Quote:
Originally Posted by nibs
Hey, I am trying to learn. I think you are basing your opinion on CORN ethanol.
Have you considered cane, cellulosic, or other sources, that are not $ubsidized.
|
I don't think you will get any argument here that our argrabusiness model in this country is dumb all the way around.
Even corn ethanol could be much more workable, iff
1. We only used the excess that was too old (and there is a lot of it)
2. We did not burn fuel to ferment the corn (the old fashioned method of malting and fermenting that takes more space and time but also does not use significant fuel to ferment)
3. We did not mandate X amount and instead based supply on what was readily available
The 3 statements above and a 4th, don't use gas to grow the ethanol "source" and any source of ethanol would be much more viable.
It is possible to adhear to the above rules but much more initial investment in production area would be needed and the plants would be more feasable down south where it is warm and up north when it is warm.
Another thing is that cars DO NOT NEED GASOLINE TO BURN ETHANOL!
I believe if we wanted ethanol cars, the cars should have been fully setup as an E100 car with glow plugs and altered variable compression and timing.
A true flex fuel motor could vary compression (like a prius), timing and would be optimized for e100 (hydrous) It would truly burn multple fuels (even diesel likely) and would likely be more efficient all the way around.
The economics of Hydrous alcohol are much much much more favorable than dry alcohol which wastes tremendous amounts of energy to make.
As usual we wanted quick, easy, wastefull and to satisfy a vested interest, all the bad things in one.
Cheers
Ryan