Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncements
Discussion Groups
By Brand
BMWChevroletDodgeFordGMHondaLexusMercedes-BenzNissanPeugeotToyotaVolkswagenOther Brands
By Topic
4x4 CarsRVsDrivingMaintenance & RepairCar AudioCollectible Cars
Country Specific
Australian ForumsUK Forums
ArticlesAuto InsuranceBuyingCars & TechnologyMaintenanceMiscellaneousSafety
DMV Resources
Related Topics
MotorcyclesBoatsMore Topics ...

Car Forum / Toyota / Toyota Cars / October 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

And, from the same article:

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Hachiroku - 23 Oct 2005 03:48 GMT
So, it appears that those who say producing ethanol takes more energy than
it returns only gave us half the story:

Energy balance in the United States

One study has concluded that the use of corn ethanol for fuel would have a
negative net energy balance. Namely, the total energy needed to produce
ethanol from grain — including fermentation, fertilizing, fuel for farm
tractors, harvesting and transporting the grain, building and operating an
ethanol plant, and the natural gas used to distill corn sugars into
alcohol — exceeds the energy content of ethanol. However, all subsequent
studies have concluded that ethanol production yields more energy than it
consumes (most agree on a ratio of 1.34:1) This is remarkable when one
considers that the two primary sources of fuel for transportation (diesel
and gasoline) have a negative energy balance. Both consume about 20% more
energy than they yield. [9]
Learning Richard - 23 Oct 2005 13:24 GMT
> So, it appears that those who say producing ethanol takes more energy than
> it returns only gave us half the story:
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> and gasoline) have a negative energy balance. Both consume about 20% more
> energy than they yield. [9]

Does this mean that after I eat my corn I can shove the corncob in my
gas tank?

TIA
Hachiroku - 23 Oct 2005 13:43 GMT
>> So, it appears that those who say producing ethanol takes more energy than
>> it returns only gave us half the story:
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
>
> TIA

Only if you have a REALLY good fuel filter and are planning on letting the
car sit for a looooong time...
Josh - 23 Oct 2005 19:06 GMT
> So, it appears that those who say producing ethanol takes more energy than
> it returns only gave us half the story:
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> and gasoline) have a negative energy balance. Both consume about 20% more
> energy than they yield. [9]

Shocked?
Hachiroku - 23 Oct 2005 20:18 GMT
>> So, it appears that those who say producing ethanol takes more energy than
>> it returns only gave us half the story:
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
>
> Shocked?

I had always heard the reason for NOT using Ethanol was that it took more
energy to produce than was returned. i never heard this about fossil fuels.

So, what's the holdup, then?
Josh - 24 Oct 2005 00:37 GMT
> >> So, it appears that those who say producing ethanol takes more energy than
> >> it returns only gave us half the story:
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> >> ethanol plant, and the natural gas used to distill corn sugars into
> >> alcohol — exceeds the energy content of ethanol. However, all
subsequent
> >> studies have concluded that ethanol production yields more energy than it
> >> consumes (most agree on a ratio of 1.34:1) This is remarkable when one
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>
> So, what's the holdup, then?

Oil Cartel?
Hachiroku - 24 Oct 2005 03:43 GMT
>> >> So, it appears that those who say producing ethanol takes more energy
> than
[quoted text clipped - 29 lines]
>
> Oil Cartel?

<Bugs Bunny voice> Mmmmmmm, Could be!
Dan J.S. - 24 Oct 2005 14:29 GMT
>>> So, it appears that those who say producing ethanol takes more energy
>>> than
[quoted text clipped - 26 lines]
>
> So, what's the holdup, then?

There is no holdup. For the last year, we have been averaging the building
of 2 ethanol plants a year. By my house, you can buy e-85 for about 70 cents
less a gallon than regular gasoline.

I just wish Toyota would pull their heads out of their a.ses and make their
cars compatible with it.
Hachiroku - 24 Oct 2005 14:41 GMT
>>>> So, it appears that those who say producing ethanol takes more energy
>>>> than
[quoted text clipped - 33 lines]
> I just wish Toyota would pull their heads out of their a.ses and make their
> cars compatible with it.

They do!

(see post Indy Rice League...)
Hachiroku - 24 Oct 2005 14:42 GMT
>>>> So, it appears that those who say producing ethanol takes more energy
>>>> than
[quoted text clipped - 33 lines]
> I just wish Toyota would pull their heads out of their a.ses and make their
> cars compatible with it.

Why isn't the car compatible with it? Mods are needed to run ethanol?
Dan J.S. - 24 Oct 2005 17:01 GMT
>>>>> So, it appears that those who say producing ethanol takes more energy
>>>>> than
[quoted text clipped - 44 lines]
>
> Why isn't the car compatible with it? Mods are needed to run ethanol?

Yeah basically you need to get rid of anything in the fuel system that could
possibly rust. You also have to program the computer to work with the higher
octane and lower BTU of ethanol. A properly programmed car will only lose a
little less MPG.
Dan J.S. - 24 Oct 2005 16:59 GMT
>>>> So, it appears that those who say producing ethanol takes more energy
>>>> than
[quoted text clipped - 34 lines]
> I just wish Toyota would pull their heads out of their a.ses and make
> their cars compatible with it.

I meant a month... not 2 new plants a year... but two new plants a month
 
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



©2008 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.