Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > Fossil Fuel Free
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 10-30-2008, 09:48 PM   #11 (permalink)
home of the odd vehicles
 
rmay635703's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Somewhere in WI
Posts: 3,328

Silver - '10 Chevy Cobalt XFE
Thanks: 350
Thanked 665 Times in 497 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by cfg83 View Post
trebuchet03 -
Isn't it difficult to make a one-to-one comparison with Brazil because of the source of their ethanol? I thought they used sugar-cane while we used corn. The gist I got was that they were extracting more energy from sugar-cane than we are from corn.

CarloSW2
Also throw in the fact that their climate is hot and perfect for ethanol production without burning fuel and throw in the fact that they generally don't blend ethanol with gas and can tollerate higher water percentages, etc ,etc.

If we wanted to produce ethanol more efficiently we could, potatoes are much better than corn and there are slower methods of making alcohol that would require fewer fossil fuels.

The trouble with anything in our "economy" is that it has to be fast and easy and almost always use oil.

With more thought and investment we could make alcohol more efficiently without the use of fossil fuels but sadly lobbies control this sector and they rarely do things that save resources

e85forum.com

Also mileage as in MPG on a vehicle does not always go down running alcohol. My buick got the same mileage both ways running a 50% blend of e85 and e10 AKA 30mpg-32mpg highway. Sadly that motor had major issues to begin with and blew out (not alcohol related) and I haven't tested the new 01 with e85 mixes yet.

The odd thing is most folks who run a mix of e85 in a car NOT DESIGNED TO RUN ON IT tend to get almost exactly the same mileage (e85 mileage is best in warm climates), those that have flex fuel MPG almost always goes down on e85.

Ah well

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 10-30-2008, 09:53 PM   #12 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,739

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,572
Thanked 3,508 Times in 2,195 Posts
Ja my mpg is the same at 50/50 blends or less.
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2010, 10:33 PM   #13 (permalink)
Basjoos Wannabe
 
ShadeTreeMech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 870

The Van - '97 Mercury Villager gs
90 day: 19.8 mpg (US)

Lyle the Kindly Viking - '99 Volvo V70
90 day: 25.82 mpg (US)
Thanks: 174
Thanked 49 Times in 32 Posts
In my Villager on E0 gas I get 20-21 MPG; on E85 I get 16.5-17 mpg. Yes I lose mpg, but the lower cost in my area made up for it.

I'm all for a plug in beat about town vehicle and a long range hydrogen fuel cell vehicle. I'm also interested in the pnuematic powered vehicles, which use only compressed air. I think that has a lot of merit due to wieght considerations and the variety of ways air can be compressed. Heck, using a windmill for the power plant you could compress air, or even powering an air compressor with solar cells.

But how does poor good ole boy from Arkansas afford to even think about affording such a thing?
__________________
RIP Maxima 1997-2012


Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesqf View Post
I think you missed the point I was trying to make, which is that it's not rational to do either speed or fuel economy mods for economic reasons. You do it as a form of recreation, for the fun and for the challenge.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2010, 11:27 PM   #14 (permalink)
dcb
needs more cowbell
 
dcb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location:
Posts: 5,038

pimp mobile - '81 suzuki gs 250 t
90 day: 96.29 mpg (US)

schnitzel - '01 Volkswagen Golf TDI
90 day: 53.56 mpg (US)
Thanks: 158
Thanked 267 Times in 210 Posts
No offense, but I think the jury has already returned a verdict on hydrogen, and it is considered a storage medium and a pretty crummy one at that, unless you are building a rocket with LOTS of other peoples money.

But little sub $1000 econoboxes with a stickshift can be finessed to 50mpg pretty easily (to 100mpg+ by some patient masters), sub $500 motorbikes get about 100mpg without trying too hard, theres a lot room for improvement on the cheap, especially for a do-it-yourself modder.
__________________
WINDMILLS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY!!!
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2010, 04:24 PM   #15 (permalink)
EtOH
 
Allch Chcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: North Coast, California
Posts: 429

Cordelia - '15 Mazda Mazda3 i Sport
90 day: 37.83 mpg (US)
Thanks: 72
Thanked 33 Times in 24 Posts
Cool

Very much misinformation and ad hoc thinking. The EPA starts requiring Ethanol use and our economy promptly fails apart, very unlikely. The reason these scientists can only give up is that Emissions and VOC are a minor part of climate factors. The Green House effect is a minor player in the entire process and the Sun's nuclear rate and speed of heat ray generation is usually the biggest factor. So I'm no expert but they're measuring gold fish to find the problems with the ocean. Scientists have done silly things to find the answer to problems and this is just crazy talk.

I thought this was going to be a discussion of E85 fuel mileage difference from anecdotal sources. The E85 lobby has also given up on giving mileage numbers and just states that, "E85 has 70% of the BTU content of Gasoline and should return at least that much mileage" and "they have see reports of better MPG" but always less than 100% of Gasoline MPG.

The dry vs wet ethanol argument is simple moot. You cannot mix "wet" ethanol with gasoline. Brazil mixes "dry" ethanol with their gasoline which is a 25% Ethanol, 75% Gasoline Mixture and they sell ethanol in it's maximum wet form of 95% Ethanol 5% water. It's been said that taking Ethanol to 95% alcohol content takes half of the energy and the other half is spent getting to to 98-99% alcohol content. But there's no other way around mixing it with gasoline. I wish we could have "wet" ethanol(denatured of course) here instead of E85, it'd be a lot cheaper and better albeit with more corrosion so changing fuel system components would be a bigger factor than they already are. But with our climate and the required components to make a Flex Fuel car run on "wet" ethanol and regular gasoline would be a major problem for regulators.

Corn Ethanol has been shown to be essentially just be a transient fuel and a is a First Generation Biofuel so it gives a small energy surplus from modern production which uses mostly Coal and Natural Gas instead of Petroleum. The next point is how much more efficient Ethanol is than Gasoline but that's another topic eh?
__________________
-Allch Chcar

  Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2010, 10:58 AM   #16 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
gc-steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Iowa
Posts: 20

Saturn - '98 Saturn SL2
Thanks: 10
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefirebuilds View Post
interesting, ive never heard a correlation between Corn values and our economy. I was under the impression that we make far more corn than we can use and the government subsidizes it just for that reason (to interest farmers in making it)

what irritates me is subsidizing something that farmers are obviously making money off of.
There is an interesting little documentary (King Corn) about the costs of producing 1 acre of corn and the subsidies involved.

I think I watched in on the instant Netflix deal, but there is an extend PBS clip here:

-

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com