 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / August 2005Gasoline or Bread ?
We may have an opportunity to make the choice, sooner than we thought. This article completely ignores the NET energy from bio-fuels, as well as the environmental impacts. Read between the lines, and we can speculate on what might happen in Brazil if bio-fuels became a significant sector of the fuel market. What was growing in the areas that are now being cultivated with bio-fuel crops ? Forests, farms, pastures ? By the way, any of these bio-fuels can only be competitive when they are subsidized by Federal price supports or tax credits. So, should we add our "added tax dollars" to the price displayed on the pump before we count our savings...? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8769619/site/newsweek/ > We may have an opportunity to make the choice, > sooner than we thought. This article completely [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8769619/site/newsweek/ Many things were subsidized by the U.S. government before Wall Street found them, the Internet is a good example. Ethanol does not need subsidies to exist. Ethanol can be created from switchgrass that can basically grow where no other crops can. > We may have an opportunity to make the choice, > sooner than we thought. This article completely [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8769619/site/newsweek/ Regarding subsidies here is a quote from the article in your post (last page bottom paragraph): In the meantime, Brazil dropped its alcohol subsidies in the late 1990s and now makes bio-fuel so competitive it could trump gasoline at $25 a barrel. With the rest of the world following Brazil, hydrogen is going to have to run fast to catch up. "At the very least biofuels are a bridge toward the hydrogen economy," IEA's Lew Fulton says. "But if you add increased use of biofuels, other fuels such as gas-to-liquid and coal-to-liquid, and finally add improvements in fuel efficiency, we may not ever need the fuel cell at all." That would make biofuels a convincing alternative indeed. > In the meantime, Brazil dropped its alcohol subsidies in the late 1990s and >now makes bio-fuel so competitive it could trump gasoline at $25 a barrel. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >add improvements in fuel efficiency, we may not ever need the fuel cell at >all." That would make biofuels a convincing alternative indeed. So let me get this straight. You environuts are now OK with cutting down the world's rain forests. No problem at all. All that sh.t about global warming doesn't matter a bit. As long as we don't burn existing energy sources. It's fine to kill the planet, just don't use oil. >> In the meantime, Brazil dropped its alcohol subsidies in the late 1990s >> and [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > It's fine to kill the planet, just don't use oil. I am not an environut. You dont need to cut down the rain forest to get ethanol. It can be produced from stuff we throw away right now... and grow switchgrass which can basically even grow in a desert - one of the hardiest plants on earth... Ethanol was what Ford Model Ts were running on a hundred years ago. Planes have been using it too. It's nothing new. >>> In the meantime, Brazil dropped its alcohol subsidies in the late 1990s >>> and [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >plants on earth... Ethanol was what Ford Model Ts were running on a hundred >years ago. Planes have been using it too. It's nothing new. Maybe you are slow. I certainly don't wish to criticize learning disabled people. T h e r e i s n o t e n o u g h l a n d t o m a k e e n o u g h e t h a n o l. >>>> In the meantime, Brazil dropped its alcohol subsidies in the late 1990s >>>> and [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > disabled people. T h e r e i s n o t e n o u g h l a n d > t o m a k e e n o u g h e t h a n o l. There is enough land if you use things like switchgrass. Also, ethanol doesn't need to be a total replacement for crude. It can be a supplement. Do you know that the U.S. government actually pays farmers not to plant corn. Why are you so eager to make personal attacks when it comes to a commodity issue? Did you lose a job or going through some other life stress? We are just having a conversation. >>>>> In the meantime, Brazil dropped its alcohol subsidies in the late 1990s >>>>> and [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] >doesn't need to be a total replacement for crude. It can be a supplement. Do >you know that the U.S. government actually pays farmers not to plant corn. I'm not familiar with switchgrass, but if it's as prolific and adaptable as you say, wouldn't it be dangerous to the native flora? Introduced species can be very dangerous ecologically. >Why are you so eager to make personal attacks when it comes to a commodity >issue? Did you lose a job or going through some other life stress? We are >just having a conversation.  SignatureBill Funk replace "g" with "a" funktionality.blogspot.com > >>>I am not an environut. You dont need to cut down the rain forest to get > >>>ethanol. It can be produced from stuff we throw away right now... and grow [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > adaptable as you say, wouldn't it be dangerous to the native flora? > Introduced species can be very dangerous ecologically. Oh Dear ! The USA is afraid of catching a grass cold ! Did you know the rest of the world sees you as useless pussies btw ? Afraid of a grass ? Now there's something to be seriously worried about ! Graham >> >>>I am not an environut. You dont need to cut down the rain forest to get >> >>>ethanol. It can be produced from stuff we throw away right now... and grow [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > >Graham If you're serious, you're seriously stupid. SignatureBill Funk replace "g" with "a" funktionality.blogspot.com >Did you know the rest of the world sees you as useless pussies btw ? Afraid of a >grass ? Now there's something to be seriously worried about ! Americans aren't stupid europeons. We don't fret about what a.sholes in france and germenemy think of us. We know we are superior. >> Maybe you are slow. I certainly don't wish to criticize learning >> disabled people. T h e r e i s n o t e n o u g h l a n d [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >doesn't need to be a total replacement for crude. It can be a supplement. Do >you know that the U.S. government actually pays farmers not to plant corn. sh.t, you are stupid. It takes 1.5 gallons of oil to make 1 gallon of ethanol. That and the fact that we would need 3 planets to grow enough product to make ethanol, and you still refuse to face facts, proves it. > >> Maybe you are slow. I certainly don't wish to criticize learning > >> disabled people. T h e r e i s n o t e n o u g h l a n d [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > sh.t, you are stupid. It takes 1.5 gallons of oil to make 1 gallon of > ethanol. You *really* do talk crap don't you. Last I saw, the energy to make a gallon of ethanol was * less* than the energy required to make a gallon of gasoline ! > That and the fact that we would need 3 planets to grow > enough product to make ethanol, and you still refuse to face facts, > proves it. Ethanol can be made form many sources such as corn ( popular in the USA ) , wood waste ( being used in Sweden ) , sugar cane ( Brazil ) , sugar beet - not sure who's doing that and actually many other forms of cellulose and sugar bearing plant matter. And indeed bear in mind that in the West much agricultural land is being 'set aside' - i.e. unused or wasted if you prefer. It simply needs to be put back into use to make fuel and reduce the West's dependence on oil *imports* ! Not replace maybe - simply *reduce*. In time maybe it could replace - I really don't know. I do know that I remember the 70s fuel crisis when the West was held hostage by the Arab world who simply restricted our access to oil and shut down parts of our economies. You want that again ? Also - you can simply put an ethanol mix in your car's tank and it'll work. Try that with hydrogen !!!! Graham > Last I saw, the energy to make a gallon of ethanol was * less* than the energy > required to make a gallon of gasoline ! Where does the energy used to make a gallon of ethanol come from then? > > Last I saw, the energy to make a gallon of ethanol was * less* than the energy > > required to make a gallon of gasoline ! > > Where does the energy used to make a gallon of ethanol come from then? Wherever you like it to come from. Indeed it could even come from ethanol if you fancied. All energy ultimately originated from the sun anyway. Some simply gets used more directly. There's plenty of sources of energy around ! Oil isn't the only one. Indeed fossil fuels are simply one source of energy out of many possibles. One that's currently causing considerable damage to the planet it has to be said - giving yet another compelling reason to convert to a carbon neutral fuel cycle that *only* biofuels can effectively do very quickly and be compatible with existing methods of motor propulsion. Let's put it this way. Would you rather drive a vehicle with an internal combustion engine running on ethanol ( that can actually *outperform* a gasoline equivalent when turbo'd - yes ethanol 'turbos' better than gasoline due to its high octane rating ) or limp around in an electric powered milk-cart like the Prius that's slow and can't even go very far ? Graham >>>Last I saw, the energy to make a gallon of ethanol was * less* than the energy >>>required to make a gallon of gasoline ! >>Where does the energy used to make a gallon of ethanol come from then? > Wherever you like it to come from. Indeed it could even come from ethanol if you > fancied. It takes more energy to make a gallon of ethanol than can be recovered from combusting it. What about the energy required to eliminate this deficit? > All energy ultimately originated from the sun anyway. Some simply gets used > more directly. How much will this energy cost? > Let's put it this way. Would you rather drive a vehicle with an internal combustion > engine running on ethanol ( that can actually *outperform* a gasoline equivalent > when turbo'd - yes ethanol 'turbos' better than gasoline due to its high octane > rating ) I currently get 25 mpg with my Audi 2.7L V6 twin turbo. What type of fuel economy would I get with an ethanol powered vehicle that will outperform my Audi? > or limp around in an electric powered milk-cart like the Prius that's slow > and can't even go very far ? How far will an ethanol powered vehicle, that can outperform my Audi, get on a 16.1 gallon tank. My Audi gets around 310 to 350 miles a tank currently. > >>>Last I saw, the energy to make a gallon of ethanol was * less* than the energy > >>>required to make a gallon of gasoline ! [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > It takes more energy to make a gallon of ethanol than can be recovered > from combusting it. Says who ? There's a lot of outdated data out there ! I've seen that many ppl quote a 70s document ( that's unfavourable to ethanol ) still ! If that were true then there would be *zero* point in making it as a fuel ! It would be uneconomic at the first hurdle ! Clearly this isn't so. > What about the energy required to eliminate this > deficit? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > How much will this energy cost? If it's sunshine then basically nothing, sunshine ! The energy required could indeed come from solar power ! > > Let's put it this way. Would you rather drive a vehicle with an internal combustion > > engine running on ethanol ( that can actually *outperform* a gasoline equivalent [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > fuel economy would I get with an ethanol powered vehicle that will > outperform my Audi? About the same as I understand it. You may know that Saab were the first motor company to make turbos widely available - indeed it's their 'thing'. There's a new 'ethanol tuned' Saab 9-5 that delivers *more* bhp on ethanol than on gasoline by using a higher boost pressure when running on ethanol ! I actually thought that most ppl might actually rather *like* that ! You can be green and actually go faster ! And the engine runs cleaner on ethanol too ! > > or limp around in an electric powered milk-cart like the Prius that's slow > > and can't even go very far ? > > How far will an ethanol powered vehicle, that can outperform my Audi, > get on a 16.1 gallon tank. My Audi gets around 310 to 350 miles a tank > currently. I'm sure the numbers will become more widely available as more experience is gained. The outlook seems promising though. Here's some links to articles about Saab's FFV ( flexible fuel vehicle ) 9-5. Note that Saab has simply taken the lead. There's nothing to stop Audi or whoever from following their lead. Indeed turbos make sense generally - whether your fuel is gasoline or alcohol. I do indeed personally experience the 'turbo grin' on a regular basis. ;-) Graham. http://www.saab.com/main/GLOBAL/en/pressreleases/recent/5/index.xml " In its Saab turbo application, the high 104 RON octane rating of E85 fuel, the 85 per cent ethanol/gasoline blend most commonly available at filling stations, also produces a significant 20 per cent increase in maximum engine power, up from 150 to 180 bhp. " http://www.greencarcongress.com/2004/08/saab_flex_fuel_.html http://www.autospectator.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=1191 > If it's sunshine then basically nothing, sunshine ! Solar power, as a "direct" form of energy, is relatively rare. It is almost certainly not being used for making large quantities of ethanol. I don't know about the UK, but most power plants in the US generate energy using some sort of fossil derived source. >>>Let's put it this way. Would you rather drive a vehicle with an internal combustion >>>engine running on ethanol ( that can actually *outperform* a gasoline equivalent >>>when turbo'd - yes ethanol 'turbos' better than gasoline due to its high octane >>>rating ) >>I currently get 25 mpg with my Audi 2.7L V6 twin turbo. What type of >>fuel economy would I get with an ethanol powered vehicle that will >>outperform my Audi? > About the same as I understand it. It's a known fact that ethanol contains substantially less energy than an equivalent amount of gasoline/petrol. It stands to reason that my vehicle would need to combust greater quantities of it to generate the same amount of power. Therefore, the fuel efficiency of my vehicle would drop. More power isn't going to really help me when I can only go 1/2 the distance I used to. >If that were true then there would be *zero* point in making it as a fuel ! It would be >uneconomic at the first hurdle ! Clearly this isn't so. It is so. There is zero point to making ethanol as a fuel. SignatureThere's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can result in a fully-depreciated one. >> > Last I saw, the energy to make a gallon of ethanol was * less* than the energy >> > required to make a gallon of gasoline ! [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Wherever you like it to come from. Indeed it could even come from ethanol if you >fancied. Moron Meter 0% 100% |----------------------------------------------------------| ******************************************************************************************************************************************** Pooh Bear /\ (*) | | | | For those of you who argue that basic science is being taught in our schools, please explain this moron's comments. >There's plenty of sources of energy around ! Oil isn't the only one. Indeed fossil >fuels are simply one source of energy out of many possibles. One that's currently >causing considerable damage to the planet it has to be said - giving yet another >compelling reason to convert to a carbon neutral fuel cycle that *only* biofuels can >effectively do very quickly and be compatible with existing methods of motor >propulsion. Except that biofuels _can't_ do it. It's not possible to produce enough, and the production of what can be produced requires so much additional (fossil-derived) energy that all the supposed advantages are more than wiped out. All your fanaticism can't change those facts. SignatureThere's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can result in a fully-depreciated one. Illinois' coal reserves contain more energy than the oil reserves of Saudi Arabia AND Kuwait >> Last I saw, the energy to make a gallon of ethanol was * less* than the energy >> required to make a gallon of gasoline ! > >Where does the energy used to make a gallon of ethanol come from then? Harry Potter waves his wand, and provides enough energy to make a billion gallons. One should ask why we don't just use the energy he created, instead of wasting it creating less ethanol... > >> Last I saw, the energy to make a gallon of ethanol was * less* than the energy > >> required to make a gallon of gasoline ! [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > One should ask why we don't just use the energy he created, instead of > wasting it creating less ethanol... This report refutes the suggestion that ethanol production is energy inefficient. Current figues show a 38% 'energy' gain from ethanol production 'State of the art' ethanol production gives a 2.5:1 ratio of energy produced to energy used in production. http://www.carbohydrateeconomy.org/library/admin/uploadedfiles/How_Much_Energy_D oes_it_Take_to_Make_a_Gallon_.html Graham >> >> Last I saw, the energy to make a gallon of ethanol was * less* than the energy >> >> required to make a gallon of gasoline ! [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > >Graham "Assuming state-of-the-art practices, the net energy ratio could be as much as 2.51:1." Note the "could be." According to this report (from 1995) the actual ratio is 1.38:1, *IF* the replacement energy it would take to make the by-products is considered: "Assuming an average efficiency corn farm and an average efficiency ethanol plant, the total energy used in growing the corn and processing it into ethanol and other products is 81,090 BTUs. Ethanol contains 84,100 BTUs per gallon and the replacement energy value for the other co-products is 27,579 BTUs. Thus, the total energy output is 111,679 BTUs and the net energy gain is 30,589 BTUs for an energy output-input ratio of 1.38:1." Note the 81,090 BTUs it takes to produce the 84,100 BTUs in a gallon of ethonal. That brings the ratio *for ethanol itself* to 1.03:1. It's reasonable to conclude that in the decade since this was written, the ratio is actually higher due to technological advances, but I think it's better to use a more reralistic figure that more properly represents the actual energy in to energy out. Using figures that include "replacement values" for by-products that aren't used as energy sources themselves only confuses things, and misrepresents the actual energy needed to make ethanol. SignatureBill Funk replace "g" with "a" funktionality.blogspot.com >>> Maybe you are slow. I certainly don't wish to criticize learning >>> disabled people. T h e r e i s n o t e n o u g h l a n d [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > enough product to make ethanol, and you still refuse to face facts, > proves it. Ethanol is actually energy positive. Brazil is a good example. You have proven your own stupidity here. > There is enough land if you use things like switchgrass. Also, ethanol > doesn't need to be a total replacement for crude. It can be a supplement. Do > you know that the U.S. government actually pays farmers not to plant corn. The US government has not paid farmer to not plant corn for years. I've been running a farm for the past 20 years, and never once have I been paid not to plant something. In fact the opposite was true to a certain extent before W started screwing things up. The Government set floors on commodity prices which encouraged me to grow corn and cotton instead of certain other crops. Now they have set the floor on the corn price so low, only a fool would try to grow corn for the government price. I actually considered not planting corn this year because I was worried the price would be below the incremental cost of production (it has been below the fully accounted cost of production for several years). In the end I planted it any way, and I think I'll make out given the current prices. However, until the price of corn goes up, it is a very marginal crop. I am lucky I have a number of alternate crops that are more profitable most years. I mostly grow corn as a rotational crop - although it is my number one crop in terms of acres. Ed >> There is enough land if you use things like switchgrass. Also, ethanol >> doesn't need to be a total replacement for crude. It can be a supplement. [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > Ed Should I scan the check that my dad receives every year? He has a 100 acre farm in Wisconsin... He is getting paid not to plant on it... as are many farmers... it basically breaks even with the tax on the land... > > In the meantime, Brazil dropped its alcohol subsidies in the late 1990s and > >now makes bio-fuel so competitive it could trump gasoline at $25 a barrel. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > It's fine to kill the planet, just don't use oil. You're clearly playing the role of the idiot here. Non-one wants to destroy rain forests to make alcohol fuel. In any event - plant matter suitable for making ethanol fuel will abosrb CO2 from the atmosphere just as well as any forest could in the first place. There will be no net CO2 imbalance. If forest is replaced by farmland growing bio-fuel then there is no net deficit on the global level. It would be wise to ensure that this isn't done where tree roots play a part in stabilising the ground such as in river valleys. Certainly care is needed. Having said that - sloping valley surfaces aren't an attractive option for harvesting crops anyway, so it's unlikely that anyone would consider changing the use in such areas. Graham |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2010 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.