Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Here's the clinker... Cars that are designed and set up to run off gasoline are not going to do as well on ethanol. It's the same misnomer as thinking that a diesel engine will run just as well on gasoline - and that there's something wrong with the gasoline if that doesn't happen.
In light of the FACT that they have designed Formula 1 engines to run on pure alcohol, wouldn't it make sense that they could do the same with passenger cars ifthey wanted to?
Also, do some deeper research on this whole "anti-ethanol blitz" that's been going on the past few years. It is led by a "professor" named Tad Patzek who "just happened" to be an engineer for Shell Oil, and who "just happened" to have his anti-ethanol research funded by Shell Oil. Then, unfortunately, all the little sheeple just copy and paste his stuff instead of thinking and researching things themselves.
Watch and wait. When Big Oil has bought up enough ethanol plants, and owns a controlling share in the market, you will suddenly hear how ethanol is GREAT for both cars AND the environment. It's already happening, but wait 5 years and everything will be hunky-dory with ethanol.
I'm wondering if you read my post. My car is designed to run on E85. That is why I said, and I will quote myself for your convenience, "I own a flex fuel vehicle". It still gets considerably lower fuel economy. That is all I was saying. You still didn't answer any of my questions about why you are instantly writing off the article that was posted. You call people sheep, but you refuse to look in the mirror. The ethanol industry is filled with just as many lies and the oil industry.
Ummm... I read that. But you do know that there's a difference between a flex-fuel vehicle and one designed to run on alcohol, right? By the way - speaking of anecdotal evidence - I've got a good friend who drives a Flex Fuel Ford Taurus. According to him, he only gets 1 mpg less on E85 than on regular gas. So who should we believe?
Also, I told you why I don't put any stock in that article.
Finally, please give us some examples of lies told by the ethanol industry.
Oh, glad to know that you discard everything because of Tad Patzek. Good work.
The biggest lie about ethanol is that it somehow is better for the environment. When you figure in all the fuel used by the farmers in their tractors to plant the corn, then to spray the corn, then to harvest the corn, then to drive it in trucks to a grain elevator so they can put it back into trucks and trains to take it the the ethanol plant and then the ethanol is blended with petroleum and finally goes back into trucks to go the gas station so that we can finally put it into our vehicles. It might make sense in places like Brazil where they are making ethanol out of plants that make better sense to make it out of, but corn is a pretty horrible starting point for ethanol. In America is mostly a scam to artificially inflate grain prices.
The Ethanol Scam : Rolling Stone (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/15635751/the_ethanol_scam_one_of_americas_biggest_political _boondoggles - broken link)
Oh come on. All you're doing is parroting the nonsense findings of Tad Patzek - just like all the other anti-ethanol people. I'm discounting his findings because he found exactly what Shell Oil paid him to find. Why is that so hard for people to understand?
Read through this thread. You'll find numerous examples of the BLATANT LIES of Tad Patzek and the anti-ethanol propaganda machine.
And "Rolling Stone" as a source for credible information? Good lord...
Now... How about you answering some questions.
1. Why can they make Formula 1 cars run on pure alcohol, but they (supposedly) can't make passenger cars run on it?
2. Do you understand the difference between a vehicle that is designed to run on alcohol, and one that is just adapted to accept it (FlexFuel)?
3. Why do other countries, like Brazil, have vehicles that run exclusively on alcohol, but the United States can't seem to come up with any?
You are totally missing the point of the article and my point that it is all bull**** in America. I won't support ethanol until it is done correctly. There are obviously places that it makes sense, such as Brazil. So onto your silly questions...
1. No one ever said that it can not be done. It obviously can be done so your question is moot. Also, Formula 1 racing teams spend hundreds of millions of dollars every year on their cars. Hardly an apples to apples comparison.
2. No, I do not know the full differences. Start importing them so they are available in the US and then we can talk about this.
3. I find it ridiculous that you will completely discount everything in the article that I linked because of your obvious biases, but then will ask a leading question like this that rather makes the point of the article. Ethanol in the USA has nothing to do with the environment or dependence on foreign fossil fuels. Political bull****.
If you're happy to drink the Shell Oil Kool-Aid - provided by Tad Patzek - more power to ya. I'm not.
But you ARE right about Political BS. That is PRECISELY what is keeping ethanol from being both useful and profitable.
Do you believe that corn is an efficient ingredient to make ethanol from? Do you think that is the key to ethanol being "useful and profitable"? If you are arguing that, I don't think Tad is your problem, Bub.
Tad is a major problem because he flat-out lied about the fact that processed corn is NOT a waste product, but a high-quality feed source.
Do you have ANY IDEA what that means?
Also, I'd like for you to explain why the price of corn - during the summer of 2008 - suddenly shot up to over $7.00 per bushel, when for years it had been under $2.00 per bushel. And when you're done explaining that, go on to explain why it almost immediately fell back to under $3.00 per bushel. Supply was not different. Demand was virtually unchanged. WHY THE CHANGE IN THE PRICE OF CORN? WHO MANIPULATED THE MARKET?
Then maybe your friend Tad can explain to you how that price spike bankrupted several major ethanol companies - shortly after they had built new processing plants - and how Big Oil "just happens" to be buying those processing plants for pennies on the dollar...
Why aren't you giving answers instead of posting nonsense like this?
Let's face it buddy... If you don't understand why it matters whether processed corn is waste or valuable feed, you really don't know anything about what's going on with ethanol production.
Feel free to continue to drink the Tad Patzek Kool Aid.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
