Go Yellow |
Post Reply | Page <1 23456 7> |
Author | |
n/a
New Slug Joined: 17 Dec 2001 Location: VA Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Economically, ethinol is marginally more expensive to produce (for now), but still in the ballpark. Of course, as NoSb points out, when you figure in all the subsidies, and other variables like lives lost to foriegn oil, the balance sheet starts lookin' real good for ethinol. There is an issue about energy value per unit of ethinol vs. gas; I think I read that ethinol has about 75% of the energy value per unit, compared to gas at about 120% the cost. But still, there is potential here!
Of course it will not happen until the energy companies can establish a maximum per unit cost that will guarantee profitability. That means that when gas reaches a maximum threshold price that begins to negatively affect the bottom line (lower revenue and profits), they will know the basis price they can charge for a unit of ethinol and will have established it as a per unit cost in the market. Does that mean $5. per gallon, or $10. per gallon? I don't know, what is the most you would pay? And of course, since the oil companies have just finished a banner year, we are a long way from that. There is no motivation for them to distribute ethinol and every motivation to lobby against it. Gas is too profitable. |
|
Wagonman
New Slug Joined: 05 Aug 2003 Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Ethanol from corn isn't the answer. Ethanol from discarded cellulose material will be the answer. It will be much cheaper and the research right now is going to make it possible. Corn ethanol isn't all that efficient, but there are a couple of researchers out there that grossly overstate the energy cost to produce it. They probably get their research money from oil companies.
The comment about not making vehicles flex fuel capable is short sighted. The infrastructure isn't there for only using ethanol, biodiesel, etc. Keeping the vehicles flex fuel capable speeds their adoption. The way to keep them using the renewable fuel is to price it lower than petro. Unfortunately, that would be accomplished by taxing petro products higher and politicians are too chicken#$%! to do what needs to be done. They can't get past the short terms costs to see the long term benefits. |
|
N_or_S_bound
New Slug Joined: 20 May 2005 Location: VA Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Demand may make this a reality yet.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13078150/ NOW, we're talking about COMPREHENSIVE SOLUTIONS and NOT marketing schemes to simply increase profits. NoSb SOV because you can, HOV because you care! |
|
Max_28756
New Slug Joined: 25 Feb 2004 Location: Va Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
If I were to buy a hybrid, I'd get clean fuel plates. Can anyone tell me where the clean fuel station is? Since gasoline isn't a clean fuel, hybrids must be fueling up at some secret location only disclosed to those who purchase a hybrid. Those hybrids I see at the gas station must be purchasing a newspaper.
Hybrids on the HOV burn just as much gasoline as any four cylinder engine. Take a look at their MPG stats listing highway mileage LOWER than city mileage. This is because the hybrid technology works best in stop and go traffic. Get in the main lanes and get the most out of your investment! Go Green [xx(] |
|
NoSUV
New Slug Joined: 14 Jan 2005 Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Max,
How amazingly uninformed you are! The Clean Special Fuel that hybrids use is electric power, which comes from a battery. Hybrids in the express lanes during HOV hours do not burn as much as ANY 4 cylinder engine. Check out EPA statistics for the Honda Accord, both conventional and hybrid. Or, if you'd rather, check out my ealier posts where I got it for you. By the way, can you tell us what you think drives an electric motor? |
|
Max_28756
New Slug Joined: 25 Feb 2004 Location: Va Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
NoSUV,
Don't try the SMUG stuff with me! Here are some MPG stats off of a hybrid web site. http://www.hybridcars.com/mileage.html Notice how the highway mileage is lower (in all but a few cases). Also take a look at those terrible EPA estimates listed for the SUV's (clean fuel hybrids). Once you're done, look at this site http://www.greenercars.com/byclass.html to see autos that perform better than hybrids but don't receive a clean fuel designation. I guess the clean fuel designation has more to do with having a hybrid tag and nothing to do with fuel economy and emissions. Honda Insight: City 61 Highway 68 Toyota Prius: City 60 Highway 51 Honda Civic: City 48 Highway 51 Toyota Camry: City 43 Highway 37 Honda Accord: City 30 Highway 37 Ford Escape (2wd): City 36 Highway 31 Ford Escape (4wd): City 33 Highway 29 Mercury Mariner: City 33 Highway 29 Toyota Highlander (2wd): City 33 Highway 28 Toyota Highlander (4wd): City 31 Highway 27 Lexus RX 400h: City 31 Highway 27 Lexus GS 450h: City 25 Highway 28 These figures represent EPA test numbers, which are commonly 10 - 20 percent higher than real-world fuel economy for hybrid and conventional vehicles. I'm not against hybrid technology, I'm against using the technology as a way to bypass a system that is designed to move more people with less vehicles. |
|
NoSUV
New Slug Joined: 14 Jan 2005 Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Max, All I request is that you make a FAIR comparison. Take 2 identical vehicles, with the only exception that 1 is a hybrid and the other a conventional. You will clearly see that the hybrid gets better fuel economy in all cases. On my earlier post, I compared the '06 Honda Accord, hybrid and conventional, using the HOnda website and the EPA figures.
Shouldn't be too hard for a SLUG to be smart, too - hybrid owners don't have a lock on that. |
|
n/a
New Slug Joined: 17 Dec 2001 Location: VA Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
NoSUV, if you want to make a FAIR comparison, hybrids do not run on electric power; they run on a combination of a gas engine and "stored" electric power that was generated by a gas engine (and a small % from the intertia generated by your brakes, created by the forward momentum caused by your gas engine).
Most electricity begins its life with fossil fuels, with the exception of solar, hydro, nuclear or wind produced electricity. So unless your hybrid sprouts a sail, has solar panels on the roof or a mobile nuclear power plant under the hood, it also runs on fossil fuels. And you should compare fuel economy of a hybrid in real world conditions to a comparable car in real world conditions. You may see those "huge" MPG gains claimed by hybrid marketers shrink. But that's OK, you keep telling yourself that you made a smart decision buying the hybrid. Just don't exepct everyone else to believe it. |
|
NoSUV
New Slug Joined: 14 Jan 2005 Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Ah raymond, where to begin, where to begin. Next you'll be discussing in circles on paper or plastic bags for your groceries (well, paper comes from trees and plastic doesn't degrade and energy is used for both). I trust that when you wash your hands, you don't use paper towels or air dryers.
OK, more on point. The discussion is on energy, renewable vs. non renewable sources. I think even YOU agree that once you use a fossil fuel in your engine that it is no longer available for reuse. The battery in YOUR car, as well as mine, has the ability to be recharged, and therefor reused. Instead of wasting so much of the energy of the fossil fuel used to run a car, LIKE YOURS, mine makes far more efficient use of that fuel. FAR, FAR MORE! And, rather than using emotional arguments about how well one person drives for fuel economy over another, I stuck with statistics. And...what did you stick to? Oh, that's right - nothing. No surprise. |
|
n/a
New Slug Joined: 17 Dec 2001 Location: VA Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
OK NoSUV, so at least we agree on one thing; renewable fuel is the best long-term solution.
Unfortunately, electricity, while renewable, is not a viable alternate fuel for use in cars, at least not in its current form. Its disappointing that the best solution marketers have so far is gas powered electric generators in hybrid cars; not a big step forward in reaching a long term solution. Present day hybrids are only marginally better than previous "plug-in to recharge" electric cars of yesteryear. Then, the electricity came from coal-fired power plants, now the gas power plant rides around with the batteries under the hood. This is not rocket science! Hybrids also offer dubious improvements in MPG and effeciency over non-hybrids, and at a high cost. Remember, many non-hybrids match or exceed hybrid MPG and ULEV claims. Unless, of course you fill that hybrid tank with ethanol or biodissel, now we're talking renewable fuel solutions! But if you burn ethanol or biodiesel, why do you need electricity? Hmmmm, You don't! The internal combustion engine is not a bad concept, it reliably does what we expect it to do, and over 15 million cars with ICEs are sold in North America alone. Our choice of fuel is the critical variable here. And of course you should maximize ridership in those ethanol burining cars, especially in the HOV-3 lanes (BTW, that stands for High Occupancy Vehicle - 3 passenger minimum)! Emotional arguments? I think not, this is all very logical and reasonable. But it does not support your claims of hybrid supremacy, so I would expect you to disagree. But the personal attacks are not necessary. Let's stick to the issues! |
|
Post Reply | Page <1 23456 7> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |