Field test confirms miscanthus far better than corn or switchgrass for ethanol

[logansowner]

Originally Posted by killerrd2

I'm still not convinced that ethanol is a viable alternative to gas/oil. Ethanol provides less power than gasoline and mileage suffers greatly.

However, I do believe the algae to oil (biodiesel) plant prospects appear incredibly viable.
In theory, wasted space on the tops of buildings could be turned into mini biodiesel growing environments nationwide and reap rewards/benefits to all. The best part is biodiesel would not affect food/agriculture crops and land management like the media hype has complained corn ethanol would!

Just think - big plants in metro areas (car manufacturers for example) could grow their own fuel for the diesel powered vehicles on the wasted space of their own rooftops. Now that's cool!!

Ethanol provides much more power than gas. It takes more, it's less energy DENSE.


I agree with everything else, algae diesel is the way to go, but ethanol can be figured out to replace a lot of gasoline. I think E85 is stupid. It doesn't want to burn in cold weather and reduces economy about 30%. Even if it costs 30% less, that is more refueling stops...which nobody wants. We need experiment with different concentrations. Most vehicles could handle 15-20%, and maybe we could reach a compromise between economy loss and oil needed if we try a 50-50 or maybe 60-40.

There is no need to be in the situation we are in. There are ways out, we just need NEW companies to kick start them. Oil companies want nothing to do with ethanol....and why should they? Because it would be nice for us? Yea right...they are still in the business of selling oil, and legislating new laws saying they should sell less oil is completely against the constitution and capitalism.

There are fixes...we just need to get moving towards a solution and stop hoping if we close our eyes and click our heels that someone else will wipe our asses for us.

[psece]

Originally Posted by logansowner

Ethanol provides much more power than gas. It takes more, it's less energy DENSE.


I agree with everything else, algae diesel is the way to go, but ethanol can be figured out to replace a lot of gasoline. I think E85 is stupid. It doesn't want to burn in cold weather and reduces economy about 30%. Even if it costs 30% less, that is more refueling stops...which nobody wants. We need experiment with different concentrations. Most vehicles could handle 15-20%, and maybe we could reach a compromise between economy loss and oil needed if we try a 50-50 or maybe 60-40.

There is no need to be in the situation we are in. There are ways out, we just need NEW companies to kick start them. Oil companies want nothing to do with ethanol....and why should they? Because it would be nice for us? Yea right...they are still in the business of selling oil, and legislating new laws saying they should sell less oil is completely against the constitution and capitalism.

There are fixes...we just need to get moving towards a solution and stop hoping if we close our eyes and click our heels that someone else will wipe our asses for us.

If the engine is designed to run on ethanol first and gasoline second, it is actually more powerful. Saab Biopower

[AMERICA 123]

Originally Posted by Xenon

I never said "Ignore it". All I said is that ethanol production takes a lot more work than simply drilling a hole and sticking a pipe to pump the oil out.

NOPE.

And this would be in reference to.... what ? ...... certainly not petroleum based fuels.

Petroleum based fuels are way more energy intensive and environmentally 'challenging' to produce and distribute - especially when sourced overseas.

What matters on fuel is 'wellhead' to 'wheel' with all variables accounted for.

The process of producing one gallon of petroleum derived gasoline is truly one of the modern marvels of the world because of the complexity involved - especially ( but not limited to ) the art and science involved at the refinery and other things like offshore drilling rigs ( especially in the North Sea area) and pipelines thru tough terrain in extreme weather areas.

Ethanol is a walk in the park comparatively speaking.

Abiotic oil - deep wheel drilling is almost always even more complex as well - it ain't easy.

While ethanol is a start, but a lot of the means for producing ethanol is reliant on plants, which can only be harvested a limited amounted of times in a given year.

Not true - 'waste' of all sorts - including sewage are coming along as base feed stock material, and besides, as pointed out in this thread and elsewhere, plants sources grown where no food crop is possible is also a real possibility going forward.

We also still have considerable land were the US taxpayer is paying to not have a crop produced - why not turn that over to fuel - and save the cost ?

Look, nothing's perfect - especially at the start - but that's no reason to not pick the best bundle of solutions - which most definitely includes domestically produced bio fuels - such as ethanol.

If the United States was 30% bio fuel dependent - oil prices would be way down as would our trade deficits.

Now extrapolate worldwide.

IMO, you can get to that number w/o destabilizing or reducing food crop production - surprisingly 'quickly' - and 'relatively' easily ie worth doing now.

That, btw, is a conservative number.

And another thing that matters a great deal - a fuel's efficiency in use is not determined solely by it basic energy content nor is a fuel's overall desirability determined by that number either.

If this were true than this whole debate would be about diesel versus bio diesel - which also is worth pursuing .

Diesel fuel blows gasoline away much more so than gasoline hold net advantage over ethanol.

In laymans terms its about how well you harness it - as measured at the flywheel - or rear wheels -ethanol essentially makes up part of its energy deficiency by more efficient combustion produced energy capture.

Again, as others have pointed out, you can run some combination of greater spark advance, boost, and or compression to 'gain back' some of energy density loss.

Ethanol in the form of E100 is a very compelling high performance - or high efficiency fuel - in the real world when measured 'wellhead' to 'wheel'.

Finally, as HooserRon pointed out , there is an enormous bundle of 'other' costs associated with importing oil that domestic bio fuel - ethanol does not entail.

[johnstarnes]

Originally Posted by vsd

As long as we aren't converting food into fuel, and as long as the fuel creates more energy than is needed to create it, then I'm happy.

I would be curious as to the water needs of the crop.

[Beau]

All high powered sports cars should be running on E85, from the plant that doesn't feed somone, on the smallest land foot print, with the least amount of water used, without using any fertilizer or pesticides.

I could run 700 WHP on my Supra without much trouble using E85, sure my mileage would suck, but it would be much cheaper, and its a weekend car anyways.

[HoosierRon]

Originally Posted by johnstarnes

I would be curious as to the water needs of the crop.

I could not find anything right on point, but thought you would appreciate this:

"Positive environmental benefits have also been found in Europe. It provides cover for breeding birds throughout the summer and fall, unlike the row crops it replaced and with little or no nitrogen requirement has decreased pollution of ground water and rivers."