algae ponds in the desert for biodiesel.
I agree with others that nuclear and solar to power electric vehicles is where the research money should be spent.
What about the independent tests that debunk the benefits of corn?
You can go back in these posts and see it for yourself , one universty debunked many of the results you and the others have posted as your proof because they use outdated data or worse case senarios
Will they make engines that violate the laws of physics? A gallon of ethanol has much less energy than a gallon of gasoline. That being the case it would be impossible for the technology of an ethanol engine to be more efficient (MPG wise) than a gasoline engine (unless you just stop any future development of gasoline engines). Why when they left teh ford model t behind and made cars in the 90s with high gas milleage did they bend the laws of physics ? or did they just develop better engines .
I for one am not, thats why I advocate that E85 and hybrids are only s minor temporary fix and other energy sources need to be developed. Its the ones that believe that this is how it will be 10 years, 20 years or more from now are looking at the less than efficient solutions and saying "thats the solution".
No one has ever said that any one thing is the soultion . However right now and for the next decade or two ethonal is the best solution we have . If we don't do something now your right in 20 years we will be in big trouble. But if we make the switch and work on getting the refinerys as efficent as possible and work on finding the best crop per gallon of fuel we can keep the problems at bay . So that in 10 years we are only fighting for a third of the oil we need today instead of more than we need today and If we can get what we need from canada then we wont have to invade countrys .
You also don't seem to understand that the large majority of our infastructer (sp?) will support e85 . Hydrogen would require a whole new set up that would cost untold billions and electric vechicals are just no where ready for prime time and that two would need a massive upgrade of our power delivery system .
Being widely available will not raise the energy in ethanol. Just as gas has less energy than diesel. Those are physical facts that will not change. You act like this is new. Check out the data on Brazil. They went to ethanol in the 1980s. Then it all but died out. Today they are going back to it. If you read some of the media hype you would think that Brazil is using mostly Ethanol to fuel their cars. NOT True, they are using about 10% ethanol. They found their own sources of oil and are now independent of oil imports. No the energy wont improve , however engines built with turbos and other devices will improve the mileage and your still ignoring that fact that milleage goes down 22-30% (which others claim its more like 10-20%) yet we get 353% increase from a barrel of oil when we convert it to ethonal using better crops like switchgrass
Yes brazil found thier own oil that is great , sadly we used most of our own oil , this counrty is rich in coal , however its very dirty and dangrous to harvest it . Esp with the recent miner's deaths .
You should try to find the stations in CA that sell E85. I did and IT happens to be in San Diego. I called them and was told the price of E85 was 85 cents above unleaded regular.
That is great , that is one station. As I've said there are already stations selling gas for over 4$ and that is regular . Just because one of the only gas stations in californa are selling e85 for an outragous price doesn't mean that is what we expect it to be. My friend in idaho just filled up for 2.25 with e85 vs 3.15 for unleaded and gas is only going up .
If oil is $90 per barrel it still takes a refined barrel of oil to produce 1.21 barrels of ethanol No one barrel of oil can produce up to 3.43 barrels of ethanol .
Once again you read about corn. That is right now , that is not next year and going foward .
You don't seem to understand that going foward there will be more refinerys making ethanol , they will be using higher yield crops that give us more ethanol per gallon.
Want to know why corn is so talked about ? Go to a 7-11 buy a coke , drink it ... does it taste like corn ? Well it should considering the amount of corn in it .
We have so much corn we don't know what to di with it .
Things like switch grass can not only be used for fuel but a portion of it can be used for animal feed. That way farmers get two products to sell from one crop.
Our big gripe in CA is the FACT that ethanol has to be brought by tanker trucks from the source in the midwest. We are not going to use the most valuable farm land in the USA to grow corn or switchgrass.
Once again you have not read about switchgrass from your horrible points here.
Switch grass can be grown almost anywhere and unlike corn and other crops it actually replenishes the soil its grown on. It traps in co2 (or is it cod2 ) and stores it in the ground making the ground more fertile . Every state should be able to grow it with the expection of perhaps texas .
Not only that but switchgrass only needs to be planeted once every 10+ years and doesn't require the heavy fertilizer that corn needs . You save alot of money and energy with switchgrass over corn aside from being able to produce more energy with it .
Then you have to figure they will start to engineer switch grass to grow better and bigger as they've done with almost every other crop.
I agree with others that nuclear and solar to power electric vehicles is where the research money should be spent
Except that solves nothing.
a) nuclear power is finite too and is way to dangrous to be used in cars . So we would need to generate it and send it in the form of electricty to a charging station , however the infastructer in the united states wont handle that power .
b) solar isn't a dependable resource , it can be stormy , overcast or night out and that source is cut out .
c) electric cars have all of the problems above and are still not ideal for long drives
Even if any of these ideas are ready for prime time in the next 10 or so years it will still take another 10-20 years to be able to use them.
We can start converting to ethanol now and have every new car running on it in the next few years .
That way as crude oil prices skyrocket and there is less to go around we can stem that with increased power yields from e85.
You can go back in these posts and see it for yourself ,
I can also go back over all the available data and draw the conclusion that ethanol from corn will never work. Its really simple math once you know all the facts. No worse case senerios there just plain facts. Ethanol from corn cannot work on any large scale.
Why when they left teh ford model t behind and made cars in the 90s with high gas milleage did they bend the laws of physics ?
And that has nothing to do with what I said. Fact is a gallon of ethanol has less energy than a gallon of gas. That means that an engine running E85 will always get 20-35% less mileage than that same engine running on gasoline. So you will not have an engine that gets better mileage with ethonal than with gas.
However right now and for the next decade or two ethanol is the best solution we have .
It is not a solution, it might be part of a temporary fix but it is unworkable on any large scale.
You also don't seem to understand that the large majority of our infastructer (sp?) will support e85 .
The only part of the current infrastructure that will support E85 is the end where fuel is sold. In other words the only thing that we can currently use is the gas stations. The rest has issues with ethanol.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Gee according to Xcelplus slick 50 is what Xcelplus is currently selling. Formulas the same just different names. According to Xcelplus the formula Slick 50 has now is different then the original which was pulled from slock50 by the inventor John Bishop in the early 80s. Then Slick 50 changed the formula without letting the public know which is why the got sued by the government and lost. Every tests result is available on the Xcelplus website and believe me Xcelplus has been in business for over 10 years so your telling me they are commiting Fraud by putting the official test results on the web page. Gimme a break.
I think it would be pretty risky for a profitable company thats been around to qoute tests from names like the Depart. of Energy, U.S. Army, Consumer Reports, Nasa. The problem is a lot of these tests were done years ago before the internet boom so no wonder why they can't be found under Internet "Searches" I would think if they where lying the would have been shut down already. Boy you give people something that will help save money and improve the enviroment in which we live and without any research the answer is " No way, can't be."
I can also go back over all the available data and draw the conclusion that ethanol from corn will never work. Its really simple math once you know all the facts. No worse case senerios there just plain facts. Ethanol from corn cannot work on any large scale.
Once again , who is talking corn ? Corn is being used right now because of the large surplus of corn this country has .
DO you even listen ? Or are you in your own world ? Its like talking to a brickwall , we all agree that corn isn't the best solution . Yet your the only one who keeps brining it up as the only solution
And that has nothing to do with what I said. Fact is a gallon of ethanol has less energy than a gallon of gas. That means that an engine running E85 will always get 20-35% less mileage than that same engine running on gasoline. So you will not have an engine that gets better mileage with ethonal than with gas.
However when you have 3 times the amount of ethanol than gas from the same resources ethanol will be cheaper . You can already get ethanol for 50-60 cents less in the corn belt than regular unleaded and prices are still inching up on regular gas .
It is not a solution, it might be part of a temporary fix but it is unworkable on any large scale.
and neither is solar or electrical .
Also its very workable on a large scale , you just have very limited thinking .
The only part of the current infrastructure that will support E85 is the end where fuel is sold. In other words the only thing that we can currently use is the gas stations. The rest has issues with ethanol.
the delivery system of trucks work just fine . That is how we get our gas in jersey , its refined by exit 10/11 on the turnpike and then is trucked to the stations . Has worked fine here for along time . When we get e85 I'm sure it will be refined in jersey too and shipped over the state using trucks .
Californa can do the same thing .
Once again you still haven't provied any solutions to the energy problem , not permit nor stop gap . So what do you offer besides us staying with gas and making our problems greater ?
According to Xcelplus the formula Slick 50 has now is different then the original
According to the makers of slick 50 its the same formula. My guess is that since everyone and their brother knows slick 50 isn't what it claimed to be xcelplus needs to say something like that.
Xcelplus has been in business for over 10 years so your telling me they are commiting Fraud by putting the official test results on the web page. Gimme a break.
Hey mix-i-go doesn't work yet they have been in business for over 20 years are still saying that it does work. Go figure. Its all snake oil.
Hey how about a link to a test that doesn't start with www.xcelplus.com ?
I think it would be pretty risky for a profitable company thats been around to qoute tests from names like the Depart. of Energy,
Yet the Department of Energy has no such information on their website.
U.S. Army,
Couldn't find an U.S. Army report on their site either.
Consumer Reports
Ditto
Nasa
Again no mention on their website.
Can you give a link that starts with www.nasa.gov or www.doe.gov or www.army.mil that has these test resuts?
You see I cannot find a test report that originates from those who supposively did the tests. All the "test reports" are on xcelplus' website. I cannot find anything outside of people selling the product that supports the claims.
Once I can go to the Department of Energy and get that report I will start to believe it. But that cannot be done.
Boy you give people something that will help save money and improve the enviroment in which we live and without any research the answer is " No way, can't be."
No its that everything that has come down the pike saying the same thing has been junk. Its pretty much been there, done that, Got the T-shirt. Before i am going to spend my hard earned money into something can has the potential to damage my engine I want proof (independent proof) that its safe and works. Going to the website of the company trying to sell it to me for that proof is a joke.
FWIW I know people who have used it, they say save your money it doesn't work
Take your snakeoil someplace else.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
You are. Don't you read what you write? here it is from post # 260 "There are many independent tests to back up what I have writen and the benfits of corn." If you're not talking about corn please don't talk about it.
You can already get ethanol for 50-60 cents less in the corn belt than regular unleaded
Even at 50-60 cents a gallon less ethanol is more expensive to use on a per mile basis. FWIW E-85 is about 30-40 cents a gallon cheaper which means you are wasting money using it.
and neither is solar or electrical .
Currently no but who knows what future technology will provide with solar and electric, or other alternatives. But this I know no amount of technology can squeeze any more energy into a gallon of ethanol.
the delivery system of trucks work just fine . That is how we get our gas in jersey
No you get your gas in Jersey from refineries very far away which ship it to distribution points (thats whats at exit 10/11 not a refinery) via a pipeline where it is trucked a very short distance to the station. You cannot put ethanol through a pipeline. It must be trucked from the refinery. Not to mention that its far more dangerous to transport ethanol.
Once again you still haven't provied any solutions to the energy problem , not permit nor stop gap .
Well first off its not my job to come up with how to solve our energy problem. But I can research what people are suggesting. That being said I have said that we need to be conserving more and exploring more workable energy alternatives such as electrical and hydrogen as well as search for others. Oh wait since you don't read your own posts why do I think you read mine.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
In Michigan E85 is 2.39, regular is 2.89, with 50 cents cheeper i.e 20% it could be a wash, since Ethanol gives 30% less fuel economy and 10 %more horse power. But if more of us use Ethanol it could reduce gasoline prices workwide. Ethanol also helps economy - Generates more jobs reduces imported Oil coming from Iran, Iraq and Saudi, who reliable is the source ? Ethanol also helps reduce trade imbalance, i.e dollar can appreciate more, if you take a future vacation overseas you get more for your dollar. trade imbalance also eliminates local jobs, and raises deficits. So the Ethanol is not just a substitute but its a a movement
Corn is being used right now because of the large surplus of corn this country has.
I believe your sources are wrong again. This is 3 hours ago on AP wire. You can stick with the "Pie in the Sky" solution. I am not driving around in a vehicle filled with highly volatile Ethanol. There is a better chance that they will come up with a biodiesel solution long before they get switchgrass fermented. Biodiesel has at least twice the energy of ethanol. That means you need 1/2 as much to go a mile in a current vehicle.
Oil companies, retailers and terminals plan to switch to the blend with ethanol _ an additive made largely from corn that raises the oxygen level of gas and reduces pollution _ by May.
However, the corn is in short supply, and the tanks used to store the new blend must first be cleaned out to be free of water and have new filters installed. The blend also cannot be shipped by pipeline, and foreign blends carry a costly tax that makes transportation costs spike.
"The lack of ethanol is one of the problems, and geopolitical unrest is another," said Pam Maiolo, a spokeswoman for AAA New Jersey.
Interesting that your friend was able to get E85 for $2.25 when the terminal price for Ethanol is about $2.60 per gallon. That is without any tax added.
You are. Don't you read what you write? here it is from post # 260 "There are many independent tests to back up what I have writen and the benfits of corn." If you're not talking about corn please don't talk about it. I've said from the start that corn is only for the short term with switch grass and other high yield crops taking over as e85 catches on. As i've said (now the third time) corn is being used because of the huge amount of corn we aren't doing anything with. Esp now that we find out that the corn syurp used in sodas and other products is a cuase of obsiety we are going to have even more left over corn
Even at 50-60 cents a gallon less ethanol is more expensive to use on a per mile basis. FWIW E-85 is about 30-40 cents a gallon cheaper which means you are wasting money using it. I'm wasting money using anything . Btw right now it may be 50-60 cents less but gas is still climbing and will continue to climb.
No you get your gas in Jersey from refineries very far away which ship it to distribution points (thats whats at exit 10/11 not a refinery) via a pipeline where it is trucked a very short distance to the station. You cannot put ethanol through a pipeline. It must be trucked from the refinery. Not to mention that its far more dangerous to transport ethanol Actually we do have refinerys . ITs why gas here is normaly lower than other parts of the country. We have and allways will be at the lower end of the pricing spectrum (I can still get gas for 2.20 if i drive down by exit 10/11 on the turnpike )
Secondly while ethanol is dangrous to transport so is gas . Anything flamable and toxic is dangrous . While ethanol is more violtal than gas , there can still be modifications done to all existing infastructers to be used.
This is not true with hydrogen and electrical delivery systems no matter how much we want that to happen.
Well first off its not my job to come up with how to solve our energy problem. But I can research what people are suggesting. That being said I have said that we need to be conserving more and exploring more workable energy alternatives such as electrical and hydrogen as well as search for others. Oh wait since you don't read your own posts why do I think you read mine.
Then if you've bothered to read anything posted here you will see that e85 allows us to conserve gas while looking at future tech .
Its obvious that you don't read anything I've writen as you would have seen the amount of times I've said that corn is only temporay and is only being used because of its over farming currently
Let me preface this by saying ethanol may not be our long term solution, but it is at least worth a shot. I think we need to take a look at the real world economics at work here, and talk about Joe Average Consumer. Everyone that has posted here has made excellent points. That being said: Mr JAC knows that a few years ago he was paying around 1.50 gal gas. Here in NY I am sure the price will go up to 3.50 before long, and these numbers are for illustrative purposes. At 1.50 my 20gal SUV,car, jeep, whatever you drive costs $30 per week. At 3.50 its $70. And lets say average fill up for most people is once a week. A $160/mo difference eating into JAC's budget. The price of crude has appreciated at a rate far greater than JAC's wage increases over the last few years. Wages, for the most part are stagnant compared to everything else. Granted, right now e85 may not be all that price competitive with gas, but producers have to know with the decrease in mpg with e85 it will ultimately have to become cheaper to wean people off of gas and make the switch. No one will pay 2.50 or 2.85 for e85 when you can get better mileage for 3.00 with gas. So, to be economically viable, it needs to be mass produced to the point where JAC says "Hey, this is worth a shot." What is that price point? Who knows, I would say $1 cheaper is a starting point. Anything more than $1 and I think it will really catch. Now how do we get there? Gov't/corporate subsidies? JAC most likely doesn't care about the 1 or 1.50 gal subsidy. All he cares about is that he is paying much less than 3.0 gal/gas. Per my example above, if e85 was 1.50 per gal (hypothetical)JAC is back paying $30/week for fill up. Even with the decreased mileage, lets say he has to fill 6 times a month and not 4. Well, thats a savings of $100.00. Probably well worth it I would say. And I can think of lots of gov't subsidies on the backs of the American taxpayer with no return on investment. Namely welfare and Social security disability and the people milking that who can work, but choose not to. Not to say there aren't people who truly need it, but we all know there are people scamming the system just eating our tax dollars and not being productive members of society. Again, no return on investment there. Sorry for the long post, but we can't be afraid of failure here. There is no stopping these oil traders and companies from continuing to jack up these oil prices. The only incentive is to make money and they do this by preying off the fears of global unrest and hurricanes and the bees not making honey. Any excuse now to raise prices. We need to take a chance on something and not just sitting around debating the viability. People will not continue to pay for gas if it goes to 4,5,6 dollars a gallon if there is a cheaper alternative.
Esp now that we find out that the corn syurp used in sodas and other products is a cuase of obsiety we are going to have even more left over corn
Where do you think all that corn syrup being fed to our children comes from. It is a byproduct of ETHANOL!!!!
Corn syrup: An expanding market and the high cost of fructose corn syrup encouraged expansion of wet mill plants that produce the syrup as a by-product of the ethanol production process
From the DOE.gov site posted earlier.
while ethanol is dangrous to transport so is gas
Gas has a much higher ignition temperature than ethanol. Gas and diesel are fine going through pipelines. How many more diesel burning trucks will have to be added to get the E85 to the areas that are not producing ethanol?
I give up you want to exchange one big corporation scam for a different one. I have personally written my Senators and Congressmen to let them know how displeased I am with the latest boondoggle "ETHANOL".
Welcome to the forum. There is a 51 cent subsidy going to the ethanol producers. It has been there since about 1978. I agree that to get people interested in using ethanol it will have to be about 25% cheaper than unleaded. For me it would have to be about 1/2 the price of diesel. I don't see how that can happen. It takes farm equipment that runs on diesel to grow the crop to make the ethanol. As the price of diesel goes up, so will the price of corn or whatever is used in the process. I believe it is tied to oil so closely that it will not be viable until they do come up with something like switchgrass. According to those in the Know it is at least 10 years off. How many times have we heard that about hydrogen? We are just throwing good money after bad.
I know nothing of the commodities market so I can only speculate, but I would think that a bushel of corn is worth more for export than ethanol production. Usually at any given time in the ports of Seattle and Tacoma there is a ship at the grain dock and one or two at anchor waiting to load. Almost always when we assist these ships out there is evidence of corn being loaded in several hatches of these ships. Corn is a huge export item.
I believe ethanol should be an option to help reduce our dependence on oil imports, but until and if transportation issues can be resolved, it might be best used as a regional solution rather than a national solution. I also believe ethanol should be priced 25% lower than gas to reflect it’s lower energy output or you are not going to get the public to go along. On the other hand, if you asked 1000 people about ethanol, most would not have a clue that it provides 25% less energy than gas.
Any subsidy that artificially lowers the price of ethanol will only serve to increase consumption. I am not a supporter of this ethanol approach but if it is expanded the correct way to make it cost competitive is to increase the price of gasoline. Because this would also encourage conservation. This would be done through a significant gas tax. This money could be used to provide economic stimulus, e.g. lower income taxes, to offset the negative economic impact of higher fuel costs. My guess is that if an additional $1.00 per gallon tax was immediately levied it wouldn't take too long for the price of gas to fall close to this amount. This would be a result of reduced consumption by the biggest consumer in the world. So gas might still cost around $3/gallon but $1 less of that would be going to the oil exporting countries. In essence it would represent a tax on them. This reduction in oil prices would also benefit all the other world economies that import oil.
BTW, Joe Average Consumer maybe should be driving something other than a 15 mpg SUV. I just don't have a lot of sympathy when I listen to these people complain about a somewhat self imposed hardship.
I've said from the start that corn is only for the short term with switch grass and other high yield crops taking over as e85 catches on.
Other than switchgrass (which may not yield as much per acre as corn from my readings) what other workable high yield crops are there?
Then if you've bothered to read anything posted here you will see that e85 allows us to conserve gas while looking at future tech .
And if you bothered to read anything I have said you would have seen that I have said it is a temporary solution. But only temporary, not on a large scale and only part of the temporary solution
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Ethanol also helps reduce trade imbalance, You can read the text of President Bush state of the union speech, he would like 75 % of our oil imports be substituted with alternate fuel, specialy Ethanol grown from wood chips, grass, corn, Sugar cane. The US spent almost exactly as much on imports from China - 243.46b - as on imports of petroleum -- $243.18b (using the raw data). But oil imports did grow just a bit faster than imports from China. US imports from China increased by 23.8% in 2005. Reducing Imports (oil) helps trade Imbalance Trade imbalance
Oil and trade imbalance reduces imported Oil coming from Iran, Iraq and Saudi, who reliable is the source ? Top suppliers of US Crude Oil Top suppliers of US Crude Oil Saudi Arabia , Iraq, Kuwait are in the top ten, how many lives have we lost fighting wars in that part of the world for Oil, how many lost sons, brothers, fathers and daughters ?
Actually, the diesel farming equipment used to farm corn and other products that produce ethanol can be run on such alternative fuels as soybean oil, thus solving the dilemna of using oil to sav oil.
To solve the dilema, DaimlerChrysler is funding a project to grow diesel from Jatropa plant native to desert climate Diesel is now actualy grown from plants.
"My guess is that if an additional $1.00 per gallon tax was immediately levied it wouldn't take too long for the price of gas to fall close to this amount. "
You are correct! European nations have done just that and more. About $2/gallon in gas tax subsidizes all the social services those countries provide while minimizing the money going to Mid-Eastern nations bent on destroying Western civilization. Americans have been living in the past (Happy Daze) for too long. We need to get real about energy conservation.
A lot of people with E85 (mostly new GM) vehicles may try E85 and not realize that Ethanol holds significantly less usable energy than gasoline resulting in poor miles per gallon.
I found a great resource that explains the difference at: Ethanol Manual
One point no one seems to realize. Rather than using taxes to spur conservation this Administration would rather give windfall profits to big oil companies. The switch to Ethanol from MTBE should have LOWERED the price of gasoline since refineries can now buy plentiful, cheaper, low grade crude, refine it less, add fewer if any additives, and push up the octane to acceptable levels by mixing in Ethanol. Production costs will drop about 30% not counting any price difference in the 10-20% Ethanol blended with cheap gasoline that most cars will be using this year (no modification required).
Recent price increases in oil obscure the lack of any discount passed along to consumers with this significant product change. Expect Exxon to earn $50B plus this year, even if they keep the same price margins relative to the price of light sweet crude.
Much of the current supply of Ethanol from our 97 current Ethanol plants will be used by the 149 US refineries switching from MTBE to enhance octane. With few cars currently E85 capable and after-market modification expensive, I don't see any large scale demand for this poor substitute for gasoline that would have to sell at $2 to compare well with $3 gasoline or a 90/10 gas/ethanol blend which performs about as well as pure gasoline.
It's going to take more Ethanol, than 100 % gas to yield the same efficiency. I've read alot about this area and in order for us to convert to Ethanol, the price of this alternative fuel source is going to have to drop significantly to justify using it over gas. Hopefully we can get the prices down to a point where Ethanol can off set the fuel effciency problem.
Not unless oil companies can stop it. E85 will decline Americas Consumption on oil. Witch means less money towards gas and that would mean Oil Company would lose lots of money. I'm sure the oil companies would not like that to happen. President Bush says he for Alternative fuel like Ethanol but I think its all talk like all the presidents before him. :mad:
I think that oil companies have unfairly become the scapegoat for our high gas prices. Granted they are making record high profits but they have little control over this because they have little control over the price of oil. They are in the enviable position of being able to sell 100% of their product at the price that the market sets. The price is set by the commodity markets, which are being driven by political unrest and growing oil consumption. When politicians take shots at the oil companies it is nothing but grandstanding for their constituents. Its a lot easier to point your finger at the evil oil companies than to lay blame on the millions of people using 3 ton, 15 mpg SUVs/trucks as their daily driver. Then again some of these people prefer to lay blame on the evil auto manufacturers for not making more fuel efficient cars. Just as long as we don't have to blame ourselves.
"Its a lot easier to point your finger at the evil oil companies than to lay blame on the millions of people using 3 ton, 15 mpg SUVs/trucks as their daily driver. Then again some of these people prefer to lay blame on the evil auto manufacturers for not making more fuel efficient cars. Just as long as we don't have to blame ourselves."
The switch to Ethanol from MTBE should have LOWERED the price of gasoline
Actually it would be the opposite since there is a shortage of ethanol to mix with the gas. This would mean a shortage of gas available for sale which in turn will drive up prices.
or a 90/10 gas/ethanol blend which performs about as well as pure gasoline.
The average engine should get about 5% less mileage with the 90/10 blend.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
President Bush says he for Alternative fuel like Ethanol but I think its all talk like all the presidents before him.
He did push it but his efforts were stopped by the Democrats (namely Richard Dirbin from IL, but I wont tell you the name many people here use for him).
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Its a lot easier to point your finger at the evil oil companies than to lay blame on the millions of people using 3 ton, 15 mpg SUVs/trucks as their daily driver. Then again some of these people prefer to lay blame on the evil auto manufacturers for not making more fuel efficient cars. Just as long as we don't have to blame ourselves.
And the Lords people said "AMEN".
Yep is so easy to blame the big bad oil companies when we burn it as fast as it can be pumped out. Tell me how much oil would we save if just half the SUV drivers dropped their 15 MPG SUV's and got a 25 MPG sedan?
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Its a lot easier to point your finger at the evil oil companies than to lay blame on the millions of people using 3 ton, 15 mpg SUVs/trucks as their daily driver.
The only we'll solve THAT problem is to start imposing excise taxes based on vehicle size and engine displacement like they do in Europe and Japan. This will guarantee that people will be buying vehicles in the Ford Focus/Honda Civic/Toyota Corolla/Hyundai Elantra class in huge numbers in no time flat.
I am going to be in the market for a Used GM pick up. I would like for it to be E85 capable. By looking at E85 web sites, it looks like the Chevy Silverado starts to be E85 capable in '02, but only on selected vehicles where the 8th digit in the VIN # is a 'Z'. I looked on a few different used vehicle web sites & did not find any 8th digit Z's. I did find 11th digit Z's & 8th digit X's & V's etc. Any body know how many E85 capable trucks GM made? - that is how common were they? any other info would be helpful... Thanks
Not sure if that will solve that problem. Larger cars with bigger engines already cost more than the Ford Focus/Honda Civic/Toyota Corolla/Hyundai Elantra class yet people still buy them. It would put a small dent in their sales but nothing to large as the buyers are already used to paying more.
Now if they start paying $100+ a week for gas then things might change.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
I think you'll make better sense of this if you only try in a limited way to understand that some people need a bit more capability out of at least one of their probable two vehicles than one of those dinky cars can provide. But that avenue of thought was largely argued in another old topic about why you hate SUVs.
I'd be completely in agreement with you if you agreed to provide me (on your dime, mind you) a third vehicle from that class of small cars just to use for routine commutes. Because I can't afford to stable three cars here, and the one of the two I've already got that is relatively efficient still has to carry four people and their groceries regularly, while the other needs to be able to tow and haul. I worked out the cost of simply buying a really frugal and cheap econobox, and found that it will take me far longer to save the extra expended cash (even with exhorbitant $5+ / gallon gas prices) than just keeping my 15-20 mpg pickup, driving it, and investing the extra dollars not spent on the car in gas.
This ramble has been brought to you by the campaign to stuff the anti-SUV nonsense and keep it to ethanol good or bad discussion.
I don't really see that as the best solution. It might create an incentive to buy a more efficient car but that's where it ends. It does nothing to encourage people to drive less, carpool, use public transit, consolidate their trips, etc... As far as I'm concerned the person that drives a Corolla 30,000 miles a year is just as big a problem as the person who drives a Hummer 10,000 miles a year. The simplest and most effective tool is to significantly raise gas taxes. That addresses the problem from every angle. People have an incentive to buy more efficient cars, drive less, keep their cars well maintained. Manufacturers have an incentive to increase fuel efficiency because it will be what the consumer wants. Alternative fuel/energy solutions will immediately become more viable and R&D in these areas should increase accordingly.
This could be done today but our politicians are gutless when it comes to making the hard choices. The American public is unwilling to sacrifice in the present for long term future gains. They delude themselves that there is always some magical legislation that can painlessly solve all problems. I can accept that mentality from the average citizens but our leaders should know better. They need to realize that doing what is right is more important than the opinion polls. They need to act in American's best interests even if we are too stupid to realize it's for our own good.
I do understand that there are people who truly need the utility that an SUV has. So there is no need to be testy in your response.
That being said unless you will be doing some serious off roading then you don't need an SUV. Mini Vans offer more seating and better gas mileage than a SUV at a lower cost.
But that avenue of thought was largely argued in another old topic about why you hate SUVs.
I don't hate SUV's just can't see the need of one if it never leaves the pavement. Also you have to admit that a sizable number of them are "status" symbols and that they can easily replaced with a sedan. So until people stop buying gas guzzler when they are not needed we will continue to have gas issues like we are currently facing.
I'd be completely in agreement with you if you agreed to provide me
Again not everyone who has an SUV needs the utility of an SUV. Going just on those that I know have SUV's that a majority of them really don't need one. I understand that there are people who actually need them, but thats not the case for a sizable number of them.
Again as long as people keep buying gas guzzlers we will continue to see these gas problems.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
I apologize for being so testy, but the anti-SUV arguments get under my skin. Too many people making the assumption that most people that own them don't use or need them. In my own opinion, unless you live their life, you're not qualified to judge their need (nor am I).
As far as the minivan's capabilities go- my other vehicle is a minivan. And that was a change from the midsized sedan we had before. Primarily because neither of our vehicles could carry more than 5 people (Girl Scouts, basketball team, daughter's friends, etc.).
But in all actuality, if I didn't carry trash routinely and general home construction materials (plywood, for example) once in a while, an SUV would be better for my needs than my truck is. That's because there isn't a minivan on the market that can tow to my requirements, but there are SUVs that can, while still doing everything else nearly as well as the vans can.
Comments
Better check your sources. 1000 barrels per acre would be 35,000 gallons per acre. With current technology you can get about 250 gallons per acre of switchgrass.
Assuming no increase in vehicle efficiency and a continued growth in driving, the U.S. is on a path to consume 290 billion gallons of gasoline in our cars and trucks by 2050. The report found increasing vehicle efficiencies to 50 mpg or better and instituting smart growth policies could reduce consumption to 108 billion gallons by 2050. "Our goal is mobility, not energy consumption," says Lend. "For a given unit of energy, two-thirds can be replaced by efficiency and one third by supply. We are kidding ourselves if we think we can supply our way out of this. We can make the biggest impacts fastest by impacting the efficiency equation."
The "Growing Energy" report projects conversion efficiencies, the number of gallons of ethanol produced per dry ton of biomass, to improve from 50 gallons per dry ton to 117 gallons per dry ton. One hundred seventeen gallons of ethanol per dry ton equates to 77 gallons of gas equivalent per dry ton (one gallon of ethanol contains 66% of the energy content of gasoline). The bulk of the increase is expected to come from R&D driven advances in biological processing.
"The key to producing enough ethanol is switchgrass," says Greene. Switchgrass shows great potential for improving yields, offers environmental benefits and can be grown in diverse areas across the country. Current average yields are five dry tons per acre.
switchgrass
Really? Thats less than what an acre of corn can produce. Switchgrass isn't as great as it appears.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
In 1826 Samuel Morey developed an engine that ran on ethanol and turpentine. Henry Ford's first engine ran on pure ethanol in 1896. It has been around a lot longer than gasoline. Ethanol has some serious problems and was dumped for the much safer gas and safer yet diesel.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/kids/history/timelines/ethanol.html
The problem with "Snake Oil" is because Slick 50 (The formula now) and all the others for years where claiming things that they had no hard proof of. That is why the government sued and the only one to survive was Bishop's formula (Xcelplus now)because they had the tests to prove it. This is the only company that sells Engine treatments that I know of that actually lets you see the tests results.
quote;
Toyota, a market leader in gasoline-electric hybrid vehicles, has resisted the technology amid worries about the impact of highly corrosive ethanol on rubber seals in the engine, the Financial Times said
I guess my question is why would anyone want to do that? The parts of the country that have most of the cars do not have any place to buy E85. There is only one station in California that sells E85. On average it is about 85 cents higher than unleaded regular. When you take into consideration the 25-33% hit on mileage it is a no win proposition. As long as it takes about a barrel of oil to produce 1.21 barrels of ethanol the price is going to be unacceptable. There is of course all this talk of other crops like switchgrass. If you go deep you find that is way off in the future. There are no facilities to produce ethanol from biomass. It is hard to get smart money to get involved in a very shaky enterprise.
But I love how in your article it talks about using municpal waste to make e85. That is great , even less farming land needed.
Really? Thats less than what an acre of corn can produce. Switchgrass isn't as great as it appears. thats because the article is based off false data points . LIke many other reports painting negative pictures of corn , this too is wrong. There are many independent tests to back up what I have writen and the benfits of corn.
In 1826 Samuel Morey developed an engine that ran on ethanol and turpentine. Henry Ford's first engine ran on pure ethanol in 1896. It has been around a lot longer than gasoline. Ethanol has some serious problems and was dumped for the much safer gas and safer yet diesel.
Yet it never had anywhere near the amount of money dump into it each year that gas engines and refinerys have had . Gas has had over a 100 years of being the dominate fuel for cars and as such has had the most money poored into getting the most out of it both in the cars and in the refinerys . Its naive to think that e85 is as efficent as its going to get . Because that is far from the truth.
I guess my question is why would anyone want to do that? The parts of the country that have most of the cars do not have any place to buy E85. There is only one station in California that sells E85. On average it is about 85 cents higher than unleaded regular. When you take into consideration the 25-33% hit on mileage it is a no win proposition. As long as it takes about a barrel of oil to produce 1.21 barrels of ethanol the price is going to be unacceptable. There is of course all this talk of other crops like switchgrass. If you go deep you find that is way off in the future. There are no facilities to produce ethanol from biomass. It is hard to get smart money to get involved in a very shaky enterprise.
Wow every time someone posts I see numbers going up. 85 cents higher than unleaded ?
Wow , my sister just payed 4.10 cents for regular unleaded up by ithaca college in new york. It was the cheapest she found. Because where she is there are 4 gas stations and they are all price gouging . I highly doubt that one gas station that sells e85 is keeping the price true to form.
Gas keeps going up, you can count that one gas station in califonia (which i doubt your prices are accurate) . I'm hearing talk that by the middle of the summer gas may hit 90$ a barrel .
The best part is you keep putting out the hit on mileage and in your insane world believe that this is going to allways be the case . Once e85 is widely avalible the engines will be built to run on e85 as the primary fuel source and they will make the engine more efficent with it .
The price will also come down as they switch to better crops and have more refinerys up.
e85 doesn't have to be made from just corn , or just switch grass.
It can be made from all that and municpal waste , which if you haven't been living under a rock for the last 20 years , you would know that we have more than enough garbage to go around
Gagrice and snakeweasel you have a funny way of looking at the future . Your taking today and believing this is how it will be 10 years from now . However that is not how it works .
In 10 years the refining process of e85 will be improved upon , e85 will be at many pumps around the nation , many states will be using municpal waste and local crops to refine e85. The engines runing on these fuels will fun more efficently than current engines .
What wont happen in 10 years is that normal gas prices will fall , there also wont be any sizable finds of oil and the prices will increase as more countrys fight over whats left of the oil
LIstening to the two of you is like going on the exxon ride at epcot in florida . They talk about all the new solar , wind and other alternative fuels and then at the end they say , but hey you should keep using oil like no tommorow !
That is not the way this works and we are going to have to change over to something else very soon and since neither of you have given any alternatives perhaps you shouldn't knock down a solid idea
This is true simply because I couldn't find anything about it on the Department of Energy website other than people promoting it on a message board. FWIW the only studies that I have seen that support the claim are posted on web pages whose addresses start with www.Xcelplus hardly an unbiased source. And when I searched for the study on the websites of the places that supposively did the study either I couldn't find any information on the study or the organization at all.
So in short the only places that I found that supported the claim was trying to sell it. So until I can verify these so called studies its snake oil.
As far as warranty goes.
Using E85 in an engine that is not designed for it will void your warranty.
The problem with "Snake Oil" is because Slick 50 (The formula now) and all the others for years where claiming things that they had no hard proof of.
Gee according to Xcelplus slick 50 is what Xcelplus is currently selling. Formulas the same just different names.
That is why the government sued and the only one to survive was Bishop's formula (Xcelplus now)because they had the tests to prove it.
I remember mix-i-go from the early 80's that claimed it increased mileage, it didn't do it. Yet even today they are promoting the claim that they improve gas mileage. As for Xcelplus having studies to prove it, when I see it from independent sources I will believe it. So far no independent sources.
Its all snake oil.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
What about the independent tests that debunk the benefits of corn?
The engines runing on these fuels will fun more efficently than current engines.
Will they make engines that violate the laws of physics? A gallon of ethanol has much less energy than a gallon of gasoline. That being the case it would be impossible for the technology of an ethanol engine to be more efficient (MPG wise) than a gasoline engine (unless you just stop any future development of gasoline engines).
Your taking today and believing this is how it will be 10 years from now .
I for one am not, thats why I advocate that E85 and hybrids are only s minor temporary fix and other energy sources need to be developed. Its the ones that believe that this is how it will be 10 years, 20 years or more from now are looking at the less than efficient solutions and saying "thats the solution".
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Being widely available will not raise the energy in ethanol. Just as gas has less energy than diesel. Those are physical facts that will not change. You act like this is new. Check out the data on Brazil. They went to ethanol in the 1980s. Then it all but died out. Today they are going back to it. If you read some of the media hype you would think that Brazil is using mostly Ethanol to fuel their cars. NOT True, they are using about 10% ethanol. They found their own sources of oil and are now independent of oil imports.
I would like to believe that there is some magic source of energy. I just see government tax shelters & subsidies for wealthy companies, exploiting the followers of everything that comes along. If you read your own articles you will find our best chance is to cut back on fuel usage.
You should try to find the stations in CA that sell E85. I did and IT happens to be in San Diego. I called them and was told the price of E85 was 85 cents above unleaded regular. You are not seeing the picture here. If oil is $90 per barrel it still takes a refined barrel of oil to produce 1.21 barrels of ethanol. Ethanol is now and will always be at least 25% less energy than gas. Not to mention that gas is at least 25% less energy than diesel. Now if in the future they can get as you say 3.5 barrels of ethanol from one barrel of oil used. There is enough gain to offset the loss of energy. Our big gripe in CA is the FACT that ethanol has to be brought by tanker trucks from the source in the midwest. We are not going to use the most valuable farm land in the USA to grow corn or switchgrass. Maybe algae ponds in the desert for biodiesel.
I agree with others that nuclear and solar to power electric vehicles is where the research money should be spent.
You can go back in these posts and see it for yourself , one universty debunked many of the results you and the others have posted as your proof because they use outdated data or worse case senarios
Will they make engines that violate the laws of physics? A gallon of ethanol has much less energy than a gallon of gasoline. That being the case it would be impossible for the technology of an ethanol engine to be more efficient (MPG wise) than a gasoline engine (unless you just stop any future development of gasoline engines).
Why when they left teh ford model t behind and made cars in the 90s with high gas milleage did they bend the laws of physics ? or did they just develop better engines .
I for one am not, thats why I advocate that E85 and hybrids are only s minor temporary fix and other energy sources need to be developed. Its the ones that believe that this is how it will be 10 years, 20 years or more from now are looking at the less than efficient solutions and saying "thats the solution".
No one has ever said that any one thing is the soultion . However right now and for the next decade or two ethonal is the best solution we have . If we don't do something now your right in 20 years we will be in big trouble. But if we make the switch and work on getting the refinerys as efficent as possible and work on finding the best crop per gallon of fuel we can keep the problems at bay . So that in 10 years we are only fighting for a third of the oil we need today instead of more than we need today and If we can get what we need from canada then we wont have to invade countrys .
You also don't seem to understand that the large majority of our infastructer (sp?) will support e85 . Hydrogen would require a whole new set up that would cost untold billions and electric vechicals are just no where ready for prime time and that two would need a massive upgrade of our power delivery system .
No the energy wont improve , however engines built with turbos and other devices will improve the mileage and your still ignoring that fact that milleage goes down 22-30% (which others claim its more like 10-20%) yet we get 353% increase from a barrel of oil when we convert it to ethonal using better crops like switchgrass
Yes brazil found thier own oil that is great , sadly we used most of our own oil , this counrty is rich in coal , however its very dirty and dangrous to harvest it . Esp with the recent miner's deaths .
You should try to find the stations in CA that sell E85. I did and IT happens to be in San Diego. I called them and was told the price of E85 was 85 cents above unleaded regular.
That is great , that is one station. As I've said there are already stations selling gas for over 4$ and that is regular . Just because one of the only gas stations in californa are selling e85 for an outragous price doesn't mean that is what we expect it to be. My friend in idaho just filled up for 2.25 with e85 vs 3.15 for unleaded and gas is only going up .
If oil is $90 per barrel it still takes a refined barrel of oil to produce 1.21 barrels of ethanol
No one barrel of oil can produce up to 3.43 barrels of ethanol .
Once again you read about corn. That is right now , that is not next year and going foward .
You don't seem to understand that going foward there will be more refinerys making ethanol , they will be using higher yield crops that give us more ethanol per gallon.
Want to know why corn is so talked about ? Go to a 7-11 buy a coke , drink it ... does it taste like corn ? Well it should considering the amount of corn in it .
We have so much corn we don't know what to di with it .
Things like switch grass can not only be used for fuel but a portion of it can be used for animal feed. That way farmers get two products to sell from one crop.
Our big gripe in CA is the FACT that ethanol has to be brought by tanker trucks from the source in the midwest. We are not going to use the most valuable farm land in the USA to grow corn or switchgrass.
Once again you have not read about switchgrass from your horrible points here.
Switch grass can be grown almost anywhere and unlike corn and other crops it actually replenishes the soil its grown on. It traps in co2 (or is it cod2 ) and stores it in the ground making the ground more fertile . Every state should be able to grow it with the expection of perhaps texas .
Not only that but switchgrass only needs to be planeted once every 10+ years and doesn't require the heavy fertilizer that corn needs . You save alot of money and energy with switchgrass over corn aside from being able to produce more energy with it .
Then you have to figure they will start to engineer switch grass to grow better and bigger as they've done with almost every other crop.
I agree with others that nuclear and solar to power electric vehicles is where the research money should be spent
Except that solves nothing.
a) nuclear power is finite too and is way to dangrous to be used in cars . So we would need to generate it and send it in the form of electricty to a charging station , however the infastructer in the united states wont handle that power .
b) solar isn't a dependable resource , it can be stormy , overcast or night out and that source is cut out .
c) electric cars have all of the problems above and are still not ideal for long drives
Even if any of these ideas are ready for prime time in the next 10 or so years it will still take another 10-20 years to be able to use them.
We can start converting to ethanol now and have every new car running on it in the next few years .
That way as crude oil prices skyrocket and there is less to go around we can stem that with increased power yields from e85.
Your not looking at the big picture at all
I can also go back over all the available data and draw the conclusion that ethanol from corn will never work. Its really simple math once you know all the facts. No worse case senerios there just plain facts. Ethanol from corn cannot work on any large scale.
Why when they left teh ford model t behind and made cars in the 90s with high gas milleage did they bend the laws of physics ?
And that has nothing to do with what I said. Fact is a gallon of ethanol has less energy than a gallon of gas. That means that an engine running E85 will always get 20-35% less mileage than that same engine running on gasoline. So you will not have an engine that gets better mileage with ethonal than with gas.
However right now and for the next decade or two ethanol is the best solution we have .
It is not a solution, it might be part of a temporary fix but it is unworkable on any large scale.
You also don't seem to understand that the large majority of our infastructer (sp?) will support e85 .
The only part of the current infrastructure that will support E85 is the end where fuel is sold. In other words the only thing that we can currently use is the gas stations. The rest has issues with ethanol.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
According to Xcelplus the formula Slick 50 has now is different then the original which was pulled from slock50 by the inventor John Bishop in the early 80s. Then Slick 50 changed the formula without letting the public know which is why the got sued by the government and lost.
Every tests result is available on the Xcelplus website and believe me Xcelplus has been in business for over 10 years so your telling me they are commiting Fraud by putting the official test results on the web page. Gimme a break.
Here is the link to the tests...http://www.xcelplus.com/tests/tests.htm
I think it would be pretty risky for a profitable company thats been around to qoute tests from names like the Depart. of Energy, U.S. Army, Consumer Reports, Nasa. The problem is a lot of these tests were done years ago before the internet boom so no wonder why they can't be found under Internet "Searches" I would think if they where lying the would have been shut down already. Boy you give people something that will help save money and improve the enviroment in which we live and without any research the answer is " No way, can't be."
Once again , who is talking corn ? Corn is being used right now because of the large surplus of corn this country has .
DO you even listen ? Or are you in your own world ? Its like talking to a brickwall , we all agree that corn isn't the best solution . Yet your the only one who keeps brining it up as the only solution
And that has nothing to do with what I said. Fact is a gallon of ethanol has less energy than a gallon of gas. That means that an engine running E85 will always get 20-35% less mileage than that same engine running on gasoline. So you will not have an engine that gets better mileage with ethonal than with gas.
However when you have 3 times the amount of ethanol than gas from the same resources ethanol will be cheaper . You can already get ethanol for 50-60 cents less in the corn belt than regular unleaded and prices are still inching up on regular gas .
It is not a solution, it might be part of a temporary fix but it is unworkable on any large scale.
and neither is solar or electrical .
Also its very workable on a large scale , you just have very limited thinking .
The only part of the current infrastructure that will support E85 is the end where fuel is sold. In other words the only thing that we can currently use is the gas stations. The rest has issues with ethanol.
the delivery system of trucks work just fine . That is how we get our gas in jersey , its refined by exit 10/11 on the turnpike and then is trucked to the stations . Has worked fine here for along time . When we get e85 I'm sure it will be refined in jersey too and shipped over the state using trucks .
Californa can do the same thing .
Once again you still haven't provied any solutions to the energy problem , not permit nor stop gap . So what do you offer besides us staying with gas and making our problems greater ?
According to the makers of slick 50 its the same formula. My guess is that since everyone and their brother knows slick 50 isn't what it claimed to be xcelplus needs to say something like that.
Xcelplus has been in business for over 10 years so your telling me they are commiting Fraud by putting the official test results on the web page. Gimme a break.
Hey mix-i-go doesn't work yet they have been in business for over 20 years are still saying that it does work. Go figure. Its all snake oil.
Here is the link to the tests...http://www.xcelplus.com/tests/tests.htm
Hey how about a link to a test that doesn't start with www.xcelplus.com ?
I think it would be pretty risky for a profitable company thats been around to qoute tests from names like the Depart. of Energy,
Yet the Department of Energy has no such information on their website.
U.S. Army,
Couldn't find an U.S. Army report on their site either.
Consumer Reports
Ditto
Nasa
Again no mention on their website.
Can you give a link that starts with www.nasa.gov or www.doe.gov or www.army.mil that has these test resuts?
You see I cannot find a test report that originates from those who supposively did the tests. All the "test reports" are on xcelplus' website. I cannot find anything outside of people selling the product that supports the claims.
Once I can go to the Department of Energy and get that report I will start to believe it. But that cannot be done.
Boy you give people something that will help save money and improve the enviroment in which we live and without any research the answer is " No way, can't be."
No its that everything that has come down the pike saying the same thing has been junk. Its pretty much been there, done that, Got the T-shirt. Before i am going to spend my hard earned money into something can has the potential to damage my engine I want proof (independent proof) that its safe and works. Going to the website of the company trying to sell it to me for that proof is a joke.
FWIW I know people who have used it, they say save your money it doesn't work
Take your snakeoil someplace else.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
You are. Don't you read what you write? here it is from post # 260 "There are many independent tests to back up what I have writen and the benfits of corn." If you're not talking about corn please don't talk about it.
You can already get ethanol for 50-60 cents less in the corn belt than regular unleaded
Even at 50-60 cents a gallon less ethanol is more expensive to use on a per mile basis. FWIW E-85 is about 30-40 cents a gallon cheaper which means you are wasting money using it.
and neither is solar or electrical .
Currently no but who knows what future technology will provide with solar and electric, or other alternatives. But this I know no amount of technology can squeeze any more energy into a gallon of ethanol.
the delivery system of trucks work just fine . That is how we get our gas in jersey
No you get your gas in Jersey from refineries very far away which ship it to distribution points (thats whats at exit 10/11 not a refinery) via a pipeline where it is trucked a very short distance to the station. You cannot put ethanol through a pipeline. It must be trucked from the refinery. Not to mention that its far more dangerous to transport ethanol.
Once again you still haven't provied any solutions to the energy problem , not permit nor stop gap .
Well first off its not my job to come up with how to solve our energy problem. But I can research what people are suggesting. That being said I have said that we need to be conserving more and exploring more workable energy alternatives such as electrical and hydrogen as well as search for others. Oh wait since you don't read your own posts why do I think you read mine.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
But if more of us use Ethanol it could reduce gasoline prices workwide.
Ethanol also helps economy - Generates more jobs
reduces imported Oil coming from Iran, Iraq and Saudi, who reliable is the source ?
Ethanol also helps reduce trade imbalance, i.e dollar can appreciate more, if you take a future vacation overseas you get more for your dollar.
trade imbalance also eliminates local jobs, and raises deficits.
So the Ethanol is not just a substitute but its a a movement
I believe your sources are wrong again. This is 3 hours ago on AP wire. You can stick with the "Pie in the Sky" solution. I am not driving around in a vehicle filled with highly volatile Ethanol. There is a better chance that they will come up with a biodiesel solution long before they get switchgrass fermented. Biodiesel has at least twice the energy of ethanol. That means you need 1/2 as much to go a mile in a current vehicle.
Oil companies, retailers and terminals plan to switch to the blend with ethanol _ an additive made largely from corn that raises the oxygen level of gas and reduces pollution _ by May.
However, the corn is in short supply, and the tanks used to store the new blend must first be cleaned out to be free of water and have new filters installed. The blend also cannot be shipped by pipeline, and foreign blends carry a costly tax that makes transportation costs spike.
"The lack of ethanol is one of the problems, and geopolitical unrest is another," said Pam Maiolo, a spokeswoman for AAA New Jersey.
Corn Shortage
Interesting that your friend was able to get E85 for $2.25 when the terminal price for Ethanol is about $2.60 per gallon. That is without any tax added.
Ethanol price
According to E85 website.
Even at 50-60 cents a gallon less ethanol is more expensive to use on a per mile basis. FWIW E-85 is about 30-40 cents a gallon cheaper which means you are wasting money using it.
I'm wasting money using anything . Btw right now it may be 50-60 cents less but gas is still climbing and will continue to climb.
No you get your gas in Jersey from refineries very far away which ship it to distribution points (thats whats at exit 10/11 not a refinery) via a pipeline where it is trucked a very short distance to the station. You cannot put ethanol through a pipeline. It must be trucked from the refinery. Not to mention that its far more dangerous to transport ethanol Actually we do have refinerys . ITs why gas here is normaly lower than other parts of the country. We have and allways will be at the lower end of the pricing spectrum (I can still get gas for 2.20 if i drive down by exit 10/11 on the turnpike )
Secondly while ethanol is dangrous to transport so is gas . Anything flamable and toxic is dangrous . While ethanol is more violtal than gas , there can still be modifications done to all existing infastructers to be used.
This is not true with hydrogen and electrical delivery systems no matter how much we want that to happen.
Well first off its not my job to come up with how to solve our energy problem. But I can research what people are suggesting. That being said I have said that we need to be conserving more and exploring more workable energy alternatives such as electrical and hydrogen as well as search for others. Oh wait since you don't read your own posts why do I think you read mine.
Then if you've bothered to read anything posted here you will see that e85 allows us to conserve gas while looking at future tech .
Its obvious that you don't read anything I've writen as you would have seen the amount of times I've said that corn is only temporay and is only being used because of its over farming currently
Mr JAC knows that a few years ago he was paying around 1.50 gal gas. Here in NY I am sure the price will go up to 3.50 before long, and these numbers are for illustrative purposes. At 1.50 my 20gal SUV,car, jeep, whatever you drive costs $30 per week. At 3.50 its $70. And lets say average fill up for most people is once a week. A $160/mo difference eating into JAC's budget. The price of crude has appreciated at a rate far greater than JAC's wage increases over the last few years. Wages, for the most part are stagnant compared to everything else. Granted, right now e85 may not be all that price competitive with gas, but producers have to know with the decrease in mpg with e85 it will ultimately have to become cheaper to wean people off of gas and make the switch. No one will pay 2.50 or 2.85 for e85 when you can get better mileage for 3.00 with gas.
So, to be economically viable, it needs to be mass produced to the point where JAC says "Hey, this is worth a shot." What is that price point? Who knows, I would say $1 cheaper is a starting point. Anything more than $1 and I think it will really catch. Now how do we get there? Gov't/corporate subsidies? JAC most likely doesn't care about the 1 or 1.50 gal subsidy. All he cares about is that he is paying much less than 3.0 gal/gas. Per my example above, if e85 was 1.50 per gal (hypothetical)JAC is back paying $30/week for fill up. Even with the decreased mileage, lets say he has to fill 6 times a month and not 4. Well, thats a savings of $100.00. Probably well worth it I would say.
And I can think of lots of gov't subsidies on the backs of the American taxpayer with no return on investment. Namely welfare and Social security disability and the people milking that who can work, but choose not to. Not to say there aren't people who truly need it, but we all know there are people scamming the system just eating our tax dollars and not being productive members of society. Again, no return on investment there. Sorry for the long post, but we can't be afraid of failure here. There is no stopping these oil traders and companies from continuing to jack up these oil prices. The only incentive is to make money and they do this by preying off the fears of global unrest and hurricanes and the bees not making honey. Any excuse now to raise prices. We need to take a chance on something and not just sitting around debating the viability. People will not continue to pay for gas if it goes to 4,5,6 dollars a gallon if there is a cheaper alternative.
Where do you think all that corn syrup being fed to our children comes from. It is a byproduct of ETHANOL!!!!
Corn syrup: An expanding market and the high cost of fructose corn syrup encouraged expansion of wet mill plants that produce the syrup as a by-product of the ethanol production process
From the DOE.gov site posted earlier.
while ethanol is dangrous to transport so is gas
Gas has a much higher ignition temperature than ethanol. Gas and diesel are fine going through pipelines. How many more diesel burning trucks will have to be added to get the E85 to the areas that are not producing ethanol?
I give up you want to exchange one big corporation scam for a different one. I have personally written my Senators and Congressmen to let them know how displeased I am with the latest boondoggle "ETHANOL".
Some people never get it. Sheep to the slaughter.
I believe ethanol should be an option to help reduce our dependence on oil imports, but until and if transportation issues can be resolved, it might be best used as a regional solution rather than a national solution.
I also believe ethanol should be priced 25% lower than gas to reflect it’s lower energy output or you are not going to get the public to go along. On the other hand, if you asked 1000 people about ethanol, most would not have a clue that it provides 25% less energy than gas.
It only costs $.68 per pound to manufacture... and it's powerful enough to be used in some of the early rockets and torpedoes.
And it breaks down into water and oxygen after it combusts... so there is no environmental pollution.
BTW, Joe Average Consumer maybe should be driving something other than a 15 mpg SUV. I just don't have a lot of sympathy when I listen to these people complain about a somewhat self imposed hardship.
But it would also increase ethanol prices and since E85 is mostly ethanol it would increase the price of E85.
reduces imported Oil coming from Iran, Iraq and Saudi, who reliable is the source ?
Most of our oil comes from other sources. And I have said that reducing oil consumption is a key and ethanol is part of a temporary solution.
Ethanol also helps reduce trade imbalance,
I will suggest some econ classes.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Other than switchgrass (which may not yield as much per acre as corn from my readings) what other workable high yield crops are there?
Then if you've bothered to read anything posted here you will see that e85 allows us to conserve gas while looking at future tech .
And if you bothered to read anything I have said you would have seen that I have said it is a temporary solution. But only temporary, not on a large scale and only part of the temporary solution
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
You can read the text of President Bush state of the union speech, he would like 75 % of our oil imports be substituted with alternate fuel, specialy Ethanol grown from wood chips, grass, corn, Sugar cane.
The US spent almost exactly as much on imports from China - 243.46b - as on imports of petroleum -- $243.18b (using the raw data). But oil imports did grow just a bit faster than imports from China. US imports from China increased by 23.8% in 2005.
Reducing Imports (oil) helps trade Imbalance
Trade imbalance
Oil and trade imbalance
reduces imported Oil coming from Iran, Iraq and Saudi, who reliable is the source ?
Top suppliers of US Crude Oil
Top suppliers of US Crude Oil
Saudi Arabia , Iraq, Kuwait are in the top ten, how many lives have we lost fighting wars in that part of the world for Oil, how many lost sons, brothers, fathers and daughters ?
Import Ethanol not Oil
Diesel is now actualy grown from plants.
Oil from the waste land
Can Diesel be cultivated
You are correct! European nations have done just that and more. About $2/gallon in gas tax subsidizes all the social services those countries provide while minimizing the money going to Mid-Eastern nations bent on destroying Western civilization. Americans have been living in the past (Happy Daze) for too long. We need to get real about energy conservation.
I found a great resource that explains the difference at:
Ethanol Manual
One point no one seems to realize. Rather than using taxes to spur conservation this Administration would rather give windfall profits to big oil companies. The switch to Ethanol from MTBE should have LOWERED the price of gasoline since refineries can now buy plentiful, cheaper, low grade crude, refine it less, add fewer if any additives, and push up the octane to acceptable levels by mixing in Ethanol. Production costs will drop about 30% not counting any price difference in the 10-20% Ethanol blended with cheap gasoline that most cars will be using this year (no modification required).
Recent price increases in oil obscure the lack of any discount passed along to consumers with this significant product change. Expect Exxon to earn $50B plus this year, even if they keep the same price margins relative to the price of light sweet crude.
Much of the current supply of Ethanol from our 97 current Ethanol plants will be used by the 149 US refineries switching from MTBE to enhance octane. With few cars currently E85 capable and after-market modification expensive, I don't see any large scale demand for this poor substitute for gasoline that would have to sell at $2 to compare well with $3 gasoline or a 90/10 gas/ethanol blend which performs about as well as pure gasoline.
Rocky
The "it's not me, it's you" game.
Actually it would be the opposite since there is a shortage of ethanol to mix with the gas. This would mean a shortage of gas available for sale which in turn will drive up prices.
or a 90/10 gas/ethanol blend which performs about as well as pure gasoline.
The average engine should get about 5% less mileage with the 90/10 blend.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
He did push it but his efforts were stopped by the Democrats (namely Richard Dirbin from IL, but I wont tell you the name many people here use for him).
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
And the Lords people said "AMEN".
Yep is so easy to blame the big bad oil companies when we burn it as fast as it can be pumped out. Tell me how much oil would we save if just half the SUV drivers dropped their 15 MPG SUV's and got a 25 MPG sedan?
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
The only we'll solve THAT problem is to start imposing excise taxes based on vehicle size and engine displacement like they do in Europe and Japan. This will guarantee that people will be buying vehicles in the Ford Focus/Honda Civic/Toyota Corolla/Hyundai Elantra class in huge numbers in no time flat.
Thanks
Now if they start paying $100+ a week for gas then things might change.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
I'd be completely in agreement with you if you agreed to provide me (on your dime, mind you) a third vehicle from that class of small cars just to use for routine commutes. Because I can't afford to stable three cars here, and the one of the two I've already got that is relatively efficient still has to carry four people and their groceries regularly, while the other needs to be able to tow and haul. I worked out the cost of simply buying a really frugal and cheap econobox, and found that it will take me far longer to save the extra expended cash (even with exhorbitant $5+ / gallon gas prices) than just keeping my 15-20 mpg pickup, driving it, and investing the extra dollars not spent on the car in gas.
This ramble has been brought to you by the campaign to stuff the anti-SUV nonsense and keep it to ethanol good or bad discussion.
This could be done today but our politicians are gutless when it comes to making the hard choices. The American public is unwilling to sacrifice in the present for long term future gains. They delude themselves that there is always some magical legislation that can painlessly solve all problems. I can accept that mentality from the average citizens but our leaders should know better. They need to realize that doing what is right is more important than the opinion polls. They need to act in American's best interests even if we are too stupid to realize it's for our own good.
That being said unless you will be doing some serious off roading then you don't need an SUV. Mini Vans offer more seating and better gas mileage than a SUV at a lower cost.
But that avenue of thought was largely argued in another old topic about why you hate SUVs.
I don't hate SUV's just can't see the need of one if it never leaves the pavement. Also you have to admit that a sizable number of them are "status" symbols and that they can easily replaced with a sedan. So until people stop buying gas guzzler when they are not needed we will continue to have gas issues like we are currently facing.
I'd be completely in agreement with you if you agreed to provide me
Again not everyone who has an SUV needs the utility of an SUV. Going just on those that I know have SUV's that a majority of them really don't need one. I understand that there are people who actually need them, but thats not the case for a sizable number of them.
Again as long as people keep buying gas guzzlers we will continue to see these gas problems.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
As far as the minivan's capabilities go- my other vehicle is a minivan. And that was a change from the midsized sedan we had before. Primarily because neither of our vehicles could carry more than 5 people (Girl Scouts, basketball team, daughter's friends, etc.).
But in all actuality, if I didn't carry trash routinely and general home construction materials (plywood, for example) once in a while, an SUV would be better for my needs than my truck is. That's because there isn't a minivan on the market that can tow to my requirements, but there are SUVs that can, while still doing everything else nearly as well as the vans can.
American's fascination with big, gas guzzling vehicles and our need for alternative, renewable energy sources are hardly unrelated topics.