True dat... Beaufort, NC has an E85 plant...yet we have no actual points of distribution here in the area...

E85 burns differently... no? It gives less MPG I believe.

The "Flex Fuel" logos are kinda cool on the back of some Tahoes and Yukons...

 

I like burning old dinosaurs........

 

Yeah, it burns differently...

In one news article I saw, they did a test to see how the mpg stacked up. Not a very scientific test, but the results showed that E85 mpg is lower than gasoline, but the price per gallon is also lower. In the end, running E85 instead of gasoline in a FlexFuel vehicle is about a wash financially.

Then again, economically speaking, why would we expect anything different? I mean, if E85 is more expensive to run than gasoline, on average the general public is not going to use it. Sure there will be a few that thing they're doing something special for the environment and such, but...

If E85 is cheaper to run than gasoline, more and more people will switch over to E85, driving up demand until the price/mile reaches equilibrium with gasoline.

It's called free market. Gotta love the news for a breaking story.

 

I've calculated that my carbon footprint is 9 tonnes of CO2 per year. That's less than half the average person in the US.

And I'm not even trying!

Carbon footprint calculator

For all you tree huggers...

 

11 tonnes here. I can't believe MyBad is greener than me.

Commie tree hugger.

I'm reading "The Omnivore's Dilemma." Try that if you want to see a real horror show.

 

Here is the thing with E85. Unless you live in the Mid-West, it is going to cost a nice premium. The latest ratings I could find put E85 @ .44 cents a gallon more than petrol in the Mid Atlantic and SE states. So... lets have a little fun....

E85 claims a 50% reduction in emissions..... correct?

Well, lets examine this.....

E85 make significantly less MPG than gasoline.. on the order of 1/3rd less. So....

You and I are taking a trip. We have the same car. You fill your ten gallon tank with E85, I with 93 Octane. The current cost of 93 octane is lets say $2.00. Since we are in the regoin where the highest premium on E85. higher than California... your gallon of E85 costs $2.44.

To fill my tank cost: $20.00
To fill your tank cost: $24.40

Now, on the highway (of which we are traveling) our car's rating on petrol is 30MPG. Since we know that E85 only provides 2/3 the milage of petrol, your car will now recieve 20MPG on the highway.

To travel the entire distance, I will use 33 Gallons of petrol. For you, in the same distance, you will use 50 gallons of E85. So to cover the same distnace, not only have you had to stop more often to fuel up, you have also paid more to do it.... but there is still a point to this...

My fuel cost for the trip is $66.00.
Your fuel cost (based on the price of the fuel at departure) is $122.00

Now.. the pro-E85 people will tell you that E85 puts out 50% less emissions than standard pertol burning vehicles. Well, let use the example above to verify that. When this is calculated, it is done by gallon... so for each gallon of E85 as compaired to each gallon of petrol, there is a 50% reducion in emissions........ BUT.............

Because you have to use MORE E85 to cover the same distance as your petrol counterparts, your true emissions reduction is less than the advertised 50%.


So, with my petrol burner....... I made the trip quicker b/c I had to stop less often to refuel, cost significantly less, with the trade off of putting out about 1/3 more emissions.

Seems like a fair trade off to me. Plant more trees........

 

I hear you...

Unfortunately, I do not believe there really is going to be a true 'green' movement to find an alternative fuel unless...
1) there is profit to be made in private industry, or
2) the government makes a concerted AND scientific effort at the very least by using artificial economic forces to create profitable opportunities for private industry.

Here's my thinking... In the US, there are far too many people that couldn't give a sh!t about the environment. I read over and over on forums and hear it from friends, family, co-workers, and acquaintances, things like "the damage is done, why should I cut back now," and "everyone else drives a huge SUV and wastes fuel, why shouldn't I," or "I'm too insignificant to make a difference."

For a true 'green' movement, that mentality is going to have to change. And the way that those changes seem to happen in this country is when it hits peoples' wallets. It's really all economics.

Private industry is only going to be motivated to develop a practical alternative energy source when it's profitable. Can't blame them, that's why they're in business; to turn a profit. The "bastardizing and trivializing" of the green movement that companies are doing is pretty much just marketing a product to the people that want it. People want green despite not really understanding what green really is, and when they can do it for essentially no additional cost to them, as in E85, they'll join in. I too want to blame the companies for their marketing strategies, but in reality I should blame the public that can't see through the marketing the way that I do.

With the exceptionally high costs to develop an alternative energy source, as well as to build an infrastructure to deliver the product, it's doubtful private industry is going to move swiftly without government intervention to make such development appear profitable. This can take place with government regulation to force certain environmental initiatives, or through artificial economic pressure (additional taxes on energy based on fossil fuels and tax breaks for use of alternative energy sources).

However, artificially driving up the consumer and business costs for fuel and energy too much could have a devastating impact on the economy in this country, as we've already seen the impacts of real variables on the economy when supply/demand cause consumer and business energy costs go up (Katrina?). Furthermore, and I'm not necessarily the biggest conspiracy theorist, but I do believe we have too many government officials with their hands in the oil industry to really have the best interests of the public in mind.

I have little confidence that our government can put together an effective plan to develop alternative energy sources, whether it be to reduce our dependence on the rest of the world for our energy needs or for environmental or 'green' purposes. I believe our government is shrouded too heavily with bureaucracy and political agendas to develop a cohesive plan. I mean, we're still giving tax breaks to people who buy H2s because they are considered a truck, despite the fact that they drink far more gasoline per mile than almost any other consumer vehicle without offering any more practicality. How can we expect these officials, each with their own personal agenda to begin a scientific and economic approach to reducing our dependency and creating a cleaner environment?

I suppose that's what pisses me off more than the marketing strategies of the auto manufacturers.

 

I forgot to mention that the news article I saw was from the midwest where E85 was actually selling at a price per gallon less than gasoline.

 

Also, add to that...

That while the vehicles I choose to drive are not the most fuel efficient, they arenot E85 compatible, but they are more fuel efficient than most of the FlexFuel vehicles currently offered, which tend to be trucks.

I'm sure that'll change with time.

 

Demonization of an industry will not get anyone anywhere.