Yes it is(to find info), as I said I was keeping it simple alluding to hopefully allow posters to come up with their own answers.Wolfram23 said:
Poll: Ethanol/Alcohol in gas, is it worth the price?
- Thread starter ZippyDSMlee
- Start date
Besides thinking anything other than electric is just screwing around (we'll have to go electric eventually), they don't use food that people are about to eat for it. Waste products and or food that isn't going to be eaten, yes, but you guys sound like they're taking it from the hands of African infants. Part of the problem is that they can't afford it, and that's not changing very quickly.
While I wouldn't really know much about hydrogen fuel cells as it isn't really related to my field of study, I'm going to have to call you out on your statements about having the same problems we had 100 years ago with electric cars. Battery technology has made some huge progress over the last 30 years. Most recently was the application of graphene combined with silicon in batteries to increase capacity, reduce charge time and reduce weight. There are several interesting papers on the matter along with the fact that these batteries have already gone into production for use in cars and various industrial applications. Here is a layman friendly source detailing the tech [http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2011/11/16/silicon-to-improve-batteries-tenfold/1] and here is a link detailing the start of production earlier this year. [http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2012/03/23/graphene-battery-tech/1]DrMegaNutz said:
As for electric motors.. Advances in both mechanical precision, magnetics and superconductor applications will always ensure continued improvment.
The problem isn't the existing technology isn't good enough. We are always improving existing tech. The main problem to overcome is effective power delivery. Ideally we want power to be delivered while driving in addition to plugging in at the end of the day. Be it by photovoltaics (another field to make huge advances) or inductive wireless transmission.
Okay, I'm going to point out why corn ethanol is replaceable with cellulose-based ethanol, and why it is worth the cost:
1) Switchgrass is an easily grown alternative to Corn for Ethanol production, which uses less energy, on the magnitude of a gigajoule or two, to create the same amount of it. Creation of ethanol does require a basic shift in production machinery, but is no more energy intensive. It is able to be grown in almost any condition in the continental United States, even arid land, thus making it even more attractive.
2) Despite the fact that the corn used for ethanol is not, in point of fact, suitable for consumption, as it is GM corn which has no kernel, that land could be replanted with actual corn, which could improve the quality of food in export countries as well as in the United States. Not directly related, but still a valid reason to switch.
3) The rubbers which are degraded by alcohol are easily replaced with slightly more expensive, but more durable rubbers in hoses and other parts. E-85 cars demonstrate this beautifully.
4) Alcohol burns with a cleaner flame, though it does not contain as much potential energy per unit. This can be adjusted for by creating engines to specifically use Ethanol, which would have a distinct compression ratio.
5) Dude. Ethanol is capable of being produced cheaply, reducing prices, though not to pre 1970 levels.
1) Switchgrass is an easily grown alternative to Corn for Ethanol production, which uses less energy, on the magnitude of a gigajoule or two, to create the same amount of it. Creation of ethanol does require a basic shift in production machinery, but is no more energy intensive. It is able to be grown in almost any condition in the continental United States, even arid land, thus making it even more attractive.
2) Despite the fact that the corn used for ethanol is not, in point of fact, suitable for consumption, as it is GM corn which has no kernel, that land could be replanted with actual corn, which could improve the quality of food in export countries as well as in the United States. Not directly related, but still a valid reason to switch.
3) The rubbers which are degraded by alcohol are easily replaced with slightly more expensive, but more durable rubbers in hoses and other parts. E-85 cars demonstrate this beautifully.
4) Alcohol burns with a cleaner flame, though it does not contain as much potential energy per unit. This can be adjusted for by creating engines to specifically use Ethanol, which would have a distinct compression ratio.
5) Dude. Ethanol is capable of being produced cheaply, reducing prices, though not to pre 1970 levels.
This can be tracked back to low usage/production (to an extent). The more it's demanded the more minds we have working on it. Also, companies that produce cars are not the only ones we need on board. I can't seem to stress this enough. I know you didn't say anything about it but I'd like to bring something up here.ZippyDSMlee said:
Many of our technological advancements (pertaining to automobiles) come from the race track (IZOD indycar series, NASCAR, ALMS, 24 hours of Le Mans, rolex sports car, etc.). Once we get these people using alternative energy/finding ways to use less energy we will advance much more. The teams that comprise these series are trying to go the fastest, and longest, on a set amount of fuel, this forces drivers and cars to find ways to use fuel more efficiently. Once the race teams find things like this the technology is ported over to regular cars. This happens often with tires.
The American Le Mans series usually runs 2 hour (or so) mixed class endurance races. The series also gives a cash prize (or at least they did) to the racing team that has the "greenest" race, that is they used less fuel. This series is also useful to determine the likely hood of one of the systems breaking. With running hours going quickly from top speed to low speed, then quickly back again, this series is a great stress test for braking systems, tire technology, biofuel/alternative fuel engines, etc.
It still eats metal and fouls plugs, its one of the worst combustion based fuels as far as I know.Pfheonix said:
As far as I know its so hard on engines they have to be regularly rebuilt/replaced, even those with alcohol proof seals.yeti585 said:
I am still trying to find some nice info on alcohol based engine designs, with info on how long it lasts.
Oh ya most all racing vehicles get rebuilt 1-8 times a year., AFAIK this would translate into a heavy duty maintenance on a normal vehicle every 2-3 years.
Now that's E-85 or so fuels.
Thats actually a very common misstake that people make. The corn used in ethanol is not for human consumption. If you were to eat it, it would make you very sick. If anything, the price of beef would go up because its the same corn they use as cattle feed.FalloutJack said:
Personally, I just want Los Alamos labs to get done with thier CO2-Gasoline maker soon.
In some situations it might make sense so I picked not really. But it just doesn't make sense to use it as a major source of energy in many cases. It's just another example of a political solution not solving the problem it is nominally there to solve.
Well it is used to feed live stock and can be halved from current numbers to put in sweet corn.BOOM headshot65 said:
You may say that, but I'm calling out the idea of EVER growing corn for fuel. Okay, you can say that it's a kind of corn not fit for human consumption, but WHY ARE WE GROWING IT? So far as I can tell, the viability of it - one way or another - is dubious. It appears to me to not be worth it when the land, the time and effort, the water, the fertilizer, etc. could be used on 'eating corn', not 'fueling corn'.BOOM headshot65 said:
True, but Electric vehicles readily available at the consumer level are often still a bit pricey, have absolute CRAP for range (elec/gas similar hybrids that self-recharge in city traffic go a long way to correcting this, but pure electrics still have this issue), and all that juice still has to come from *somewhere*...If the city you're in lacks are massive recharging network (still rare), which they have to pay for, you'll be charging up a huge battery pretty much daily, using the same fuel source at your house, all while running up the power bill. Electrics have definite potential, but they are many years away from being truly practical on a large scale.MeChaNiZ3D said:
True. But, see my last sentence above. For now, hybrids are probably the way to go, and they will continue to improve alongside pure electrics.
FalloutJack: You'll get no argument from me. A number of us in this thread have been saying as much. As for why it's being grown and used for these purposes? Because it makes a TON of money for those who are invested in it. Some of those people hold a great amount of sway over decisions such as the one to use E90 in the first place.
I agree that, if we're gonna keep using ethanol in non-FlexFuel vehicles at all (which I wish we wouldn't), we NEED to turn to and seriously get alternative, cheaper ethanol sources rolling.
Sorry to be posting 3 months later but I thought this would be the best place to put it rather than a new topic.EricKei said:
Today i found out about a new electric car designed by Holden called the Volt. Here's the link about it:
http://www.holden.com.au/vehicles/volt#/technology
From what I understand its an electric car that generates power from breaking to increase its range (obviously it is fully charged at a power outlet, it supports normal home outlets), and then has a petrol engine as backup/for longer journeys. This will probably be how cars will run until batteries can store enough charge to challenge a tank of petrol or find a way to charge themselves on the road.
sorry for not reading the entire thread, but Ethanol burns hotter than traditional fuel. That's why it destroys regular engines. Diesel engines have no problem using it. I'm not too sure on the economics of it, whether it makes everything more expensive, but it can be recycled from the oil used in restaurants, and if we devote enough resources to developing it, it'll be much cheaper. Currently almost no one is making it. There's not enough for everyone so it's much more expensive. However, I'm not very well versed in this stuff, so I may be wrong.
Biofeul production is in theory not a bad thing, however as it currently stands there are two fundemental problems with the processes currently being used. Firstly food or agricultural land being used for this, when in reality effort should be made into using waste streams from aggriculture or industry (such as used distillers grains) to minimize the impact of biofeul production on global food security.
The second problem is that most emphasis is placed on producing ethanol, which as people have stated previously is damaging to vehicles and is structurally fairly different from petrol. However butanol (produced by fermentation of some Clostridia) basically matches petrol better by being non polar, has a higher energy releasing potential than ethanol and has virtually no negative effect when a car is run on 100% butanol with no modification made to the car.
Due to the problems with fossil fuels ultimately biofeul production is going to need to ramp up, however it will probably need to develope safly away from threatening global food security and place an emphasis away from ethanol production. Problem with that is though less sustainable the current ways are at present cheaper/easier, so feel free to be cynical as things currently stand
The second problem is that most emphasis is placed on producing ethanol, which as people have stated previously is damaging to vehicles and is structurally fairly different from petrol. However butanol (produced by fermentation of some Clostridia) basically matches petrol better by being non polar, has a higher energy releasing potential than ethanol and has virtually no negative effect when a car is run on 100% butanol with no modification made to the car.
Due to the problems with fossil fuels ultimately biofeul production is going to need to ramp up, however it will probably need to develope safly away from threatening global food security and place an emphasis away from ethanol production. Problem with that is though less sustainable the current ways are at present cheaper/easier, so feel free to be cynical as things currently stand