I'm putting this in "Fossil Fuel Free" because the vehicle at the center of the story is being converted to 85% ethanol, and eventually electric power. Also, the owner is the editor/owner of EV World.
---
Has Bill Moore fumbled the ball?
Image source: EV WORLD CURRENTS: How We're Getting Off Oil
EV World has an article in which Moore lays out his justification for trading his 65 mpg 1st generation Honda Insight for a Chevy S-10 pickup in which he expects to get 12 MPG after modifying it to run on 85% ethanol (E85).
His main stated goal is to reduce oil use, particularly "foreign" oil. Certainly laudable. This is the primary reason given for the E85 conversion.
Moore attempts to demonstrate how the truck is marginally better than the hybrid by doing a math exercise, ultimatedly concluding that even though it's vastly less efficient, the truck squeaks out ahead of the 65 mpg hybrid in terms of absolute petroleum use:
Quote:
|
There are 5.6 times more ethanol in a gallon of E85 as there is gasoline (85/15 = 5.6). 12 mpg times 5.6 = 67.2 mpge
|
The problem is he forgets to account for the fossil fuel used in
producing the ethanol. The energy input to create corn derived ethanol is a very high proportion of the energy derived from burning it (some argue it's even higher, meaning a net loss). This fact more than likely tilts the balance of lower petroleum use back towards his long-gone hybrid.
To be fair to Moore:
1) He states twice in the article that he "may someday" convert the S-10 to electric drive.
2) In defending himself in the comments, he says that he traded the Insight for a truck so he could haul stuff. (Why he didn't say so in the article itself is a head-scratcher.)
It looks like his readers aren't buying his petroleum reduction through E85 argument, judging by the negative sentiment in the comments at the bottom of the page.
Full article & comments:
EV WORLD CURRENTS: How We're Getting Off Oil