However this topic is all about ethanol and not SUVs, nor America's fascination with tractor trailers. Speaking of which, I just returned from taking my family to visit my parents (drove the minivan, for those concerned, and got over 29 going to, over 26 coming back from, in a CSV no less!). And during that trip I'd estimate a good two of every three vehicles was a semi (more on the trip up- closer to 3 out of 4 or 4 out of 5, but less on the way back).
Given our consumerism in this country, I'm not really surprised. But based on this fact it's hard to see the focus on POVs while ignoring the continuously growing number of heavy commercial vehicles on the highways. If all those that I had to deal with this past week were using GMs hybrid powertrains and biodiesel, I have a feeling we'd see a bigger impact than by converting all our heavier POVs to small cars.
It appears to be that Ethanol, whether a 10% or 85% mix will be a product of the east coast. Western USA is deficient in moisture. Growing corn or switch grass in California, as an example, using high price water from the mountains, make it too expensive and farmers can make a lot more growing other things. However, eastern US states have had millions and millions of acres idled in the last 50 years as small farms bit the dust, tobacco was discontinued, and government welfare for crops has been drastically cut. Meanwhile there are many thousands of acres in the south, middle atlantic states and New England, whose soil is currently not the best, that would love to have crops such as switch grass bring back their soils and provide a steady income. Letting corn subsidies and allotments disappear would allow for more corn production.
The costs of storing, mixing and selling ethanol based gasoline can easily be done close to the source of the corn and switch grass products. The Eastern USA can easily gear up and do it as the other required facilities are already there, access to large volumes of free water, an interstate system that reaches many more small towns than we see out west, manufacturing sites that can support new equipment, a workable rail system when needed, and a very dense corridor of population and autos from Maine to Florida.
As we see on the national news, there are many in the west that do not want ethanol, especially the politicians. Water out in the west is so expensive and power to run ethanol plants is probably not available. It will cost the USA a lot to convert to Ethanol, but the work has already started and there are millions of 10% users already...now if we can only increase production for the 85% gasahol mix we will be ahead of the game. Ethanol sites are already being built from here in Iowa to upstate NY (that I am aware of). Ethanol production is not a future government dream, but a fact that is already being done with private funds. There are some farmer co-op owned companies already manufacturing ethanol. The only problem facing us is trying to grow enough corn and switch grass to do the job...the future of ethanol is already here in practical terms.
I'm not anti-SUV either. I'm all for personal choice as long as this person is paying for his choice. In the case of low mpg vehicles this drives up the price of gas and oil for everyone. I think there is little doubt that if we all drove 30 mpg vehicles the price of gas would be significantly less than it is today. So the driver of a fuel efficient car is paying more at the pump as a result of people who choose less efficient vehicles. So its a choice that negatively impacts others and this cost should be completely absorbed by the person that made the choice. If you're one of the few people that actually needs the utility of a truck or SUV for your livelihood then this cost needs to be passed on to your customers.
Actually, there is no good amount of gas to burn. Which is why I like a large gas tax. It penalizes everyone in proportion to their offense. I see it more as a CO2 fine than a tax. Kind of like a fine for littering except you are littering the atmosphere.
This allows for substantially higher levels of torque in turbocharged engines and makes it possible to substitute a smaller, more fuel-efficient turbocharged engine for an engine twice its size while maintaining the same or better horsepower and torque capability in the low RPM range which is important for acceleration. For example, a 3.0 liter V6 engine could be replaced by a 1.5 liter 4 cylinder engine.
I think replacing a 3.0 leter v6 with a 1.5 l 4cylinder will make e85 more efficent. This ebs system is for ethanol only
Studies showed engine efficiency increases from 33% to almost 40% while toxic emissions are reduced by as much as 80%.
Now the above can be used for all fuel types . however combine the two above and you can have yourself extremely powerfull 4cylinder engines that get extremely high gas mileage on ethonal while providing power of equal or greater power to current v6s add in hybrid tech and I think we have a good road in the next 10-20 years on e85.
For snakeweasel and the others that say e85 wont provided the same mileage or better than gasoline and will allways be 20-33% less efficent ...
That is because E85 contains about 25% less energy than gas. So unless you know of a way that will inject more energy into E85 then it will always be less efficient. saying you can make E85 give you better mileage than gas is like saying you can get more change from a quarter than you can from a buck.
I think replacing a 3.0 leter v6 with a 1.5 l 4cylinder will make e85 more efficent.
You can also get better efficentcy with a gas engine buy making it smaller. Remember you don't increase power by increasing octane.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Growing corn or switch grass in California, as an example, using high price water from the mountains, make it too expensive and farmers can make a lot more growing other things
Switchgrass shouldn't require alot of water actually . Its a very low maintance crop. I don't really see caly growing this stuff honestly as that state has so many problems it doesn't need to add farmers to the list . But there are places like washington that has an abundance of land and water that could be used for switch grass.
Your right that the east coast could use e85 the easiest . That is what we should focus on . Getting the east coast on e85 supplied from the east coast would reduce our oil dependency greatly .
will cost the USA a lot to convert to Ethanol Of course , but i twill cost alot less than converting to pure electric cars or hydrogen and it will also create more jobs in the process
The only problem facing us is trying to grow enough corn and switch grass to do the job...the future of ethanol is already here in practical terms.
well it will take awhile for us to need vast quanityso f e85 . So we have the time to refine the refinerys , modify the switch grass seeds and convert useless land to growing this stuff . Along with building better e85 engines than just ocnverted gas engines
That is because E85 contains about 25% less energy than gas. So unless you know of a way that will inject more energy into E85 then it will always be less efficient. saying you can make E85 give you better mileage than gas is like saying you can get more change from a quarter than you can from a buck.
Did you read the link I posted ? Its adressed there .
You can also get better efficentcy with a gas engine buy making it smaller. Remember you don't increase power by increasing octane. read the links . It states how to increase the efficenty of the engines .
The carefully designed and timed direct injection of ethanol, through the mechanism of evaporative cooling and its own intrinsic properties as a fuel, is equivalent to increasing the overall fuel octane rating of the mixture of ethanol and gasoline to more than 130. This high effective octane rating and increased resistance to engine knock allows for significantly higher levels of turbocharging. This implies that -- compared to a conventional engine of comparable size -- over two times the air and fuel flow can be processed in an engine equipped with EBS technology without any reduction of compression ratio, an important design parameter affecting the engineís intrinsic energy conversion efficiency. This allows for substantially higher levels of torque in turbocharged engines and makes it possible to substitute a smaller, more fuel-efficient turbocharged engine for an engine twice its size while maintaining the same or better horsepower and torque capability in the low RPM range which is important for acceleration. For example, a 3.0 liter V6 engine could be replaced by a 1.5 liter 4 cylinder engine.
As you can see its all addressed here. As i've said before by designing an engine around e85 instead of around gas , you can increase the efficenty of the engine .
The way above will increase the power of a v4 in such a way that it will be competive with a v6 in the lower rpm lvls where its needed .
What I find particularly interesting about a lot of your arguments for ethanol is that they are based on this technology evolving over the next 10-20 years. At the same time you dismiss electric vehicles because they are not viable in their current state.
BTW, diesel engines are already closer to 40% efficient. If this 7% efficiency gain is impressive then its hard to ignore the 57% improvement that an electric motor can provide. Also, I think that the corellation between engine displacement and fuel efficiency is not as great as people are led to believe. The 6 cylinder Camry only gets 2 mpg less than the 4 cyl despite having 2 more cylinders, almost 50% greater displacement and over 100 lbs of extra weight.
but i twill cost alot less than converting to pure electric cars or hydrogen and it will also create more jobs in the process
That sounds a lot like a statement that was just pulled out of the air. If not then be a little more specific. How much less will it cost. How many more jobs will it produce. I'll settle for rough estimates as long as there is a credible source. And it is also based on never going the electric vehicle route because it certainly doesn't cost less to do both.
I read the link and did not draw the same conclusion as you seem to be drawing. For one thing both links were from companies promoting their own technologies, hardly objective. Let's take them at their word. The first link involving turbocharging only stated that with a ethanol mix a greater amount of fuel/air could be forced into the cylinder. All that means is that with all things being equal the engine burning ethanol would be rated at a higher max torque and hp. This would be achieved by burning more fuel not greater efficiency. Even you agreed that the second link had nothing to do with using ethanol.
Did you read the link I posted ? Its adressed there .
Yes I did and no it didn't, it just repeated a lot of falsehoods.
read the links . It states how to increase the efficenty of the engines .
See above.
well we are done here , you dismiss ideas and patents done by professionals and that is your busniess , however I don't deal with people who dismiss things with out any proof. If you want to claim a negative then its up to you to post the proof
I read the link and did not draw the same conclusion as you seem to be drawing. For one thing both links were from companies promoting their own technologies, hardly objective. Let's take them at their word. The first link involving turbocharging only stated that with a ethanol mix a greater amount of fuel/air could be forced into the cylinder. All that means is that with all things being equal the engine burning ethanol would be rated at a higher max torque and hp. This would be achieved by burning more fuel not greater efficiency. Even you agreed that the second link had nothing to do with using ethanol.
Actually you wont need to burn anymore fuel. By using the system you will produce over two times the heat and air flow can be generated thus giving a 1.5 l4 cylinder engine the performace lvls of a v6 3.0l engine . When you compare the fuel savings between a 4cylinder and a 6 cylinder you will see they more than make up the diffrence between ethanol and gas. When average joe goes into a show room and buys a car , he will see a 4 cylinder 1.5 litter car with about 20-30% of the fuel economy of a standard 4clylinder 1.5 , however he will see performance characteristics close to that of a v6 3.0 litter engine .
You can take this further and design a smaller engine than a 1.5 litter 4 cylinder engine and get the same power as a 4 cylinder engine .
That is increased fuel econmy based on the power of the engine compared to engines with the same power.
As for the second link , I said it can be used for both. However combinding the two would created a highly efficent engine small engine , that has very high acceleration and high fuel economy .
With time even newer engine designs will come about based on ethanols diffrences between gas . They will play on its strengths and create more efficent ethanol engines .
What I find particularly interesting about a lot of your arguments for ethanol is that they are based on this technology evolving over the next 10-20 years. At the same time you dismiss electric vehicles because they are not viable in their current state.
Electric vehicles will evolve . I have never disagreed. In thier current state and for the near future they will not be workable . So what do we do in the interm ? Sit on our backsides and watch gas climb higher and higher ? Ethanol is ready to roll out today. In 5-10 years we can have every new car running on ethanol (most likely sooner) we can have a large amount of new cars being sold in the next 5 years running on ethanol . We can have 20-348% times the amount of gas we can import now as ethanol. If electric cars are ready in 5 years they will start out in small scale like gm has been putting out flex fuel cars , or like hybrids and will take years to catch on .
The other problems are how do you get the electricty for this car ? Ethanol you go down to a local gas station and yoru done.
Electric ? Plug it in ? Sure but your going to need a large current to charge it and your house is already feeding alot of stuff. So your going to have to have your house power lines upgraded . Or you can get I guess a solar paneling set and plug it into that . Have large batterys burried by your house to get a 2 or 4 day charge and then charge your car when you plug it in . Great , however not every house is built to gather the most amount of sun like during the day. The front of my house gets the most sunlight , however the roof slants to the side of the house which is normaly in the shadow of the house next to me and the trees infront of that house . I'm sure for every house that can take advantage of the sun , there is at least one that can't . We can agree on that correct (esp since a portion of the houses in the east were built before 1950 and were hardly concerned about solar power) . So I guess we have the power companys supply htis . However the power grids are horribly out of date . Here in jersey last summer we have 4 black outs of over 4 hours and many little brown outs . Thats because man are running air units . I highly doubt the power grids are going to hold up if we throw in charging electric cars in everyones house we are going to have huge problems esp in the summer time. So we can regulate the power a car draws in its charging set up. However this will make the time to charge much longer. We can add in tech like on the hybrids that will charge the batterys as you break. However there is no engine to switch to so that will only delay the battery from being spent.
So the most logical solution is to add power units at gas stations . To make this work we are going to need fast charging batterys . Like the toshiba ones . Now I believe that it takes 1min to charge a large portion of the battery( i believe over 90%) But i believe someone said he thought it was 8-9 minutes . Now 1 minute charges aren't bad . Even if it takes another 1 min for the rest of the battery. That is 2 minutes. But how about a 8min charge with 2 min charge on the rest ? that be 10 mins per car at a charge station.
Then you have the fact that these stations are going to have to be converted to half gas / half electric the number of cars going through will be lowered. The stations will want to make money and thus charge you for it . Your still going to need to update the existing power delivery system.
I've watched the discovery channel and they have talked many times about our adiquated power grid . Most of it was built towards the end of the early 1900s and mid 1900s . There are huge problems with it and we've seen these problems many times over like the east coast power outage when the station in canda went down and over loaded the grids .
Now I agree with you , Electric cars are most likely the best answer. However its not an answer ready today and most likely wont be ready to start being introduced for another decade and even then it will be in the smaller cars (it will take alot of power to move a pick up truck)
I would love a world where I can pull up to the mall. Plug my car in , swip my credit card and start walking to the mall under a roof of solar panels that helps to charge all the cars . Come back unhook my car , plug my phone of pda into the terminal , have the bill loaded on to that (why waste paper ? ) and drive off having whatever portion of my battery charge in the alot time i was there.
As for diesel , I would love to run purely on diesel. I was actually hopping jeep would offer the patriot with a diesel . I would buy it in a second . I believe the liberty with its diesel gets around 30% more fuel economy than the gas version . However even that isn't a magic bullet. Though I wonder how e95 (which is 5% diesel and 95% ethanol ) would perform .
As for your claims on engine size. Well I will have to look into that . However the civic 1.8 liter gets 20/38 , the 2.0 liter 23/32. . That is a huge diffrence and they are both v4s there is only a 200lbs diffrence.
However you are right on the camry . 24/33 vs 22/31. Which is the only car that shows that diffrence. Perhaps its a 5 speed automatic on the v6 vs a 4 on the v4 ?
Yea thats it , the v6 has a 6 speed auto matic and the 4 has a 5 speed auto matic . The 6th gear adds efficeny . This is a standard feature .
That is increased fuel econmy based on the power of the engine compared to engines with the same power.
Have they sold this engine to any automakers? If not why not? Could it be they are not as practical as they are saying? I would think that some automaker would jump on an engine that will get equal or better mileage with E85 while maintaining the same HP as a gas engine.
Have they sold this engine to any automakers? If not why not? Could it be they are not as practical as they are saying? I would think that some automaker would jump on an engine that will get equal or better mileage with E85 while maintaining the same HP as a gas engine.
Or it can simply be that there are not enough ethanol pumps and where you can use the engine would be limited ?
ITs very simple that for this engine to be practical you need e85 as it uses the way ethanol burns and is made to make this work. If you buy this and can only fill up at a few dozen stations nation wide itsn ot going to be successfull.
Right now the engines being used are made to run on varying types of fuel. e85 , e10 , regular unleaded. When e85 is wide spread and your able to find it in every area easily (i.e going from maine to florida and being able to fill up when needed) then we will see engines geared specificly to e85 and its unique propertys .
Its the same reason we don't see pure electric cars using quick charge batterys. There is no where to get the fuel currently or hydrogen cars
It could be 10-20 years before E85 is readily available, if ever. That would kind of put that engine in the same league as the CNG/LNG cars. Just like there is not much natural gas in the midwest & East Coast. There is not much E85 on the west coast. I don't think Honda sells their Civic GX anywhere but CA. No place back East to fuel them.
It could be 10-20 years before E85 is readily available, if ever. That would kind of put that engine in the same league as the CNG/LNG cars. Just like there is not much natural gas in the midwest & East Coast. There is not much E85 on the west coast. I don't think Honda sells their Civic GX anywhere but CA. No place back East to fuel them.
it could be however that is 10-20 years for something to be readily avalible. Not 10-20 years for an introduction of the tech .
IF the goverment mandated today that every engine sold in 2008 was flexfuel the vehicals would be there and as e85 became avalible in your area you could use it and still be able to use gas if you end up some where that doesn't have e85.
What happens in your electric car if you go on a trip and get there and no one can recharge it for you as they can't provide the juice ?
The country would have to upgrade all of its power grid (and be able to provide the power after that ). With ethanol the only problem is creating it and more and more plants capable of doing this will be made in the next few years and of course can import ethonal from brazil , europe , canada and other areas .
Whats interesting is every car should be capable of running on e10 , motortrend thinks its likely that most should be able to run on e20 . flexfuel engines can run on regular unlead and e10 up to e85. So as more ethanol becomes avalible we can use e20 , then e30 , then e40 and so on.
So the limited amount of ethanol we can produce today and import (wish bush would get rid of that tax and give brazil and other countrys the 51cent incentive) can still reduce amount of gas we need and we can continue to increase our production and imports of it and slowly move up in grades of ethanol .
However today electric cars wont do anything to reduce our dependancy on oil . Hybrids can help. But hybrid ethanol cars will help further .
This is something we can do today.
I wonder what the fuel econmy of e20 is ? e10 is 5% less than unleaded correct ?
It does nothing to encourage people to drive less, carpool, use public transit, consolidate their trips, etc...
A really fast way to ensure far more public transit use is to make the cost of a monthly transit pass full tax-deductible if you can prove you're working or involved in a full-time job search. Given the cost of local public transit monthly passes nowadays (US$70 or more per month) such tax relief would be very much welcome.
I keep seeing a few of you referring to the fact that a gallon of ethanol contains less energy than a gallon of pure gasoline. This much is true.
But then you go further and use that to try to prove the claim that an engine powered by ethanol can't possibly be more efficient than an engine powered by pure gasoline. This part is blatantly false- the fact that we're talking about efficiency alone should clue you in. Gasoline engines, despite having a century of development, are still very inefficient engines. Diesel engines are more efficient but still far from using all the available energy content in the fuel. Until our engines are 100% efficient, comparing overall energy content in each fuel by itself to make such statements is wasted effort, and amounts to an attempt to be blatantly misleading.
BTW, higher compression in engines generally results in higher efficiency levels from whatever fuel source is in use, which is one of the biggest, if not the biggest, reasons why diesel is so much more efficient than gasoline. Higher octane fuels allow for higher compression ratios. So pure ethanol (105 or better octane) in engines specifically geared for it (and not for gas first, with E85 compatibility) can run higher compression than similar gas engines, which would increase the percent of energy extracted from the fuel, so that the ethanol powered car achieves similar or better economy. I believe Saab recently demonstrated a turbocharged car demonstrating this, but haven't found the link yet..
I agree that I'd like to see greater use of public transit but I'm not sure a tax deduction is the way to go. I think that our tax code is already way to complicated and contrived. On top of that only 25% of taxpayers itemize. So 75% of the taxpayers and all the non-taxpayers would have no greater incentive to use public transit. I read recently that in areas that offer public transit ridership is at record high levels. This is the free market working and as long as gas prices remain high this trend will continue.
...from ethanol, an engine must be designed specifically to run on it. Here's what my basic design parameters would be for a pure alcohol motor with good efficiency and decent power:
1) Carbon fiber block with porcelain coating, steel cylinder inserts 2) 2-stroke, direct injection 3 cylinder inline @750 cc 3) 15:1 compression ratio 4) Intercooled turbo set for 14.7 psi boost 5) Pushrod 4 valve heads--single low mounted cam 6) Closed crankcase
This would be a small, very light, very power dense motor. the ethanol would allow for the high compression and moderate turbo pressure. The block would keep the heat inside the engine and minimize thermal losses. The two stroke provides mechanical efficiency, while the three cylinder would allow for smoothness. i picked pushrod with a single cam to decrease package size.
The basic inefficiencies of an ICE are going to be the same no matter what you're burning. As far as higher compression equating to higher efficiency, what are you basing that on? I agree that higher compression engines tend to have higher power ratings relative to their displacement but they typically have lower mileage estimates. Certainly there is nothing here that will offset the significant shortfall when it comes to the chemical energy stored in a gallon of ethanol relative to gasolene.
The idea of turbocharging to allow for similar power in smaller displacement engines is hardly a novel idea. Currently what ever can be accomplished in terms of efficiency in an ethanol engine can be exceded by a gasoline engine. Will that always be the case? To answer that requires speculation. But to say that a technology that is currently at a big disadvantage will overtake the leader is not only speculation but wild speculation.
As for your claims on engine size. Well I will have to look into that . However the civic 1.8 liter gets 20/38 , the 2.0 liter 23/32. . That is a huge diffrence and they are both v4s there is only a 200lbs diffrence
Your hardly comparing apples to apples. This same 2.0L engine in the Acura RSX is rated at 27/34, not quite as huge a difference. Interestingly the Type-S, high performance version of the RSX is only rated at 23/31, which is a more similar engine to your example. What are the differences? The Type-S has a higher compression , uses higher octane gas and has a 6 spd manual as opposed to the 5 spd in the standard model. Why didn't this result in better efficiency? A couple other examples. The 1.5L in the Honda Fit is rated at 33/38 and weighs 300 lbs less than the Civic. The 2.4L in the Accord is rated at 26/34 and weighs 400 lbs more than the Civic. I agree that there is a corellation between engine displacement and efficiency it just isn't all that significant.
try to prove the claim that an engine powered by ethanol can't possibly be more efficient than an engine powered by pure gasoline. This part is blatantly false
Assuming that you are correct and an engine can be built that will give good fuel economy in a midsize family sedan. This car would run on E85 or E100 to take advantage of the high octane rating. What happens when you cannot find E85? Trying to find 105 octane gas is not easy.
well we are done here , you dismiss ideas and patents done by professionals
No I dismiss questionable statements made by people trying to sell me something. That is something that I suggest everyone do.
Face facts, anything that can be done to improve an engine running ethanol can be done to improve an engine running gas. Hiker octane does not equal more power. Ethanol has less energy than gasoline. These are simple facts that the article either ignores or doesn't address.
however I don't deal with people who dismiss things with out any proof.
Without any proof to prove their claim you want me to accept what they say? Hey if your like that e-mail me i have a wonderful deal for you. But please no checks cash only.
If you want to claim a negative then its up to you to post the proof
I provided points of why I do not accept it. I see no proof to the contrary. How about providing that proof?
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
I should remind you that today's gasoline-fuelled engines are VASTLY more powerful, fuel-efficient and cleaner than engines of even 20 years ago, thanks to these developments:
1. Full electronic ignition with computerized spark control 2. Port fuel injection with electronic fuel deliver control 3. Four-valve per cylinder heads 4. Variable valve timing 5. Vastly improved catalytic converter designs
A good example is compare a 1988 Honda Accord LX sedan with the 2006 version of the same car. In the 1988 LX, the engine was a 2.2-liter I-4 with a 12-valve head and a carburetor for fuel delivery, rated at 98 bhp; the 2006 LX uses an 2.4-liter engine with a 16-valve variable timing valve head, port fuel injection, and modern electronic controls for almost the engine engine rated at 166 bhp! :surprise: The new engine not only has better fuel economy, but also is so clean that it even gets the CARB AT-PZEV emissions certification, something found mostly in hybrid vehicles.
And gasoline engines still can get further improvements, too. The arrival of direct fuel injection allows for extremely precise fuel delivery and control of the ignition process, and an upcoming technology called homogeneous charge compression ignition (HCCI) could raise fuel economy 33% over today's gasoline engines. :shades: That bodes well for gasoline engines over the next 20 years until E85 fuelled engines and fuel-cell vehicles take over by 2025.
"Certainly there is nothing here that will offset the significant shortfall when it comes to the chemical energy stored in a gallon of ethanol relative to gasoline."
Indeed, the chemistry is more significant than any other factor discussed here. Alcohol just doesn't contain nearly the usable energy/volume gasoline has. That's why we switched to gasoline a Century ago when it was still easier to obtain Ethyl alcohol. Review some of the chemistry and graphs. Ethanol Manual
Brazil has shown it is possible to make the transition away from oil alone to mostly Ethanol, but it took decades. Still, this is probably easier than the other solutions (electric, hydrogen) which will be evolving at the same time.
Easier still would be changing our lifestyles and assumptions so we use less energy. I see a lot of large empty pickups and SUV's being driven around with few or no passengers most of the time. This wastes more oil than thousands of acres of Ethanol-making crops can replace.
Conservation alone could make the biggest difference in reduced oil dependence, global warming, etc. Conservation first, supplemented by mass transit and new, lower-oil solutions such as Ethanol blends, E85, hybrids, electrics, and finally hydrogen fuel cells will get us where we need to be in the next decade.
It was tried once before and it didn't work. All the additives they keep adding to gasoline just adds more to the price of gasoline and does little extra.
Brazil has shown it is possible to make the transition away from oil alone to mostly Ethanol, but it took decades.
Brazil is oil independent because they now produce more oil than they use. Ethanol is between 10-20% of their fuel usage.
President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, dressed in an orange jump suit, drenched his hand in oil as he flipped the switch Friday on a new oil rig that will usher in overall independence from foreign oil.
Petrobras said the huge P-50 rig will boost national oil production to an average of 1.9 million barrels a day this year, more than average consumption of 1.85 million barrels a day.
You can get gm cars with flex fuel (the ones offered) for the same price as the non flex fuel ones.
Also gas is still going up and its starting to affect other bills not just the gas bill. I got a notice from my landscaper stating that due to gas increases my bill has gone up 10$ a week.
Doesn't sound like much. However my gas for my car has gone up about 20$ a week.
So now i'm at 30$ a week or 120$ that is if I fill up only once a week . If i have to fill up twice a week we are looking at 50$ a week or 200$ a month.
This is before counting in the fact that almost everything at the grocery store has gone up in price. Tide went up 25cents. Next up are the resturants and other eaterys .
I don't htink some on this board understand how far reaching oil is . The price of gas effects everything , your house energy bills , your car gas bills , the price of new cars , the price of consumer goods , the price of food and services .
I don't think there really is a premium since the engines that are coming out are designed to run on either ethanol or gas. It's not a certain trim level or option package since it's just engineered into the engine.
Easier still would be changing our lifestyles and assumptions so we use less energy. I see a lot of large empty pickups and SUV's being driven around with few or no passengers most of the time. This wastes more oil than thousands of acres of Ethanol-making crops can replace.
I hate when people assume this . Not everyone doesn't use thier suvs . You may see me often alone with out cargo in my suv. However I have the suv because at least once or twice a week I need to move alot more stuff than a sedan would allow me to .
I would of course love to have a fuel efficent car to drive around in when I don't have the need for extra cargo room.
However I can't see spending 20k on a suv and then another 20k or so on a fuel efficent car .
It would have to be pretty damn efficent to make up that extra 20k
I don't htink some on this board understand how far reaching oil is . The price of gas effects everything
That I agree with you on. The farmer pays more for diesel to run his tractor. More for the trucks to haul the crops. more for the fertilizer made with fossil fuels. All the reasons that when oil goes up ethanol and everything else goes up. All this talk of using more ethanol has only made the price of ethanol go up. And it took gas with it because of the May 5th E10 mandate.
Marines do not fight wars for salary, they fight to defend the country. We are at war with big Oil, how many American lives have we lost fighting for Oil Gulf war I, II, IRAQ. You do not use Ethanol to save money, you use Ethanol to make a statement "I am reducing my Oil consumption", "I am reducing my carbon footprint" This is a movement, there are no savings, here, this for our future, our Children and our country. I use Ethanol just to make a statement, hey big Oil , there is an alternative
You do not use Ethanol to save money, you use Ethanol to make a statement "I am reducing my Oil consumption", "I am reducing my carbon footprint"
That is commendable, as long as Congress does not try to push it off on the whole country. The states with the highest gas prices are the ones trying to get enough ethanol trucked into them for that stupid mandate. Also the MTBE was the EPAs doing not the oil companies. The EPA mandated an oxygenator for gas and MTBE was considered the best because it could be added at the refinery before being piped to the different locations. They cannot do that with Ethanol. I imagine when ethanol is determined to cause cavities or something it will be dumped.
If you want a high mileage car for E85 forget it. The highest rated is the Impala & Monte Carlo with a combined 19 MPG.
Even if someone on the west coast wanted to be part of the E85 "movement" it would be near impossible. In all of Oregon, Washington & California there is only ONE station selling E85. E85 is best kept in the Midwest.
Additionally, Bush said he would ask the EPA to temporarily ease clean air regulations that have caused gas shortages in some portions of the Northeast.
"I think it makes sense that they should be allowed to, so I'm directing EPA administrator [Steve] Johnson to use all of his available authority to grant waivers that would relief critical fuel supply shortages," Bush said. "And I do that for the sake of our consumers."
"Switchgrass shouldn't require alot of water actually . Its a very low maintenance crop. I don't really see caly growing this stuff honestly as that state has so many problems it doesn't need to add farmers to the list . But there are places like washington that has an abundance of land and water that could be used for switch grass."
I agree, the Weather Channel today listed the top 10 low rainfall cities in the USA. There was one city in Colorado and the other nine were scattered up and down the west coast...4 were in California. The #1 driest city was Los Angeles. I doubt if we will ever see any corn or switchgrass growing west of the rockies in any dry area -- too costly. E10 has proven itself and E85 will probably be limited to the east and middle America.
I agree, the Weather Channel today listed the top 10 low rainfall cities in the USA. There was one city in Colorado and the other nine were scattered up and down the west coast...4 were in California. The #1 driest city was Los Angeles. I doubt if we will ever see any corn or switchgrass growing west of the rockies in any dry area -- too costly. E10 has proven itself and E85 will probably be limited to the east and middle America.
yea , switch grass can be grown everywhere . Some places better than others. We have farms up and down the east coast that were abandoned along time ago . South Jersey has a ton of land that isn't being used .
we don't have to stop at e10. when we can produce enough ethanol we can move to a e20 mixture. Then a e30 mixture , then a e40 and so on
IT doesn't matter what % of vechicals can use more . You just have to provide x amount of pumps in a y amount of milleage from each other that offers the higher amount .
As more cars have flexfuel engines more will buy that fuel.
Jeep just anounced 2007 grand cherokees and commanders will have flex fuel engines.
Not a bad start combined with the choices gm has .
As more cars have flexfuel engines more will buy that fuel.
I don't think that will be the case. For people to buy the fuel they will need 1.) flex fuel engines and 2.) the ability (real or perceived) that they can go further on a dollar of E85 than the can on a dollar of gasoline.
You see people as a general rule follow their pocketbooks. If they find that they are spending more on E85 than they do with gas E85 will never take off.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
While I fully support ethanol (maybe misguided, time will tell) I completely agree with you on this snakeweasel. We have plenty of other things that extra $$ can be spent on, even if we can easily afford fuel for our trucks and SUVs. The more we save the more we can put elsewhere. So for any of the alternatives to be successful it really needs to appeal to the end-users' pocketbooks and wallets.
Comments
Given our consumerism in this country, I'm not really surprised. But based on this fact it's hard to see the focus on POVs while ignoring the continuously growing number of heavy commercial vehicles on the highways. If all those that I had to deal with this past week were using GMs hybrid powertrains and biodiesel, I have a feeling we'd see a bigger impact than by converting all our heavier POVs to small cars.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
85% Ethanol 15% Gasoline
Gerald E Smith
Providence RI
The costs of storing, mixing and selling ethanol based gasoline can easily be done close to the source of the corn and switch grass products. The Eastern USA can easily gear up and do it as the other required facilities are already there, access to large volumes of free water, an interstate system that reaches many more small towns than we see out west, manufacturing sites that can support new equipment, a workable rail system when needed, and a very dense corridor of population and autos from Maine to Florida.
As we see on the national news, there are many in the west that do not want ethanol, especially the politicians. Water out in the west is so expensive and power to run ethanol plants is probably not available. It will cost the USA a lot to convert to Ethanol, but the work has already started and there are millions of 10% users already...now if we can only increase production for the 85% gasahol mix we will be ahead of the game. Ethanol sites are already being built from here in Iowa to upstate NY (that I am aware of). Ethanol production is not a future government dream, but a fact that is already being done with private funds. There are some farmer co-op owned companies already manufacturing ethanol. The only problem facing us is trying to grow enough corn and switch grass to do the job...the future of ethanol is already here in practical terms.
Actually, there is no good amount of gas to burn. Which is why I like a large gas tax. It penalizes everyone in proportion to their offense. I see it more as a CO2 fine than a tax. Kind of like a fine for littering except you are littering the atmosphere.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Here are some avenues that will help change that
http://www.ethanolboost.com/Technology.htm
This allows for substantially higher levels of torque in turbocharged engines and makes it possible to substitute a smaller, more fuel-efficient turbocharged engine for an engine twice its size while maintaining the same or better horsepower and torque capability in the low RPM range which is important for acceleration. For example, a 3.0 liter V6 engine could be replaced by a 1.5 liter 4 cylinder engine.
I think replacing a 3.0 leter v6 with a 1.5 l 4cylinder will make e85 more efficent. This ebs system is for ethanol only
Here is another
http://www.scuderigroup.com/technology/the_technology.html
Studies showed engine efficiency increases from 33% to almost 40% while toxic emissions are reduced by as much as 80%.
Now the above can be used for all fuel types . however combine the two above and you can have yourself extremely powerfull 4cylinder engines that get extremely high gas mileage on ethonal while providing power of equal or greater power to current v6s add in hybrid tech and I think we have a good road in the next 10-20 years on e85.
That is because E85 contains about 25% less energy than gas. So unless you know of a way that will inject more energy into E85 then it will always be less efficient. saying you can make E85 give you better mileage than gas is like saying you can get more change from a quarter than you can from a buck.
I think replacing a 3.0 leter v6 with a 1.5 l 4cylinder will make e85 more efficent.
You can also get better efficentcy with a gas engine buy making it smaller. Remember you don't increase power by increasing octane.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Switchgrass shouldn't require alot of water actually . Its a very low maintance crop. I don't really see caly growing this stuff honestly as that state has so many problems it doesn't need to add farmers to the list . But there are places like washington that has an abundance of land and water that could be used for switch grass.
Your right that the east coast could use e85 the easiest . That is what we should focus on . Getting the east coast on e85 supplied from the east coast would reduce our oil dependency greatly .
will cost the USA a lot to convert to Ethanol Of course , but i twill cost alot less than converting to pure electric cars or hydrogen and it will also create more jobs in the process
The only problem facing us is trying to grow enough corn and switch grass to do the job...the future of ethanol is already here in practical terms.
well it will take awhile for us to need vast quanityso f e85 . So we have the time to refine the refinerys , modify the switch grass seeds and convert useless land to growing this stuff . Along with building better e85 engines than just ocnverted gas engines
Did you read the link I posted ? Its adressed there .
You can also get better efficentcy with a gas engine buy making it smaller. Remember you don't increase power by increasing octane. read the links . It states how to increase the efficenty of the engines .
The carefully designed and timed direct injection of ethanol, through the mechanism of evaporative cooling and its own intrinsic properties as a fuel, is equivalent to increasing the overall fuel octane rating of the mixture of ethanol and gasoline to more than 130. This high effective octane rating and increased resistance to engine knock allows for significantly higher levels of turbocharging. This implies that -- compared to a conventional engine of comparable size -- over two times the air and fuel flow can be processed in an engine equipped with EBS technology without any reduction of compression ratio, an important design parameter affecting the engineís intrinsic energy conversion efficiency. This allows for substantially higher levels of torque in turbocharged engines and makes it possible to substitute a smaller, more fuel-efficient turbocharged engine for an engine twice its size while maintaining the same or better horsepower and torque capability in the low RPM range which is important for acceleration. For example, a 3.0 liter V6 engine could be replaced by a 1.5 liter 4 cylinder engine.
As you can see its all addressed here. As i've said before by designing an engine around e85 instead of around gas , you can increase the efficenty of the engine .
The way above will increase the power of a v4 in such a way that it will be competive with a v6 in the lower rpm lvls where its needed .
Yes I did and no it didn't, it just repeated a lot of falsehoods.
read the links . It states how to increase the efficenty of the engines .
See above.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
BTW, diesel engines are already closer to 40% efficient. If this 7% efficiency gain is impressive then its hard to ignore the 57% improvement that an electric motor can provide. Also, I think that the corellation between engine displacement and fuel efficiency is not as great as people are led to believe. The 6 cylinder Camry only gets 2 mpg less than the 4 cyl despite having 2 more cylinders, almost 50% greater displacement and over 100 lbs of extra weight.
That sounds a lot like a statement that was just pulled out of the air. If not then be a little more specific. How much less will it cost. How many more jobs will it produce. I'll settle for rough estimates as long as there is a credible source. And it is also based on never going the electric vehicle route because it certainly doesn't cost less to do both.
Yes I did and no it didn't, it just repeated a lot of falsehoods.
read the links . It states how to increase the efficenty of the engines .
See above.
well we are done here , you dismiss ideas and patents done by professionals and that is your busniess , however I don't deal with people who dismiss things with out any proof. If you want to claim a negative then its up to you to post the proof
Actually you wont need to burn anymore fuel. By using the system you will produce over two times the heat and air flow can be generated thus giving a 1.5 l4 cylinder engine the performace lvls of a v6 3.0l engine . When you compare the fuel savings between a 4cylinder and a 6 cylinder you will see they more than make up the diffrence between ethanol and gas.
When average joe goes into a show room and buys a car , he will see a 4 cylinder 1.5 litter car with about 20-30% of the fuel economy of a standard 4clylinder 1.5 , however he will see performance characteristics close to that of a v6 3.0 litter engine .
You can take this further and design a smaller engine than a 1.5 litter 4 cylinder engine and get the same power as a 4 cylinder engine .
That is increased fuel econmy based on the power of the engine compared to engines with the same power.
As for the second link , I said it can be used for both. However combinding the two would created a highly efficent engine small engine , that has very high acceleration and high fuel economy .
With time even newer engine designs will come about based on ethanols diffrences between gas . They will play on its strengths and create more efficent ethanol engines .
Electric vehicles will evolve . I have never disagreed. In thier current state and for the near future they will not be workable . So what do we do in the interm ? Sit on our backsides and watch gas climb higher and higher ? Ethanol is ready to roll out today. In 5-10 years we can have every new car running on ethanol (most likely sooner) we can have a large amount of new cars being sold in the next 5 years running on ethanol . We can have 20-348% times the amount of gas we can import now as ethanol. If electric cars are ready in 5 years they will start out in small scale like gm has been putting out flex fuel cars , or like hybrids and will take years to catch on .
The other problems are how do you get the electricty for this car ? Ethanol you go down to a local gas station and yoru done.
Electric ? Plug it in ? Sure but your going to need a large current to charge it and your house is already feeding alot of stuff. So your going to have to have your house power lines upgraded . Or you can get I guess a solar paneling set and plug it into that . Have large batterys burried by your house to get a 2 or 4 day charge and then charge your car when you plug it in . Great , however not every house is built to gather the most amount of sun like during the day. The front of my house gets the most sunlight , however the roof slants to the side of the house which is normaly in the shadow of the house next to me and the trees infront of that house . I'm sure for every house that can take advantage of the sun , there is at least one that can't . We can agree on that correct (esp since a portion of the houses in the east were built before 1950 and were hardly concerned about solar power)
. So I guess we have the power companys supply htis . However the power grids are horribly out of date . Here in jersey last summer we have 4 black outs of over 4 hours and many little brown outs . Thats because man are running air units . I highly doubt the power grids are going to hold up if we throw in charging electric cars in everyones house we are going to have huge problems esp in the summer time. So we can regulate the power a car draws in its charging set up. However this will make the time to charge much longer. We can add in tech like on the hybrids that will charge the batterys as you break. However there is no engine to switch to so that will only delay the battery from being spent.
So the most logical solution is to add power units at gas stations . To make this work we are going to need fast charging batterys . Like the toshiba ones . Now I believe that it takes 1min to charge a large portion of the battery( i believe over 90%) But i believe someone said he thought it was 8-9 minutes . Now 1 minute charges aren't bad . Even if it takes another 1 min for the rest of the battery. That is 2 minutes. But how about a 8min charge with 2 min charge on the rest ? that be 10 mins per car at a charge station.
Then you have the fact that these stations are going to have to be converted to half gas / half electric the number of cars going through will be lowered. The stations will want to make money and thus charge you for it . Your still going to need to update the existing power delivery system.
I've watched the discovery channel and they have talked many times about our adiquated power grid . Most of it was built towards the end of the early 1900s and mid 1900s . There are huge problems with it and we've seen these problems many times over like the east coast power outage when the station in canda went down and over loaded the grids .
Now I agree with you , Electric cars are most likely the best answer. However its not an answer ready today and most likely wont be ready to start being introduced for another decade and even then it will be in the smaller cars (it will take alot of power to move a pick up truck)
I would love a world where I can pull up to the mall. Plug my car in , swip my credit card and start walking to the mall under a roof of solar panels that helps to charge all the cars . Come back unhook my car , plug my phone of pda into the terminal , have the bill loaded on to that (why waste paper ? ) and drive off having whatever portion of my battery charge in the alot time i was there.
As for diesel , I would love to run purely on diesel. I was actually hopping jeep would offer the patriot with a diesel . I would buy it in a second . I believe the liberty with its diesel gets around 30% more fuel economy than the gas version . However even that isn't a magic bullet. Though I wonder how e95 (which is 5% diesel and 95% ethanol ) would perform .
As for your claims on engine size. Well I will have to look into that . However the civic 1.8 liter gets 20/38 , the 2.0 liter 23/32. . That is a huge diffrence and they are both v4s there is only a 200lbs diffrence.
However you are right on the camry . 24/33 vs 22/31. Which is the only car that shows that diffrence. Perhaps its a 5 speed automatic on the v6 vs a 4 on the v4 ?
Yea thats it , the v6 has a 6 speed auto matic and the 4 has a 5 speed auto matic . The 6th gear adds efficeny . This is a standard feature .
Have they sold this engine to any automakers? If not why not? Could it be they are not as practical as they are saying? I would think that some automaker would jump on an engine that will get equal or better mileage with E85 while maintaining the same HP as a gas engine.
Or it can simply be that there are not enough ethanol pumps and where you can use the engine would be limited ?
ITs very simple that for this engine to be practical you need e85 as it uses the way ethanol burns and is made to make this work. If you buy this and can only fill up at a few dozen stations nation wide itsn ot going to be successfull.
Right now the engines being used are made to run on varying types of fuel. e85 , e10 , regular unleaded. When e85 is wide spread and your able to find it in every area easily (i.e going from maine to florida and being able to fill up when needed) then we will see engines geared specificly to e85 and its unique propertys .
Its the same reason we don't see pure electric cars using quick charge batterys. There is no where to get the fuel currently or hydrogen cars
it could be however that is 10-20 years for something to be readily avalible. Not 10-20 years for an introduction of the tech .
IF the goverment mandated today that every engine sold in 2008 was flexfuel the vehicals would be there and as e85 became avalible in your area you could use it and still be able to use gas if you end up some where that doesn't have e85.
What happens in your electric car if you go on a trip and get there and no one can recharge it for you as they can't provide the juice ?
The country would have to upgrade all of its power grid (and be able to provide the power after that ). With ethanol the only problem is creating it and more and more plants capable of doing this will be made in the next few years
and of course can import ethonal from brazil , europe , canada and other areas .
Whats interesting is every car should be capable of running on e10 , motortrend thinks its likely that most should be able to run on e20 . flexfuel engines can run on regular unlead and e10 up to e85. So as more ethanol becomes avalible we can use e20 , then e30 , then e40 and so on.
So the limited amount of ethanol we can produce today and import (wish bush would get rid of that tax and give brazil and other countrys the 51cent incentive) can still reduce amount of gas we need and we can continue to increase our production and imports of it and slowly move up in grades of ethanol .
However today electric cars wont do anything to reduce our dependancy on oil . Hybrids can help. But hybrid ethanol cars will help further .
This is something we can do today.
I wonder what the fuel econmy of e20 is ? e10 is 5% less than unleaded correct ?
A really fast way to ensure far more public transit use is to make the cost of a monthly transit pass full tax-deductible if you can prove you're working or involved in a full-time job search. Given the cost of local public transit monthly passes nowadays (US$70 or more per month) such tax relief would be very much welcome.
But then you go further and use that to try to prove the claim that an engine powered by ethanol can't possibly be more efficient than an engine powered by pure gasoline. This part is blatantly false- the fact that we're talking about efficiency alone should clue you in. Gasoline engines, despite having a century of development, are still very inefficient engines. Diesel engines are more efficient but still far from using all the available energy content in the fuel. Until our engines are 100% efficient, comparing overall energy content in each fuel by itself to make such statements is wasted effort, and amounts to an attempt to be blatantly misleading.
BTW, higher compression in engines generally results in higher efficiency levels from whatever fuel source is in use, which is one of the biggest, if not the biggest, reasons why diesel is so much more efficient than gasoline. Higher octane fuels allow for higher compression ratios. So pure ethanol (105 or better octane) in engines specifically geared for it (and not for gas first, with E85 compatibility) can run higher compression than similar gas engines, which would increase the percent of energy extracted from the fuel, so that the ethanol powered car achieves similar or better economy. I believe Saab recently demonstrated a turbocharged car demonstrating this, but haven't found the link yet..
1) Carbon fiber block with porcelain coating, steel cylinder inserts
2) 2-stroke, direct injection 3 cylinder inline @750 cc
3) 15:1 compression ratio
4) Intercooled turbo set for 14.7 psi boost
5) Pushrod 4 valve heads--single low mounted cam
6) Closed crankcase
This would be a small, very light, very power dense motor. the ethanol would allow for the high compression and moderate turbo pressure. The block would keep the heat inside the engine and minimize thermal losses. The two stroke provides mechanical efficiency, while the three cylinder would allow for smoothness. i picked pushrod with a single cam to decrease package size.
The idea of turbocharging to allow for similar power in smaller displacement engines is hardly a novel idea. Currently what ever can be accomplished in terms of efficiency in an ethanol engine can be exceded by a gasoline engine. Will that always be the case? To answer that requires speculation. But to say that a technology that is currently at a big disadvantage will overtake the leader is not only speculation but wild speculation.
Your hardly comparing apples to apples. This same 2.0L engine in the Acura RSX is rated at 27/34, not quite as huge a difference. Interestingly the Type-S, high performance version of the RSX is only rated at 23/31, which is a more similar engine to your example. What are the differences? The Type-S has a higher compression , uses higher octane gas and has a 6 spd manual as opposed to the 5 spd in the standard model. Why didn't this result in better efficiency? A couple other examples. The 1.5L in the Honda Fit is rated at 33/38 and weighs 300 lbs less than the Civic. The 2.4L in the Accord is rated at 26/34 and weighs 400 lbs more than the Civic. I agree that there is a corellation between engine displacement and efficiency it just isn't all that significant.
Assuming that you are correct and an engine can be built that will give good fuel economy in a midsize family sedan. This car would run on E85 or E100 to take advantage of the high octane rating. What happens when you cannot find E85? Trying to find 105 octane gas is not easy.
No I dismiss questionable statements made by people trying to sell me something. That is something that I suggest everyone do.
Face facts, anything that can be done to improve an engine running ethanol can be done to improve an engine running gas. Hiker octane does not equal more power. Ethanol has less energy than gasoline. These are simple facts that the article either ignores or doesn't address.
however I don't deal with people who dismiss things with out any proof.
Without any proof to prove their claim you want me to accept what they say? Hey if your like that e-mail me i have a wonderful deal for you. But please no checks cash only.
If you want to claim a negative then its up to you to post the proof
I provided points of why I do not accept it. I see no proof to the contrary. How about providing that proof?
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
I should remind you that today's gasoline-fuelled engines are VASTLY more powerful, fuel-efficient and cleaner than engines of even 20 years ago, thanks to these developments:
1. Full electronic ignition with computerized spark control
2. Port fuel injection with electronic fuel deliver control
3. Four-valve per cylinder heads
4. Variable valve timing
5. Vastly improved catalytic converter designs
A good example is compare a 1988 Honda Accord LX sedan with the 2006 version of the same car. In the 1988 LX, the engine was a 2.2-liter I-4 with a 12-valve head and a carburetor for fuel delivery, rated at 98 bhp; the 2006 LX uses an 2.4-liter engine with a 16-valve variable timing valve head, port fuel injection, and modern electronic controls for almost the engine engine rated at 166 bhp! :surprise: The new engine not only has better fuel economy, but also is so clean that it even gets the CARB AT-PZEV emissions certification, something found mostly in hybrid vehicles.
And gasoline engines still can get further improvements, too. The arrival of direct fuel injection allows for extremely precise fuel delivery and control of the ignition process, and an upcoming technology called homogeneous charge compression ignition (HCCI) could raise fuel economy 33% over today's gasoline engines. :shades: That bodes well for gasoline engines over the next 20 years until E85 fuelled engines and fuel-cell vehicles take over by 2025.
Indeed, the chemistry is more significant than any other factor discussed here. Alcohol just doesn't contain nearly the usable energy/volume gasoline has. That's why we switched to gasoline a Century ago when it was still easier to obtain Ethyl alcohol. Review some of the chemistry and graphs. Ethanol Manual
Brazil has shown it is possible to make the transition away from oil alone to mostly Ethanol, but it took decades. Still, this is probably easier than the other solutions (electric, hydrogen) which will be evolving at the same time.
Easier still would be changing our lifestyles and assumptions so we use less energy. I see a lot of large empty pickups and SUV's being driven around with few or no passengers most of the time. This wastes more oil than thousands of acres of Ethanol-making crops can replace.
Conservation alone could make the biggest difference in reduced oil dependence, global warming, etc. Conservation first, supplemented by mass transit and new, lower-oil solutions such as Ethanol blends, E85, hybrids, electrics, and finally hydrogen fuel cells will get us where we need to be in the next decade.
It was tried once before and it didn't work. All the additives they keep adding to gasoline just adds more to the price of gasoline and does little extra.
The EPA is also a joke. A stupid joke.
Brazil is oil independent because they now produce more oil than they use. Ethanol is between 10-20% of their fuel usage.
President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, dressed in an orange jump suit, drenched his hand in oil as he flipped the switch Friday on a new oil rig that will usher in overall independence from foreign oil.
Petrobras said the huge P-50 rig will boost national oil production to an average of 1.9 million barrels a day this year, more than average consumption of 1.85 million barrels a day.
http://www.forbes.com/home/feeds/ap/2006/04/21/ap2688592.html
You can get gm cars with flex fuel (the ones offered) for the same price as the non flex fuel ones.
Also gas is still going up and its starting to affect other bills not just the gas bill. I got a notice from my landscaper stating that due to gas increases my bill has gone up 10$ a week.
Doesn't sound like much. However my gas for my car has gone up about 20$ a week.
So now i'm at 30$ a week or 120$ that is if I fill up only once a week . If i have to fill up twice a week we are looking at 50$ a week or 200$ a month.
This is before counting in the fact that almost everything at the grocery store has gone up in price. Tide went up 25cents. Next up are the resturants and other eaterys .
I don't htink some on this board understand how far reaching oil is . The price of gas effects everything , your house energy bills , your car gas bills , the price of new cars , the price of consumer goods , the price of food and services .
I hate when people assume this . Not everyone doesn't use thier suvs . You may see me often alone with out cargo in my suv. However I have the suv because at least once or twice a week I need to move alot more stuff than a sedan would allow me to .
I would of course love to have a fuel efficent car to drive around in when I don't have the need for extra cargo room.
However I can't see spending 20k on a suv and then another 20k or so on a fuel efficent car .
It would have to be pretty damn efficent to make up that extra 20k
That I agree with you on. The farmer pays more for diesel to run his tractor. More for the trucks to haul the crops. more for the fertilizer made with fossil fuels. All the reasons that when oil goes up ethanol and everything else goes up. All this talk of using more ethanol has only made the price of ethanol go up. And it took gas with it because of the May 5th E10 mandate.
The reason gas went up is simple . poor planing on the gas companys parts in the switch over to e10 .
e10 is important because the previous mixtures were bleeding into the ground water .
Imagine if the goverment fined the gas companys to clean up the mess. Imagine how much money we would be paying in gas then.
We are at war with big Oil, how many American lives have we lost fighting for Oil Gulf war I, II, IRAQ.
You do not use Ethanol to save money, you use Ethanol to make a statement "I am reducing my Oil consumption", "I am reducing my carbon footprint"
This is a movement, there are no savings, here, this for our future, our Children and our country.
I use Ethanol just to make a statement, hey big Oil , there is an alternative
That is commendable, as long as Congress does not try to push it off on the whole country. The states with the highest gas prices are the ones trying to get enough ethanol trucked into them for that stupid mandate. Also the MTBE was the EPAs doing not the oil companies. The EPA mandated an oxygenator for gas and MTBE was considered the best because it could be added at the refinery before being piped to the different locations. They cannot do that with Ethanol. I imagine when ethanol is determined to cause cavities or something it will be dumped.
If you want a high mileage car for E85 forget it. The highest rated is the Impala & Monte Carlo with a combined 19 MPG.
Even if someone on the west coast wanted to be part of the E85 "movement" it would be near impossible. In all of Oregon, Washington & California there is only ONE station selling E85. E85 is best kept in the Midwest.
http://www.e85fuel.com/database/search.php
Additionally, Bush said he would ask the EPA to temporarily ease clean air regulations that have caused gas shortages in some portions of the Northeast.
"I think it makes sense that they should be allowed to, so I'm directing EPA administrator [Steve] Johnson to use all of his available authority to grant waivers that would relief critical fuel supply shortages," Bush said. "And I do that for the sake of our consumers."
I agree, the Weather Channel today listed the top 10 low rainfall cities in the USA. There was one city in Colorado and the other nine were scattered up and down the west coast...4 were in California. The #1 driest city was Los Angeles. I doubt if we will ever see any corn or switchgrass growing west of the rockies in any dry area -- too costly. E10 has proven itself and E85 will probably be limited to the east and middle America.
yea , switch grass can be grown everywhere . Some places better than others. We have farms up and down the east coast that were abandoned along time ago . South Jersey has a ton of land that isn't being used .
we don't have to stop at e10. when we can produce enough ethanol we can move to a e20 mixture. Then a e30 mixture , then a e40 and so on
Yes we have to as only a relatively few flex fuel cars can use anything much more than 10% ethanol.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
IT doesn't matter what % of vechicals can use more . You just have to provide x amount of pumps in a y amount of milleage from each other that offers the higher amount .
As more cars have flexfuel engines more will buy that fuel.
Jeep just anounced 2007 grand cherokees and commanders will have flex fuel engines.
Not a bad start combined with the choices gm has .
I don't think that will be the case. For people to buy the fuel they will need 1.) flex fuel engines and 2.) the ability (real or perceived) that they can go further on a dollar of E85 than the can on a dollar of gasoline.
You see people as a general rule follow their pocketbooks. If they find that they are spending more on E85 than they do with gas E85 will never take off.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D