Re: [OT - US/Canada] E-85

On Wed, 10 May 2006 15:39:49 -0700, William Graham <weg9@xxxxxxxxxxx>
said...

"Joe Bleaux" <me@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:MPG.1ecbd4c819a680fd9896a7@xxxxxxxxxxxx
On Mon, 8 May 2006 22:45:08 -0700, William Graham <weg9@xxxxxxxxxxx>
said...

"Joe Bleaux" <me@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message > Try 25-30% less mileage
(the Energy Dept. estimates 40% less mileage).
Recent reports cite ethanol prices being more expensive than gasoline,
but even if ethanol were selling for a cheaper price than gas it's
still
more expensive when you figure in the tremendous drop in fuel
efficiency.

Of course. There are few liquids that contain as much energy per pound
than
gasoline. - That isn't the point. The point is we are running out of
gasoline. It will have really lousy efficiency when we don't have any
more
of it. This will happen by 2050. Then what do you suggest we do?
I suggest we find some reasonable alternative. Ethanol is one of
those.
The sooner we start to use it, and build vehicles that can run on it, the
better off we are. Brazil has been doing this for over 10 years now. - It
can be done, and we should be doing it.




Hi William,

I won't argue that we need to find an alternative to gasoline, we do. I
just don't think it's ethanol.

Your reply didn't address the point on air pollution - or the fact that
ethanol causes more smog than gasoline. Do you think the increased air
pollution from ethanol is a good trade-off?

As for Brazil, did you read the article I linked to? Brazil is
growing sugar cane for their ethanol production, which has a better
energy conversion rate than what we're doing here. When Brazil tried
using agricultural crops (like the US is) for ethanol production, it
achieved an energy conversion rate to low to be worth the effort.
Unfortunately, the US doesn't have the climate for growing sugar cane
(except Hawaii). Brazil's major focus has been to find more oil, and
just recently opened a platform that is expected to make the country oil
independent.

Let's also keep in mind that the US consumes about 20 times more oil
than Brazil. I doubt we have enough land to grow the crops necessary to
produce enough ethanol to cover even a fraction of the energy use we are
accustomed to getting from gas.

This particular discussion has been focused on ethanol as a gasoline
alternative. That ignores the big picture of finding an OIL
alternative. We use oil (and its derivatives) for a lot more than just
powering our cars. Oil is not only used as an energy source. It is
also used as a lubricant, coolant, and as a raw material. Oil is used
for agriculture, medicine, plastics, computers, etc. Ethanol only has
the potential to be used as an energy source (as far as I know). It
doesn't address any of the other things oil is used for.

The most realistic solution I've seen regarding alternative energy and
the whole "end of oil" issue was in an article I read (sorry, no link)
where the author stated that all of the alternative forms of energy
combined (solar, wind, hydro, etc.) would only provide 15-20% of the
energy we're accustomed to getting with fossil fuels. He suggested the
only way to address the problem of our energy needs is a drastic change
of lifestyle that would require less energy consumption (this article
was specific to US consumption). Of course, that isn't going to happen
until we have no other choice.


Joe

I agree with most of the above. I consider ethanol to be a reasonable short
term solution to the problem. The only long term solution is electric
vehicles powered by either batteries, or pickups that can get their
electricity from copper strips in the highway, or oscillating fields beneath
the roads. The electricity will have to come from nuclear plants. Getting
some of it from solar panels, or wind power, is fine with me, but these are
solar driven items that I could generally include in, "nuclear power"
anyway.
A change in lifestyle to reduce dependency on individual,
high-horsepower vehicles is, of course, desirable, but it is not something
that comes under what I consider to be an, "engineering solution", so it is
basically outside of my field of either expertise, or general interest. I
will say this about it:

In my opinion, the only reasonable way to change peoples lifestyle is by
economic means. IOW, when it becomes economically disadvantageous enough to
drive our own gas-guzzlers, then people will change their lifestyle. But as
long as they can afford to do what they like to do, they will do what they
like. This is one of the characteristics of a free market economy.





I don't think nuclear will be our salvation. Putting aside the issue of
dealing with the waste, nuclear plants require uranium - which is also a
finite resource. At best, it's a stop-gap measure. What do we turn to
when the uranium runs out?

Well, a change in lifestyle could be considered a "social engineering"
solution. :)

I agree that economics will be what prompts a lifestyle change.
However, you have focused on gas-guzzling vehicles. I was talking in
much more general terms, which I think is what needs to be emphasized.
Whenever this issue comes up, people usually focus on gas prices and
availability. If we consider everything oil is used for, the impact of
not having it available will go far beyond what it will cost to fill up
your car with ethanol/electricity/whatever.

Let me use just one example: plastic. All plastic requires oil as a
material and/or in the manufacturing process. What happens if plastic
is no longer available? Consider everything you own or use that is made
of plastic, or has significant quantities of plastic:

-the computer you're reading this on
-possibly the clothing you're wearing
-the buttons on your shirt
-the elastic in your underwear and socks
-every household appliance: TV, radio, microwave, blender, etc.
-the packaging for almost everything you buy
-the credit card in your wallet (and parts of your wallet, too)
-music and movies: CD, DVD, VHS
.....and the list goes on.

A lot of things we take for granted, all gone due to the lack of a
single oil derivative - plastic.

The bottom line is we are faced with a looming problem that has no easy
solution. A problem that goes WAAAY beyond what you pay at the gas
pump.


Joe
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Recession music
    ... Germany and Japan were trying to secure oil supplies to fuel their ... Which country produces more ethanol, ... Brazil launched its "energy independence" push in 1975, ...
    (rec.music.makers.guitar.jazz)
  • Re: Thank God for the US Congress!
    ... to leave out cellulois based ethanol. ... it's so called energy policy for the future. ... we stick to burning oil and forget about alternative or biomass ... that the war in Iraq has more to do with controlling and stablizing ...
    (alt.sports.football.pro.ne-patriots)
  • Re: Thank God for the US Congress!
    ... to leave out cellulois based ethanol. ... it's so called energy policy for the future. ... we stick to burning oil and forget about alternative or biomass ... that the war in Iraq has more to do with controlling and stablizing ...
    (alt.sports.football.pro.ne-patriots)
  • Re: [OT - US/Canada] E-85
    ... but even if ethanol were selling for a cheaper price than gas it's ... There are few liquids that contain as much energy per pound ... gasoline. ... Brazil's major focus has been to find more oil, ...
    (rec.photo.equipment.35mm)
  • Re: Why Its Pointless To Argue With Global Warming Believers
    ... George Graves wrote: ... first-world, energy for their cars, electric lights, etc. ... which seems possible, use ethanol. ... Brazil is energy-positive, carbon neutral, and ethanol ends up costing ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)