If you want even more fun, try to have a reasonable discussion on the increased use of carbon fiber in automobiles.
cellulosic ethanol, FTW
(just as long as it doesn't result in a reduction of my white likker production)
If you want even more fun, try to have a reasonable discussion on the increased use of carbon fiber in automobiles.
cellulosic ethanol, FTW
(just as long as it doesn't result in a reduction of my white likker production)
I am on the fence when it comes to ethanol. Too much money has been poured into subsidizing its production.
In standard engines and even engines that are made for e85, there is little advantage to it.
There are currently problems transporting ethanol via current pipeline infrastructure.
However, imported alcohol makes sense. So does investment in technology to better produce and transport alcohol.
And as vic noted, alcohol works very well in turbocharged engines, which are in the pipeline from carmakers. Ford has a turbocharged v6 that makes 350hp on gas and 450 on e85.
In short the technology has a lot a promise, but needs work to make it happen.
In standard engines and even engines that are made for e85, there is little advantage to it.
There are currently problems transporting ethanol via current pipeline infrastructure.
However, imported alcohol makes sense. So does investment in technology to better produce and transport alcohol.
And as vic noted, alcohol works very well in turbocharged engines, which are in the pipeline from carmakers. Ford has a turbocharged v6 that makes 350hp on gas and 450 on e85.
In short the technology has a lot a promise, but needs work to make it happen.
Zebo
Elite Member
- Jul 29, 2001
- 39,398
- 19
- 81
1. Um..Energy
2. Cleaner burning and independence from retrograde peoples who soon as look at you want to cut you head off.
3. Less than 1 ROE makes it horrible alternative by definition. The US can't grow Sugar like Brazil or South America. Corn and some grasses also take up to much land needed for things like food.
2. Cleaner burning and independence from retrograde peoples who soon as look at you want to cut you head off.
3. Less than 1 ROE makes it horrible alternative by definition. The US can't grow Sugar like Brazil or South America. Corn and some grasses also take up to much land needed for things like food.
Why can't you discuss the issues without being a smug bastard? You knew damn well what this thread was about but, because you've decided that you're better than everyone else, you decided that you would antagonize me. You demonstrated that you're better than me by pulling a bunch of quotes out of context, then pretend like you're the patron saint of the forums. I tried to discuss ideas in this thread, but was disrupted when people decided not to answer the very simple, straightforward questions that I posed in the OP. You did so, but not before attempting to demonstrate your intellectual superiority. Unfortunately, everyone else understood perfectly well what this thread was about. Everyone but you.
As for the usage of ethanol as a mobile fuel, it cannot be used effectively as a fuel in and of itself in existing everyday cars: it must be "diluted" using different fuels, most likely an octane-poor gasoline. Thus, while it can serve a purpose, heralding it as a final short-term solution is foolish since it is not a stand-alone product. Thus, my answer to my own questions would be:
1. An effective fuel additive that may be used to decrease the amount of fossil fuels required to produce an equivalent amount of liquid fuel propulsion (i.e. go further in your car with the same amount of petroleum-based fuel).
2. Decreasing the need for fossil fuels and the net carbon dioxide output. In the long term, higher compression ratio engines could be designed to use pure ethanol.
3. Producing, transporting, and storing ethanol are problematic for a variety of reasons. Large scale production (i.e. on the order of current gasoline production) is far away, even if cars that could run on pure ethanol were made available tomorrow. Transportation and storage requirements are not all that different from those for gasoline. Current gasoline additives may be incompatible with some ethanol formulations, though this is a minor problem.
:roll: Sometimes I'm not quite sure why I insist on beating my head against the wall of ignorance.
Corn is a terribly inefficient source of raw stock for ethanol, and economically, it competes with its use as a food source for humans and livestock. Sugar cane isn't a viable crop in the U.S.
There are other renewable celulistic, non food sources that yield more ethanol, including various grasses, fast growing trees and plant residue (including corn stalks, not the grain), sawdust and waste wood products.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
As usual Harvey is dead wrong/misleading on many fronts.
First off, while it's not the most efficient, it is not "terribly inefficient" either.
And while it does use a chunk of corn to produce, it does not really compete with "human" food but it does use corn that could be used for livestock. That however is mitigated by the feeding of the DDG(ethanol production byproduct) to livestock.
As to there being other more "efficient" sources - sure, but we do not have the technology in place for mass production yet. It will come with time as it's technology matures but it's not like you can just flip a switch to make the change over even if everything else was in place.
ZzZGuy
Golden Member
- Nov 15, 2006
- 1,855
- 0
- 0
I recall seeing on the discovery channel a process that is in development where they grow algae in vats, using sunlight/artificial light and Co2 they somehow get the algae to secrete ethanol. It supposedly yield 100x what a hectare of corn would, though I don't know if they mean if they stack the vats on top of each other.
Anyone know how this is coming along?
Anyone know how this is coming along?
I think ethanol is a great idea, but it's really a short-term solution to a long-term problem. The government should not be subsidizing it; they can invest their money more effectively elsewhere, plus there's the fact that this is really affecting food prices in a negative way.
*posts a thread*
*discussion ensues*
*gets pissed off because people are discussing it*
*bleats about how smart he thinks he is*
that is the summary of your contribution to this thread.
It's moving along, though the process doesn't scale very well. At best, it would be feasible to use it at a wastewater plant to power the plant itself - that sort of thing. The vats aren't stackable due to the need for sunlight and mass transfer (i.e. movement of CO2 and other chemicals to and from the algae).
- Oct 9, 1999
- 46,898
- 10,728
- 147
Oh, the ironing!
The strategic, as opposed to the tactical energy picture is clear. We need organized, funded development along a broad range of oil and coal energy alternatives, preferably starting yesterday.
Any one alternative will perforce be more expensive in the short run, which is why our private, quarterly report sensitive, instant profit dependent private energy monoliths have failed us repeatedly and will continue to fail us if we leave our national energy future in their hands.
We need vision, and we need commitment.
The acuity of the problem is not yet apparent to many, but our Exxons of today are our General Motors and AIG's of tomorrow, helmed by short-sighted, over compensated blowhards pimping the one thing they know, the same-old, same-old.
Obviously you're not familiar with the strategy of big oil. They developed many alternative energy tools, methods, and ideas years ago and are now sitting on them. They are playing for the long haul. They also know that oil isn't going anywhere any time soon, but that some day people will decide enough is enough and look for alternatives. When they look for those alternatives, they'll find it's the same companies offering the new service.
GodlessAstronomer
Lifer
- Oct 27, 2007
- 17,009
- 5
- 0
I plead guilty to not directly answring questions. Sorry was running out the door to head to work at the time.
1.Fuel for cars
2.renewable, may be cheaper someday then oil (but not from corn), can be produced domestically.
3.will never be enough of it to replace oil.
SlickSnake
Diamond Member
- May 29, 2007
- 5,235
- 2
- 0
Umm, I hate to break this to you CyloWizard, but this is not really politics or news, is it? 
Maybe a good post for Off Topic or Highly Technical. Considering the mud slinging mess that is P&N this post seems kind of out of place.
But since you asked, I think it is not ethical to make fuel from food. Ethanol becomes a completely embarrassing scientific moral failure in this country when the government subsidies corn farmers to help make it when you stop to consider all the starving people this planet can not feed already.
And the entire ethanol concept is further flawed when it also takes way more energy to make the fuel than it ever recoups to help the atmosphere to use it.
Ethanol fuel from corn faulted as 'unsustainable subsidized food burning' in analysis by Cornell scientist
Maybe a good post for Off Topic or Highly Technical. Considering the mud slinging mess that is P&N this post seems kind of out of place.
But since you asked, I think it is not ethical to make fuel from food. Ethanol becomes a completely embarrassing scientific moral failure in this country when the government subsidies corn farmers to help make it when you stop to consider all the starving people this planet can not feed already.
And the entire ethanol concept is further flawed when it also takes way more energy to make the fuel than it ever recoups to help the atmosphere to use it.
Ethanol fuel from corn faulted as 'unsustainable subsidized food burning' in analysis by Cornell scientist
Jeff7
Lifer
- Jan 4, 2001
- 41,596
- 20
- 81
Ethanol from corn? No, it's terribly inefficient, just using the grain portion of it. It also drives up corn prices, and takes edible corn (edible by humans or livestock) out of that market.
That infamous switchgrass sounds like a better idea. It can grow in places corn can't, and the entire plant can be used to produce ethanol.
Still, efficient methods would need to be devised for producing it. All liquid fuels do is provide a means of energy storage; instead of a battery that stores electrical charge, a combustible fuel is a battery that stores its energy in the form of molecular bonds.
Electric vehicles would be a better idea. Electric motors are fairly efficient, and we've already got a decent system for distributing electricity, though it may need some upgrading to handle the load of charging electric cars. And power outages would also mean that people could be unable to drive to work. Some new lithium-ion technology claims a significant increase in energy density, but they may still suffer from what I consider to be the biggest drawback of lithium-ion battery technology: Death by aging. Other battery types, such as lead acid and NiMH die by either deep discharge or by going through lots of charge/discharge cycles. Li-ion dies not by deep discharge (batteries have protection circuits to prevent this), but as a result of time, losing capacity simply by virtue of existing at all, charged or uncharged.
(Ok, so they will die by deep discharge, but that's also to keep things from blowing up or catching fire. One deep-discharged cell in a li-ion pack can be bad news if it gets reverse-biased during charging.)
The new development of low self-discharge NiMHs was an excellent step forward. Unfortunately, NiMHs have the disadvantage of weight. It's tough to compete against the least-dense metal in existence.
That infamous switchgrass sounds like a better idea. It can grow in places corn can't, and the entire plant can be used to produce ethanol.
Still, efficient methods would need to be devised for producing it. All liquid fuels do is provide a means of energy storage; instead of a battery that stores electrical charge, a combustible fuel is a battery that stores its energy in the form of molecular bonds.
Electric vehicles would be a better idea. Electric motors are fairly efficient, and we've already got a decent system for distributing electricity, though it may need some upgrading to handle the load of charging electric cars. And power outages would also mean that people could be unable to drive to work. Some new lithium-ion technology claims a significant increase in energy density, but they may still suffer from what I consider to be the biggest drawback of lithium-ion battery technology: Death by aging. Other battery types, such as lead acid and NiMH die by either deep discharge or by going through lots of charge/discharge cycles. Li-ion dies not by deep discharge (batteries have protection circuits to prevent this), but as a result of time, losing capacity simply by virtue of existing at all, charged or uncharged.
(Ok, so they will die by deep discharge, but that's also to keep things from blowing up or catching fire. One deep-discharged cell in a li-ion pack can be bad news if it gets reverse-biased during charging.)
The new development of low self-discharge NiMHs was an excellent step forward. Unfortunately, NiMHs have the disadvantage of weight. It's tough to compete against the least-dense metal in existence.
nobodyknows
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2008
- 5,474
- 0
- 0
Originally posted by: SlickSnake
Umm, I hate to break this to you CyloWizard, but this is not really politics or news, is it?
Maybe a good post for Off Topic or Highly Technical. Considering the mud slinging mess that is P&N this post seems kind of out of place.
But since you asked, I think it is not ethical to make fuel from food. Ethanol becomes a completely embarrassing scientific moral failure in this country when the government subsidies corn farmers to help make it when you stop to consider all the starving people this planet can not feed already.
And the entire ethanol concept is further flawed when it also takes way more energy to make the fuel than it ever recoups to help the atmosphere to use it.
Ethanol fuel from corn faulted as 'unsustainable subsidized food burning' in analysis by Cornell scientist
Fail
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/16...alance-of-Corn-Ethanol
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Originally posted by: SlickSnake
Umm, I hate to break this to you CyloWizard, but this is not really politics or news, is it?
Maybe a good post for Off Topic or Highly Technical. Considering the mud slinging mess that is P&N this post seems kind of out of place.
But since you asked, I think it is not ethical to make fuel from food. Ethanol becomes a completely embarrassing scientific moral failure in this country when the government subsidies corn farmers to help make it when you stop to consider all the starving people this planet can not feed already.
And the entire ethanol concept is further flawed when it also takes way more energy to make the fuel than it ever recoups to help the atmosphere to use it.
Ethanol fuel from corn faulted as 'unsustainable subsidized food burning' in analysis by Cornell scientist
Ahem - Pimetal has been debunked and his methodology and figures crumble under the light of day. He's the only one who has been saying these things for a couple decades I believe. Too bad he hasn't updated his numbers and methodology for a couple decades...
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Originally posted by: nobodyknows
Originally posted by: SlickSnake
Umm, I hate to break this to you CyloWizard, but this is not really politics or news, is it?
Maybe a good post for Off Topic or Highly Technical. Considering the mud slinging mess that is P&N this post seems kind of out of place.
But since you asked, I think it is not ethical to make fuel from food. Ethanol becomes a completely embarrassing scientific moral failure in this country when the government subsidies corn farmers to help make it when you stop to consider all the starving people this planet can not feed already.
And the entire ethanol concept is further flawed when it also takes way more energy to make the fuel than it ever recoups to help the atmosphere to use it.
Ethanol fuel from corn faulted as 'unsustainable subsidized food burning' in analysis by Cornell scientist
Fail
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/16...alance-of-Corn-Ethanol
Isn't it fun to see people still clinging on to the Myths?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter