Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by griiker on September 8, 2008 at 8:19

good article, a couple of things which weren't proposed or addressed was the idea of a CNG hybrid. The article mentions 32 MPGGE for the CNG version, 45 mpg for the hybrid, Hybridizing the CNG version would equalize the difference. It's still to early to predict what will happen with the Pickens plan, but it seems that there will be a growing debate between CNG and ethanol. From my point of view, I predict we may end up having a CNG/ethanol dual fuel economy.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by North LA on September 8, 2008 at 8:38

Ethanol would lose by a landslide. I've done the research.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by slowpoke on September 9, 2008 at 1:25

Theres a few papers on the subject of ethanol that describe its shortcomings as a mass-produced fuel. One of the big downers is that it takes so much water to both produce the crop and to convert it to fuel. It could literally wipe out water tables over the course of a few years. On the other hand, a backyard Joe with a still, a few acres of corn or switch grass and a supply of wood could do ok in providing for his own needs and a few friends. Its a good concept....... so long as its not done en masse.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on September 8, 2008 at 12:37

Item 2 about NGV's having higher GHG emissions than hybrids may or may not be true. It depends on the fuel for the generated electricity. For instance coal fuelled power would result in twice the GHG emissions of the NGV.

The price spread for Item 3 is much wider now.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by P.G. on September 8, 2008 at 14:39

Ethanol is causing more problems than it's solving!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by K_Bain on September 8, 2008 at 14:45

Corn ethanol, yes. Sugar ethanol not as much. NGV's are a great option though, in my opinion.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by K_Bain on September 9, 2008 at 7:08

Amen to that!

My wife & I hosted an exchange student from Brazil back in 2003. His father worked for a company that was affiliated with Petrobras. He told me then that Brazil would love to supply the USA with sugar ethanol. They are "energy independent" as a result of using / making it. The issue is that we (the USA) impose a tariff on their ethanol to keep it from competing with the American corn farmer's ethanol.

I really feel that our country should take a long, hard look at the plan good ole' TB Pickens is pushing. NGV's just make sense, but so does buying fuel (sugar ethanol) from friendly countries like Brazil. I'd much rather see us buy from them than the Saudi's.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by griiker on September 8, 2008 at 16:38

I think ethanol is still in its infancy. I think sugar beats are better than corn,more sugar content per bushel.

the corn that is being used to make the ethanol would have gone to feed cattle and hogs, only 1% of corn grown is for human consumption. The corn diverted to ethanol has the sugar extracted, leaving the protein and fiber. this makes it an even better food for cattle and pigs. creating an additional revenue stream for the ethanol companies. essentially, it is extracting as much use out of the corn as possible.

We can't argue that natural gas is finite, even considering the haynesville shale. T Boone Pickens wants to replace oil and eliminate coal with CNG and wind, respectively. There is not supposed to be any net increase in CNG consumption, never the less, we will consumeit and will need a replacement for CNG, even Pickens understands this.

The best thing to replace CNG will be biogas from our biomass laden waste stream,which produces...Natural gas.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by mooncookie on September 8, 2008 at 18:19

Here is my problem with ethanol.

The carbon footprint from the field to refining.......2,000 gallons of water for 1 gallon of ethanol. Even in E85 cars, it takes twice enough E to have the equivalent in gasoline.

Then there is that whole thing about eating...most humans find it necessary to survival (along with that 2,000 gallons of water some corn might do a body good).

Plus there are other hybrid biofuels and technologies that are way better than ethanol. As a matter of fact, it you invested in a co that has Ethanol as their primary market (and they are not a foreign money-laundering scam-or related to the Bush conglomerate) SELL NOW!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by K_Bain on September 9, 2008 at 7:10

See my post above about sugar ethanol. There are plenty of sources for making ethanol besides corn (which is nuts to begin with!!).

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by P.G. on September 9, 2008 at 3:09

You forgot corn gluten meal is also a good pre-emergent herbicide as well!

A problem with using corn for ethanol is that it takes nearly as much energy to produce than it produces!
Not to mention that it drives up prices for everything associated with a non-fuel need for corn. Will Big Mac's soon be costing $10 each?
And has anyone noticed that chicken meat doesn't taste like it used too? Seems like it tastes more gamy than it used too. I wonder if that has anything to do with replacing soy protein with corn protein in the feed rations?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by P.G. on September 9, 2008 at 6:18

I was referring to the factory chickens sold at the grocery store. Seems like they don't taste as good as they used too. I'm betting they've change feed rations for economic reasons seeing how high soy has risen too. They may be using corn gluten from the ethanol process rather than soy meal. Maybe they are using some other grain to fatten the birds. Ground corn probably isn't economical anymore.
I used to raise my own range chickens for the table and even those needed to be fattened (corn was best) before slaughter. Taste can be affected by feed. (i learned that the hard way)

They need to find something other than corn to make ethanol from. Feed prices are ridiculous!

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page