Al Gore "Ethanol a Mistake"
Platinum Member
12-09-2010, 12:47 AM
#33
Banned
Either way, my point is that we are now forced to introduce piss (real or synthetic) into diesel engines. Another example of politicians believing they are scientests or engineers. Once these "improvements" are made (catalytic convertors, ethanol, death taxes, Obamacare, etc.)...you can't get rid of the nonsense under any circumstances, it seems.
I think Chrysler was wrong in rejecting urea and going forward with their dodgy, problematic DPF and EGR systems.
12-09-2010, 05:55 AM
#34
E85 & E98 = More Boost !
http://www.theturboforums.com/smf/in...topic=140800.0
Plant more, import less !
Brazil has the right idea.
Convert the farm equipment to run on it also.
http://www.theturboforums.com/smf/in...topic=140800.0
Plant more, import less !
Brazil has the right idea.
Convert the farm equipment to run on it also.
12-09-2010, 07:15 AM
#35
Registered
What surprises me is that people still talk about corn juice as some form of energy policy.
Question, how do you subsidize the farm industry in direct violation of world trade policies while simultaniously driving UP the price of a bushel of corn?
Answer, call it a fuel for the environment subsidy instead of a farm subsidy.
"We're not growing food on the farm, we're producing fuel".
Pretty damn simple and obvious if you ask me.
Question, how do you subsidize the farm industry in direct violation of world trade policies while simultaniously driving UP the price of a bushel of corn?
Answer, call it a fuel for the environment subsidy instead of a farm subsidy.
"We're not growing food on the farm, we're producing fuel".
Pretty damn simple and obvious if you ask me.
12-09-2010, 09:34 AM
#36
Charter Member #927
Charter Member
Well, ya!
This whole goddamned ethanol issue just infuriates me! It's preposterous to even contemplate using ethanol as a fuel, yet alone mandate it.
This should truly illustrate to everyone how idiotic our environmental advocates and politicians are!!!!!!
Facts:
Regular gasoline yields 115,500 BTU's of potential energy.
Ethanol yields 76,000 BTU's of potential energy.
That's 33% LESS!!!
That means that:
E10 lowers mileage by 3.4%, and
E15 lowers mileage by 5.1%
And it would take 1.52 gallons of ethanol to drive the same distance as you could on 1.0 gallon of gasoline!
Wow!!!!!
And if that's not bad enough, consider that it costs more to produce a gallon of ethanol than it's worth, and it requires more energy to produce ethanol that it will ever yield!!
Where's the sense in that? There is none! Welcome to the U.S. government.
Between fertilizer, pesticide, farm equipment fuel, irrigation, electricity and bulk transport, it requires about 81,000 BTU's of energy to simply grow the corn.
The energy economics get worse at the processing plants, where the grain is crushed and fermented. As many as three distillation steps are needed to separate the 8 percent ethanol from the 92 percent water. Additional treatment and energy are required to produce the 99.8 percent pure ethanol for mixing with gasoline. This all amounts to an additional 50,000 BTU's of energy per gallon of ethanol.
131,000 BTU's of energy in to get 76,000 BTU's out.
BRILLIANT!!!!!!!
An acre of U.S. corn yields about 7,110 pounds of corn for processing into 328 gallons of ethanol.
But planting, growing and harvesting that much corn requires about 140 gallons of fossil fuels and costs $385 per acre. Thus, even before corn is converted to ethanol, the feedstock costs $1.05 per gallon of ethanol.
In total, Ethanol from corn costs about $1.74 per gallon to produce, compared with about 95 cents to produce a gallon of gasoline.
if it weren't for government subsidies no one would dare venture into producing ethanol. It's a $ loser.
It's no wonder that corn farmers and processors burn gasoline in their equipment and not ethanol. They couldn't afford to.
This whole goddamned ethanol issue just infuriates me! It's preposterous to even contemplate using ethanol as a fuel, yet alone mandate it.
This should truly illustrate to everyone how idiotic our environmental advocates and politicians are!!!!!!
Facts:
Regular gasoline yields 115,500 BTU's of potential energy.
Ethanol yields 76,000 BTU's of potential energy.
That's 33% LESS!!!
That means that:
E10 lowers mileage by 3.4%, and
E15 lowers mileage by 5.1%
And it would take 1.52 gallons of ethanol to drive the same distance as you could on 1.0 gallon of gasoline!
Wow!!!!!
And if that's not bad enough, consider that it costs more to produce a gallon of ethanol than it's worth, and it requires more energy to produce ethanol that it will ever yield!!
Where's the sense in that? There is none! Welcome to the U.S. government.
Between fertilizer, pesticide, farm equipment fuel, irrigation, electricity and bulk transport, it requires about 81,000 BTU's of energy to simply grow the corn.
The energy economics get worse at the processing plants, where the grain is crushed and fermented. As many as three distillation steps are needed to separate the 8 percent ethanol from the 92 percent water. Additional treatment and energy are required to produce the 99.8 percent pure ethanol for mixing with gasoline. This all amounts to an additional 50,000 BTU's of energy per gallon of ethanol.
131,000 BTU's of energy in to get 76,000 BTU's out.
BRILLIANT!!!!!!!
An acre of U.S. corn yields about 7,110 pounds of corn for processing into 328 gallons of ethanol.
But planting, growing and harvesting that much corn requires about 140 gallons of fossil fuels and costs $385 per acre. Thus, even before corn is converted to ethanol, the feedstock costs $1.05 per gallon of ethanol.
In total, Ethanol from corn costs about $1.74 per gallon to produce, compared with about 95 cents to produce a gallon of gasoline.
if it weren't for government subsidies no one would dare venture into producing ethanol. It's a $ loser.
It's no wonder that corn farmers and processors burn gasoline in their equipment and not ethanol. They couldn't afford to.
After making ethanol with a bushel oc corn, what you have left is 2/3 the weight of that bushel in DDGs, dried distillers grain. That can be feed directly to cattle.
I've run e10 in all my vehicles ( by choice) since the early 80s. Except the diesels, they get B20.
I do think straight gas should be available where there is a need for it.
I am also glad to hear I once again disagree with Al Gore.
12-09-2010, 09:42 AM
#37
Registered
Urea serves a useful function in reducing NOx pollutants from diesel fuel. Urea does this better than the fatally clogging diesel particulate filter and the soot-producing EGR systems. European diesel cars use urea almost exclusively.
I think Chrysler was wrong in rejecting urea and going forward with their dodgy, problematic DPF and EGR systems.
I think Chrysler was wrong in rejecting urea and going forward with their dodgy, problematic DPF and EGR systems.
So aren't you talking 2 different things? Maybe we should start a thread on this in the truck section.
12-09-2010, 12:18 PM
#39
Banned
Good idea for a thread in the truck forum. That way we can keep up with what the truck mfgs are doing in these areas.
12-09-2010, 01:26 PM
#40
The key here will be what he comes up with that is going to be the next thing to save the world. He is trying to make his fortune on this stuff so if nothing else is working he will be touting the next great "Threat to Mankind and the Earth!!!!!!!" in order to maintain his power and income. Listen not to the Goracle, it deceives.....
