We know it will be DOD there is a good chance Flex Fuel may be there. Maybe an Option?

 

I have been hearing alot about flexfuel lately and the more I hear about it the more I dig it. There was a news program on a little while ago discussing the possibility of flexfuel being used in the future and it actually gave GM and Ford good press saying how Ford started work on it back in the 80's and both companies have really been pushing it.

I gotta say from what I hear I like it alot. From what I understand we could practically home grow our own fuel and really cut down on petroleum imports and that would be a big plus IMO. Not to mention the environmental friendliness of it. They mentioned that Brazil currently has over 40% of their transportation using flexfuel and that its extremely popular down there and vehicles outfitted to use flex are starting to sell like hotcakes.

Between the talk of hydrogen, hybrids, and flexfuel I like flexfuel the most. With some fine tuning it could be a serious option for future fuel. And if GM and Ford really push this new tech, imagine the benefits they both could reap if it became mainstream

So to answer the thread, eventually, I would hope that the Camaro could run on it.

 

Actually, its not a ruse its a reality. In fact, recent in-depth studies show a higher return on energy for Ethanol than gasoline. Yup, you can thank technology. Older studies, which people like to quote are just that - older and out of date.

And by the way, don't start complaining about any farm subsidy. I would much rather give money to a local farmer in Ohio, than a missile toting militant muslim in the middle east.

I don't think anyone would disagree with that one...excepting the missile toting militant

 

Sure, we can talk about tillable land all you want. Lets start the the conversation with the fact that today, we still *GIVE* away for free to Russia, enough corn to get them through the winter. United States almost solely supplies the continent of Africa...again, mostly for free.

We export far more than we intake.

And this is just using corn as a base for Ethanol. The real future of ethanol production is just starting to happen right here in the states. And that is cellulosic technology. We get 5 times the yield of corn, it can use anything from refuse to woodchips as feedstock, and the cost is lower than corn. The future is looking good for E85.

 

The reality is it isn't available on the left coast, nor is it environmentally friendly.

 

The reality is that it will soon be availble on the left coast. And it is more environmentally friendly than gasoline. Not our fault califorina is behind the times. How about joining the rest of the nation for once?

http://www.gm.com/company/onlygm/liv...low/index.html

Cornunator!

 

We've had smog laws since the 1960's in California, now everyone is finally catching up with us.

http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news...d=aSVm3V6ipm8I

 

What? For the love of God, please do some research. It is more environmentally friendly by orders of magnitude, over petrol.

Ethanol's significantly lower emmissions is one of its selling points. And not just the emissions coming out of the tailpipe...overall ecological impact, from tractor tiller to harvester to refiners, the numbers far favor ethanol.

And it is coming to the left coast. Bill Gates himself is investing in ethanol plants in California, slated to come online in the next year.

 

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/byfueltype.htm

Besure to compare the greenhouse gases. I could really care less about Kevin Hassett opinions. Defently when his arguement against using e85 is to compare emissions that run straight gas to those that run 10% ethanol.

 

You're right. Everyone else is finally getting as much Smog as California has

This topic brings up memories as a child, living in the Los Angeles basin during the late 60s and early 70s. The state would actually close down schools and public offices, requiring people to stay at home.

I can remember as a child when the smog was so bad, it hurt to breath. My mother would make us breath through a wet washcloth to ease the pain.

Indeed California has come a long way.

 

Are you factoring in the green house gases to produce ethanol? Is the farming equipment tested for emissions? What about the plants producing the enthanol from grain?

 

And there's another problem with E10 studies. The problem is not with the ethanol in the blend, but with the gasoline that its blended with.

Because ethanol raises the octane level, refiners mix ethanol with sub-par grade gasoline....gasoline that would not be saleable at the pump. They make a fortune because they save money by not having to refine crappy gas. All they have to do is add ethanol and bring the octane level up.

E10 and E5 have gotten some bad flack from people complaining about its performance. What they don't know is that they are putting gutter grade gasoline in their cars, with the equivalent a can of octane booster.

Its another way of the oil companies screwing us and getting away with it. Not only do they make money off of their cheapo gas, they get to give ethanol a negative reputation, thus ensuring their own product(gasoline) looks better.

 

Wow. Just wow. What a blow hard.


http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/charl...lotte_business

I guess Shell doesnt count because they didnt make quit as much as Exxon.

http://biz.yahoo.com/bizj/060213/1227783.html?.v=2

Here is a private firm throwing $85 Million

Yeah, ADM sucks. So do Demoratics. But who cares?


Not nearly as much as Oil is. Does he know who our President is? I mean, we go to war for this stuff.

So.....we are comparing a fuel to a crop now huh? Corn has more herbicides and insecticides than other corps. No kidding. What does that have to do with how much pollution the refinery and use of oil gives off? Those are the two you should compare

pollution of creating ethonal vs pollution of creating gas.

Niether of this data is presented

So recent infact, it was written before the new refinary process of enthonal. Snice he didnt provide a link to the study he is talking aboutill.

http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/r...ing_Patzek.pdf

Of course, most of the money that bush is putting thwards enthonal is in the refinery process to make it cheaper to make.

 

So one harms the environment in different ways than the other. However they're both bad for the environment. While I agree we need alternative fuel sources, I'm simply saying that ethanol is not the long term answer. There are other more environmentally friendly solutions that should be looked at before this country invests vasts amount of money and energy into a short term solution that in the end may be just as harmful as gasoline.

Where's the Mr. Fusion when we need one?

 

Anti-matter is a clear answer. Now if I can just store it. Im not saying it is the answer either. Just that im happy we are putting some money into looking elsewhere.

Remember, the goverment and a few fanatics kept the internet moving along for 20 years before wallstreet jumped aboard.