Hope we won't lose the Camaro again...

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by DerScotsman

^ Not only that but E85 also emits more CO2 than petrol

It does? Everything I've read says that it's slightly less than petrol.....

But in any event. The point of E85 has become national security. We are eating out of the hands of volatile foriegn nations, and not only that, but we are eating a slowly depleting resource.

E85 is one part, (also the first introduced) of the solution. If we can make it ourselves there is unimaginable benefits.

This whole "green" movement is crap, Imo, and if we were to argue CO2 emissions, I'd tell you that we were converting plants into fuel, and releasing C02 that would otherwise have been emmitted anyways through decomposition. As opposed to digging up Mother Nature's crap, literally, and burning it.

BUT - back to the point of the thread - If we have vehicles that can burn a fuel from a stable source, the gov't's idea is that that is a good thing, so we'll give you a bonus for it. It has nothing to do with real fuel economy numbers, EllwynX.

Just a sidenote...it IS a good thing that GM is producing these flex-fuel vehicles - but do you think that GM is doing solely for the reason that it's the right thing to do? No. They're taking advantage of a path around a stupid-ass law, too.

[The_Blur]

Ethanol is better than petroleum for the environment. Stop pretending otherwise. Do your research. It burns cleaner. Carbon dioxide is cleaner than many of the other emissions that petroleum produces. It's not clean. It's cleaner.

As muscle car enthusiasts, instead of complaining it is our job to come up with a way to make environmentally friendly powerhouses on the road. This movement is not going to change, so start innovating. It took us a long time to learn how to make gas-powered cars fast, so we need to start spending time researching how these hybrids or E85 cars can attain new heights in power.

The first step is to get over it. We will still get our Camaros, but we should take some responsibility for making our cars fast and stop complaining about how the environment is hurting our cars. Our cars have been hurting the environment for over a century!

[headpunter]

the problem that foods like beef and corn are taking it in the ass because corn is being used for ethanol, the real secret is drilling in anwar, remember 6 years ago when they said anwar wouldnt matter because it would take 6 years to get it operational? well it seems kinda silly now doesnt it. also can someone even prove to me that man is causing global warming....

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by The_Blur

Ethanol is better than petroleum for the environment. Stop pretending otherwise. Do your research. It burns cleaner. Carbon dioxide is cleaner than many of the other emissions that petroleum produces. It's not clean. It's cleaner.

There are two schools of thought regarding ethanol fuel:

The first says that ethanol is the greatest thing ever, the second says its pretty much a scam. If one does their research they will find both sides of the story. I lean towards the later, for now. Basically, in order to create ethanol fuel, you need tonnes of fertilizers and pesticides. For the most part these are derived from petroleum. Secondly, the process to turn corn into ethanol requires massive amounts of energy. All told, it costs about as much oil to make ethanol fuel from corn as you get out of it, compared to a 1:5 return from regular oil. on the up side, ethanol is renewable and the CO2 produced does go down significantly overall, since it gets absorbed by next years crops

But most of that goes out the window when talking about cellulose based ethanol. That is a great idea, no doubt about it.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by headpunter

the problem that foods like beef and corn are taking it in the ass because corn is being used for ethanol,

Yes...but not as much as most people think. Gas is rising, too - you know, so to transport, and harvest all that crap it costs more.

But I digress. Cellulosic Ethanol is an excellent source of ethanol. and in turn. an excellent source of fuel for our Camaro's.

Originally Posted by headpunter

also can someone even prove to me that man is causing global warming....

Nope.

Basically. No. I don't think our Camaro's are going anywhere. BE PREPARED FOR CHANGE. but they're gonna stay.

[The_Blur]

Originally Posted by headpunter

also can someone even prove to me that man is causing global warming....

Global warming is a natural phenomenon that occurs periodically. Earth is due for another ice age, but first there must be global warming.

Human beings are not the cause of global warming; however, the emissions produced by mankind since the Industrial Revolution have made global warming worse than it has to be. That means the next ice age will do significantly more damage to civilization than it did in the past. Therefore, in order to bring down the impact of global warming, we should contribute less toxic emissions. That leads to the final reason to produce less toxic emissions—they're toxic! Toxic things are bad for everyone and everything. If it's toxic, we should find a way to replace it with something that isn't toxic or to remove all toxic elements of the product. We don't have to produce carbon dioxide if there's an alternative, so why not have an alternative? Sure, it's costly for research and development, but it's better than being responsible for the end of civilization on this planet.

SUMMARY
• Global warming is natural, periodic, and leads to an ice age.
• We made it worse, so the consequences will be worse.
• To reduce the consequences, we should use alternative fuels that are cleaner.

[Scotsman]

What's the issue with bringing cellulosic ethanol to the masses then if it's the best alternative??? Would an E85 engine be compatible with cellulosic ethanol??

Starting discussions like this is healthy, you can't learn everything on your own, definitely not another's perspective.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by The_Blur

Global warming is a natural phenomenon that occurs periodically. Earth is due for another ice age, but first there must be global warming.

Human beings are not the cause of global warming; however, the emissions produced by mankind since the Industrial Revolution have made global warming worse than it has to be. That means the next ice age will do significantly more damage to civilization than it did in the past. Therefore, in order to bring down the impact of global warming, we should contribute less toxic emissions. That leads to the final reason to produce less toxic emissions—they're toxic! Toxic things are bad for everyone and everything. If it's toxic, we should find a way to replace it with something that isn't toxic or to remove all toxic elements of the product. We don't have to produce carbon dioxide if there's an alternative, so why not have an alternative? Sure, it's costly for research and development, but it's better than being responsible for the end of civilization on this planet.

SUMMARY
• Global warming is natural, periodic, and leads to an ice age.
• We made it worse, so the consequences will be worse.
• To reduce the consequences, we should use alternative fuels that are cleaner.

Thats the best summary of global warming i have ever seen

[Dan]

This is an interesting article.

http://www.topspeed.com/cars/car-new...l-ar49401.html

No more California emissions...

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by DerScotsman

What's the issue with bringing cellulosic ethanol to the masses then if it's the best alternative??? Would an E85 engine be compatible with cellulosic ethanol??

Starting discussions like this is healthy, you can't learn everything on your own, definitely not another's perspective.

Ethanol is a chemical, C2H5-OH. That doesn't change whether you get it from rice, corn, grapes or what ever. Yup, ethanol is the same alcohol that you drink in beer or wine or moonshine or anything else. A car engine doesn't care where you get the ethanol from, just like your stomac doesn't care when you drink the stuff (don't drink E85 even though its 85% ethanol, its still 15% gasoline!). However, your wallet does care where you get ethanol from, and so do cows, and lots of other things. There are two basic ways to make it, use sugar or use cellulose. Using sugar means that you need to get it from some sort of food, corn is the most popular. Problem is, if you use a crop of corn to make fuel nothing can eat the corn. But by using the corn stalks, which are high in cellulose and are otherwise useless, you have gained a basically free energy source. The problem here is that there isn't an efficient way to convert cellulose into ethanol, but chemists, biologists, and engineers are working hard to find a way.

That clear things up?

[Scotsman]

^Enahnced my perspective. Thanks.

Here's an article I pulled up from a search for cellulosic ethanol:
http://www.technologyreview.com/Energy/18227/

Again, investment in an infrastructure seems to be the only serious issue for cellulosic ethanol. No matter how you look at it, something has to be done, soon.

[The_Blur]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

The problem here is that there isn't an efficient way to convert cellulose into ethanol, but chemists, biologists, and engineers are working hard to find a way.

Once that happens, there really is no excuse for using gasoline. Ethanol could potentially be a very good source of income for domestic farmers and businesses. That means Americans can buy cars supporting domestic workers and buy fuel supporting domestic farmers.

[EllwynX]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

BUT - back to the point of the thread - If we have vehicles that can burn a fuel from a stable source, the gov't's idea is that that is a good thing, so we'll give you a bonus for it. It has nothing to do with real fuel economy numbers, EllwynX.

Ah. Ok. See, now it makes a lot more sense.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Also, energy return on Gas production vs energy output is somewhere between .9 to 1.2 depending on who does the research.

Cellulosic ethanol yeilds a massive 8!! yet to be proven less!!