What is Digg?67 Comments
- gator99, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I've heard to run your car on just gasoline again, it has to go through a 12 step program.
- mrnoob, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2How can we have TWO of the SAME story on the FRONT PAGE!?
- Osirisofdoom, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2WTF two of virtually the same story on the front page?? Whats going on here.
- gator99, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I've been running on ethanol for years.
- jaxun, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Ah good, now I can re-read all the same arguments made about the LAST ARTICLE ON THIS. I think soon we will need to change the name of this site to Digg Digg.
- TheIguana, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1However you would need to use more ethanol to get the same milage as you would get with octane (gasoline) mostly because it has significantly less energy stored up in it.
Iggy :) - fabioakita, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1You're all off. This whole article is very naive, it mentions Brazil only one in the middle. Well, guess what, this is nothing near news for Brazilians. We've been using such energy source for ages, going back until the 70's. We had some crisis in the middle but today we have a very stable supply. To plus it up, Petrobras is already self-sufficient in petroleum and today 70% of all new cars sold are based on a technology called "Flex" with means the same engine capable of burning both gasoline and ethanol. The the cost/consume ratio for gasoline and ethanol is quite the same, so no, you won't pay more for it. Your car will consume more gallons of ethanol but you pay less for the gallon. With this whole ***** around the Middle Orient and the ***** himself Chaves, we Brazilian can - at least - say that we are totally shielded from this particular probably crisis.
- Tweekster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1First of all, how is it for the environment, because that damn ethanol gas we have around her (10%) is actually WORSE. Not only does it cost more, give you lower MPG it is also worse than gas without the 10% for nature.
Plus, ethonal production, SERIOUSELY nasty for the environment..(not that oil is great either)
is pure ethonal any better to burn than gasoline. how much better? and what does it do, taking polution out of the air just to have it end up in the ground water isnt exactly much better. - Dingo128, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I can not say how much I hate Ethanol. We have it where I am at, up to 10% and it is terrible. It costs more that traditional fuel, and I get worse gas mileage. So then I get to fill up more. How is that helping the environment?
- tazamore, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1What is this, Ethanol Day on Digg?
- monolith, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I was going to bash this in the same way that it always is... that all that cropland that would be dedicated to Ethanol is an Environmental impact that is rarely taken into consideration by the Ethanol proponents... but this story about maybe possibly using waste cellulose... that would make Ethanol an even cooler trick. Dugg.
I'm still rather skeptical though. - sonic767, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2When second tier fuel companies in Australia tried to launch fuel with an ethanol content of between 5% and 20%, the major international fuel companies paid the tabloid media to launch a massive scare campaign, delivering all kinds of 'proof' that more than 5% ethanol in fuel physically damages cars, etc, etc.
The campaign was massive, and it worked. Australian consumers now largely reject fuels with any ethanol content at all. Non brand-name fuel sellers often have signs at the front of their retail outlets proclaiming "NO ETHANOL" or "Our fuel is Australian Standards compliant" to encourage customers to come back. The scare campaign that killed ethanol in Australia and sent a lot of fuel retailers into financial hardship (not to mention the environmental issues) is a classic example of how large corporates will shamelessly manipulate the public for their own fiscal benefit.
Still, this came as a pleasant change to many. Usually it is the large multinational drug companies that by the media and generate a scare campaign of some sort - when they have stocks of a certain drug to sell, they pay the media to report on "huge increase"s and "outbreak"s.
The choice of which media outlet to buy varies from state to state, but generally speaking, large corporate campaigners will have success buying Channel 9 (TV) A Current Affiar, Channel 7 (TV) Today Tonight, and (tabloid newspaper) The Daily Telegraph, in New South Wales (Sydney and the rest of the state). - Tweekster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Dingo: not to mention that the combo gas is not even good for the environment, ITS WORSE!
- Namco, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Didn't I just see this 5 minutes ago?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Law of evolutions says adapt or die, sure ethanol provides less power but all we have to do is drive at lower speeds with ad-hoc engines and wake up earlier for work.
- mtonak, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Gas stations in Minnesota that sell 85% ethanol fuel were much lower than regular gas prices. You do have to have an E85 compatible car for it though. But I don't understand how people are saying it's costs more at the pumps when the higher percentage ethanol is a lower price.
- waldo21, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0A Canadian company called Iogen is looking to buy straw from all over Idaho and are currently entering into contractual agreements. The staw will be used to produce ethanol at a plant located in Idaho Falls. Staw for those who may not know is the stems from grain stalks. Combines take just the grain, and spit the rest out the back. Straw is usually used for things like animal bedding etc.
Another plus to celulose biomass is that it would help reduce some government programs that keep cropland idle. - jopsa, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I thought humanity was trying to look for clean, renewable energy sources?
"Oh look, weve run out of oil! Well, I don't know, let's put something else in our car tanks... Oh yeah, ethanol, which is also pollutant!"
Thank god i'll be long gone for whenever our ozone layer dissapears completely. - Dhalgren, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0^^ He may be carrying around a clay jar with Xs on the side
- Garrick, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0http://garrickvanburen.com/archive/exchanging-petroleums-problems-for-ethanols
Depends on geography. - OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This has been known since the first cars were invented. In the past, it was more difficult and expensive to create ethanol, this is no longer true!
The oil companies during the great depression squeezed ethanol out of the market and we have been enslaved to them ever since. Now we have to technology to take back our freedom from Oil Vampires in Texas and Saudi Arabia.
Not only can ethanol and other BIODIESELS be made from corn, they can be made from hemp (much easier to grow) and organic waste. One company is already making Biodiesel from turkey carcasses, the same can be done with cow carcasses and other food byproducts.
We are still addicted to oil purely for political and religious reasons. - diggnationdevon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0You can buy this at quite a few gas stations, but this should replace gasoline
- maccalvin5, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050911/NEWS03/509110345/1005
same link i posted in the earlier story's comments - ethanol production pollutes like crazy, check it out. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Don't you even look at the front page before posting? This has already been posted:
http://digg.com/science/Why_and_how_gasoline_will_become_obsolete.
Essentially the same story. - capajc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0A "scientific" study with the word "probably" in the conclusion...yep, sounds like Berkeley =P
- 1337geek, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0ditto osiris, ditto.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0biodeisel is better than ethanol
- func, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I don't buy it, I doubt that there are enough arable acres on the planet to replace petroleum with the relatively energy poor ethanol. And remember, petroleum is not only necessary for the mechanized equipment, it is necessary for the fertilizers/pesticides that make modern crop yeilds possible.
- vonskippy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0At 20+ Million barrels of oil a day (just for the US), and ignoring all of the energy required to grow and convert biomass into usable energy, there is not enough arable land in the world, to be able to grow enough biomass of any sort to provide that type of energy. And biomass takes a certain amount of time to grow.
Tree huggers should spend a little more time doing the math before thinking they are saving the world. - stonebear, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It’s certainly not the energy panacea some would make it out to be. It actually takes quite a bit of fossil fuel to produce the biomass necessary for ethanol production. Proponents also don’t like to discuss how ethanol readily absorbs water from the air, corroding many components in the fuel systems of automobiles intended for gasoline, carburetors especially. Unless your car’s operating manual states it is built to use ethanol, you should avoid using it.
- archanoid, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This study brought to you by the letters A, C, and E.
(hint: http://www.ethanol.org) - Dhalgren, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"okay, who has the chemical process so i can create ethanol in my basement and stick it to the man?!?"
Just find your everyday Arkansas man, just make sure he has a bushy white beard and is missing more teeth than he has and ask him about moonshine. - vuke69, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Now if back in the 70's, instead of bowing to the tree huggers, we would have shifted more of the US energy production to nuclear, we would be in a much better position to switch to electric & hybrid vehicles.
I hate to say it, but that is the one thing that France did right. As far as I know, they are still the leader in nuclear power production (in %).
An electric hydrogen hybid, where the energy for the hydrogen production comes from nuclear (or other non-fossil fuel plants), is the way to go. Everything else is a waste of time (in my mind), unless they can produce a compact, 100% failsafe reactor that is small enough to power a car (or at least trucks/busses/trains/etc.) - Cincoted, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Many of the aforementioned arguments may be true now - but look at what solutions like E85 could mean, if the production of ethanol were to grow more efficient through developments in technology and wider distribution (based on demand). Corn is the most obvious source and most commonly noted, but certainly progress in waste cellulose could help to provide a reasonable base to use ethanol as a reliable piece of the fuel alternative pie. The key is proper education of how to use it: http://www.popularmechanics.com/specials/diy_central/1783077.html?page=2&c=y
- bringonts2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is extremely old news. There are reasons why we didn't change over to it from gasoline, and nothing has changed.
- jekul, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Using ethanol during the summer sucks... Your chances of your car overheating is high. I know because my car stalled atleast 6 times last summer. I knew it was because of the ethanol but I had no other choice since living on my own and going to college, tight budget.
- RomieZ, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Ridiculous..
- DJPandemonium, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"You can run a car on moonshine, which is basically a form of Ethanol."
Didn't they try that in Back to the Future 3?
It didn't work well, if I remember right...
;-) - ragingkegger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0ummm....doesn't fermentation create CO2???
- mkjones, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"How much energy is needed to convert the whatever into ethanol?"
About twice as much energy as producing a barrel of oil.
Its not the best option.
You could get a desiel and run it on vegetable oil, a few crazy folks in the UK have been doing that for years ;) - Moose_Head, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0According to Wired mag there is not enough corn to service even a small amount of the US petro market.
- FishyJoe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0mtonak, the ethanol produced in the USA is HEAVILY subsidized by the government. Even though you may pay the same price for ethanol at the pump, the actual costs of the product is substantially higher.
- earlycj5, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Dang, I'm tired of reading "EtOH is an energy loss".
Go back through the comments here and in the earlier post today. READ! There are about two people who typically "find" EtOH to be a net loss. The last report I saw/read was it was a 37% gain in energy. - rebrad, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Stop The Madness!!!!!!
- gutoandreollo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0ok.. i just hate bashing, but for this i have to ask myself.. WTF?!
not only this is not a new concept, but it HAS ALREADY been done!! not only with ethanol, but with alcohol taken off Sugar Cane!! Brazil already had a major incentive program decades ago (seriously), to enable research into this field, and turns out alcohol IS cheaper than gasoline here (even tho our gasoline has also some alcohol on it, 10% if i'm not mistaken)..
also, to give a better explanation, let me state that engines that run on alcohol are DIFFERENT than those which run on gasoline. so, when you buy a car, on of the choices you get is what fuel you want to run it on (Gasoline or Alcohol). Alcohol engines, correcting tweekster, have a BETTER milleage than gasoline engines, also..
Nowadays, you can also buy cars which have a special injection system (that is called Flex, Flexpower, Flextech or something like that, depending on the car make), and which you can use both gasoline and ethanol, and the system just adapts itself and works correctrily (yes, since gas engines are NOT made to run on ethanol). Those cars can be filled with 100% alcohol, for better milleage, 100% alchohol, for higher horsepower (in this case, the alcohol engines do not have better mileage, since the engine is not made specifically for that), or anything in between, being 50/50 the best of the two worlds usually.
So yes, this is not nothing new.. We Brazilians have already found new ways to run cars using less petroil (ethanol itself is only used as a complement, when there is a low on the production), and have done that decades ago!! So, old news =P - rhettnyedotorg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The 2007 Chevrolet Tahoe is dual-fuel e85 capable. GM has been hyping up e85 for some time, with army testing vehicles, etc. Here in British Columbia there is a lot of waste-wood from logging operations. most of the waste wood (not suitable for lumber nor paper) is left behind and usually burned. Why not take all those stumps and scrags and put them into a big still? some types of trees are not good enough for lumber nor paper (ie alder) and are only good for firewood. fireplaces (and slash burns) are horrible for the environment. I saw a fact stated that the comparable 'smog forming' emissions of the entire usable lifetimes of 10 Chevy Trailblazers is created by burning a single chord of wood in your fireplace. With companies like GM behind E85 and Ethanol it sounds like it's only a matter of time until we have another choice at the pump. The existing infrastructure of gasoline refineries are probably quite straightforward to convert to ethanol use/mixture and/or production? Anyone got a link to making ethanol and/or moonshine?
- jo42, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Horse Sh*t.
There aren't enough corn fields in Amerika to produce enough Ethanol to run a fraction of the cars in Yankeeland. - lwatcdr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Okay.
1. A car burning ethanol doesn't have to make less power than a car burning gasoline. Ethanol has an octane rating of around 113. An engine that ONLY burn ethanol can a higher compression ratio than a standard gasoline engine. That would help make up for the lower energy density of Ethanol vs Gasoline.
For a flex fuel system you could run more boost. Which would lower your fuel economy but would increase your power. Dragsters and Indy cars use alcohol because it can make MORE power then Gasoline not less.
Other problems with ethanol are real but probably could be deal with.
I have to wonder if Ethanol couldn't be used to make gasoline. It is a hydrocarbon so in theory it could be refined into a different hydrocarbon. The issue would be the cost in energy and money. - MrFisty, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0As the owner of a new Cooper S, the chances of me putting ethanol in my car are about as good as me keying my own car.
Ethanol is fine if you don't want performance. I had a mate try ethanol in his Cooper while I used Optimax 98 (as I always do) and I got nearly 200 extra kilometers out of it, not to mention faster pickup and acceleration, especially on slopes.
If you're so keen on saving the environment, ride a bike or catch a train. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This'll do if there's nothing else left to burn, but I don't care to use ethanol if regular gas is still available. I've tried it, and it sucks. It's more expensive, my MPG went down, and my car had less power.
However, I think it's a step in the right direction. Maybe with some engineering know-how, possibly new engine designs, and more powerful ethanol, this will be more usable.
I also strongly agree with Vuke69 on his nuclear power argument. Nuclear power is being held back due to people's emotions moreso than any safety issues. Emotions are crap. -
Show 51 - 67 of 67 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is