A study was recently published that said that Ethanol could be worse for humans than gasoline if used as the primary fuel for all vehicles in the United States of America. So most people are asking why we are even trying to push for bio fuels.
Well, the simple answer is that fuels such as gasoline are easy to get and are extremely easy to use. Bio fuels (such as E85) are a direct replacement for them. Gasoline has many disadvantages including, but not limited to:
1. Large demand means way too much reliance on unstable governments like those of the middle east.
2. They pollute way too much, causing smog and many health risks (This is what E85 is currently being excused of as well)
3. Limited supply that is non-renewable.
Although E85 will require a lot of switchgrass, one of the best sources for E85, that will probable require support from other countries, it doesn't have to be limited to just the select few we currently get gasoline from.
But lets say that E85 is every bit as bad when it comes to polluting and only a few countries can produce enough of it to meet our demands. Why can't we make E85 with hybrid electric motors?
After we do that, it will make the transition to full electric easier. Which is really where we need to be. Electric has proven to be the best for anyone traveling less than 300 miles per day (which is 99% of us). And for the rare times that we want to travel, we can just use public transportation.
I still don't think hydrogen will ever work out. hydrogen is very expensive to produce and requires great caution when refueling. All around, it doesn't seem like it would pan out very well. The better solution would be electric cars getting their power from hydrogen or other power stations.
This puts us back onto electric. The reason I think the world, or at least the USA, is not ready for electric tomorrow is that the added strain on our old power systems would be too much. Some of you may remember, a few years back, a power failure in one area caused a chain reaction which left the whole North East of the USA without power. Which is proof positive that our powerlines cannot take the added load of every car in the USA charging.
What we need is a progressive country to take a strong stance on alternate fuel solutions, specifically electric, so that we can see how well it really works on the large scale. I can sit up here and speculate about stuff I don't know a bit about all day long, but if we could get one country to function in a gasoline free state, it would prove that it is 100% possible to break the dependancy on gasoline once and for all.
ID:29669
 Apr 18 2007, 5:31 am (Edited on Apr 23 2007, 7:39 am)
|
|
SuperSaiyanGokuX wrote:
Though this is slightly tangential to your topic... ... ... It is actually half of the point I was trying to make. Even with gasoline. E85 is just a patch to the gasoline wire, not a replacement. What we need is a complete overhaul of the current transportation system. The old electric system is a great example of outdated technology that just needs to be replaced. Burning fuels is also an outdated technology that needs to be replaced. And regarding the communications grids, the phone lines need to be removed, and replaced by higher bandwidth Internet. I guess most of the technology erected in the past ~100-200 years is due for replacement. We have been just patching it all this time, making it better, but less stable and more bloated. | |
E85 is nowhere near as damaging as gasoline is, as far as I recall (I did a report on this, not too long ago) - The biggest problems are the pure amount of space it takes to make bio fuels, and the possibility of disturbing natural ecosystems surrounding the area.
I see it as a step in the right direction; which is far better than a step in the wrong direction. | |
I've read that the big worry with E85 and the like is that if/when it becomes the norm, the demand for corn to make the fuel will pull supply away from food crops...
If a farmer can sell his corn for a large profit to an ethanol manufacturer, or a much smaller profit for food, which is he more likely to take? | |
From what I understand, however, switch grass is a much better source of ethanol than corn, which is said to grow in dry and hot climates, such as those closer to the equator.
I agree that E85 is a step in the right direction, but I think we need to take a jump, not a step. It is time to go past our current preconceptions about electric and make the jump. At the same time, like I said in my post, this would create problems with the added power loads. | |
"hydrogen is very expensive to produce..."
It can't be too expensive to produce. It's a fairly simple process to seperate the oxygen and hydrogen in water, so then you just have to collect the gas bubbles. | |
From what I understand, it takes massive amounts of energy to do it. So to produce the hydrogen, you would use more energy than just pumping the energy right into the car.
I'm sure that the price would go down if more people were doing it, being that the method to refine hydrogen would become... refined, but it is still a waste of energy. I suppose if you had a hydrogen electric that could run on batteries, but then could switch to a hydrogen electric generator for long trips, you would solve both problems (the high price of hydrogen and the lack of distance of electric). | |
Danial.Beta wrote:
From what I understand, it takes massive amounts of energy to do it. So to produce the hydrogen, you would use more energy than just pumping the energy right into the car. Materials: 1) Water 2) A 9v battery 3) Graphite from a pencil (or some other carbon-based rod) 4) Wire from bettery to graphite Procedure: 1) Attach one end of each wire to 9v 2) Break the pencil graphite in half, so you have 2 rods. 3) Attach one end of each wire to a piece of graphite. 4) Put the graphite pieces in the water. 5) Wait for bubbles. Those bubbles are O2 and H2. If you can do it so easily with a 9v, I don't think it'll take too much energy to make the reaction occur faster. | |
Despite what people think, hydrogen would be safer in cars than gasoline. If there is ever sort of leak, hydrogen diffuses up due to it's low density, stopping any real chance of a fire from it because of leaking.
| |
Why has no one mentioned the real reason we rely on gasoline?
Its all in economics. As long as the powers-that-be can make money off of gasoline, they will continue to do so. | |
Jamesburrow wrote:
Why has no one mentioned the real reason we rely on gasoline? Because we didn't want any conspiracy theorists to show up. Its all in economics. As long as the powers-that-be can make money off of gasoline, they will continue to do so. Damn, too late. | |
Lol. Sorry. Its actually what they teach us in Gov. & Eco. here at school.
And, you've gotta admit, it does make sense. Do you have any idea how easy it would be to start producing purely electric cars? The main reason its not done is the economics involved. Like it or not, the world runs off of money. | |
Ethanol is nothing more than a huge corn subsidy. It takes more energy to turn corn into fuel than it generates. It has already driven the cost of corn up to levels such that areas like Mexico who relied on it as a staple now are searching for alternatives. In terms of environmental responsibility and progress, it is a joke.
Slate had a good article here: http://www.slate.com/id/2122961/ From USAToday: http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/ 2006-07-10-ethanol-study_x.htm And on the international impact on food supplies:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/ 01/26/AR2007012601896_pf.html Electric cars aren't that easy- storing enough energy to move a car isn't quite that simple. Fortunately, we have had a more efficient energy generator than pure gasoline combustion for years- steam generation. It powers most ships, for example. And while you still need combustion, there is less energy loss. In fact, were it not for an outbreak of hoof-and-mouth disease, cars would likely be steam driven (and vastly more efficient). Nonetheless, pure electric cars have some remarkable advantages- namely elimination of all the secondary systems that gasoline engines need! that in turn reduces weight and energy requirements. But any alt fuel or design is a threat to established industries, so progress is slow until either 1) somebody finds a way to make enough money off it to make it worthwhile or 2) the system collapses. And that is not conspiracy- it is our markets in action! | |
We need a completely integrated public transportation system of light-rails, bullet trains, subways and the like. Where one could use them to get where they need to be. Then we wouldn't need to waste resources on personal vehicle fuels (which isn't to say that they shouldn't be around, just not used as an everyday thing).
| |
That may work for cities, but people who live in rural areas cannot depend on buses and whatnot. It is just not functional. We need independent transportation, period. Sure, cities like LA need a very powerful and useful public transportation system, but it just doesn't work for us out on the 'boon'.
| |
Of course. You know how easy it would be for us to build a car that runs from burning kittens? It's more of a question of, how many gas stations are there in the united states? There are about 200,000. It would be incredibly expensive to build 200,000 kitten stations for people to refuel there cars at. Not to mention how dangerous it is to put live kittens into your kitten-tank.
Jamesburrow wrote: And, you've gotta admit, it does make sense. Do you have any idea how easy it would be to start producing purely electric cars? | |
Strawgate +1.
| |
But that is the problem with E85, but electric wouldn't need refueling stations. It is plugged in like anything else in your house. The biggest issue is getting power to it from inside to outside, but assuming you spend $15,000 on a car, you could probably spend $200 to have an outlet placed outside.
But yes, I explained that the old systems get in the way of implementing the new ones. | |
E85 Ethanol: I was under the impression that you could use existing gasoline infrastructure to sell E85.
Electric: Recharge time! You know how long it takes for you to be able to get enough gas to drive something like 200 miles? About 5 minutes. I was under the impression that electric cars take a couple of hours to recharge, you could do it overnight, but what if you don't have that long and you need to have it done now? Danial.Beta wrote: But that is the problem with E85, but electric wouldn't need refueling stations. It is plugged in like anything else in your house. The biggest issue is getting power to it from inside to outside, but assuming you spend $15,000 on a car, you could probably spend $200 to have an outlet placed outside. | |
Though this is slightly tangential to your topic, just the other day I found myself looking at all of the infrastructure we've put in place to handle electric distribution and communications grids, and I get the notion that we really need to rip out all of the wires and poles and start over... But, that will never happen... We're doomed to just keep patching over the same obsolete crap...