Flex-fuel?

[Scotsman]

I can't see GM not making the 5th-gen flex fuel capable? I think it's ultra important for car makers to offer cars that are capable of running on alternative fuels and increasing the number of diesel options available to consumers. Getting away from gas is definitely something we need to do.

[smokn']

i agree. in fact, flex-fuel is one of the biggest reasons i'm waiting for the 'maro and not getting a goat. i want my muscle to last!

[The_Blur]

I agree. I would feel really good about driving a Flex-Fuel pony car.

[DGthe3]

There is no reason not to do it. If people don't want it, they don't need to buy E85. The increased costs are marginal, slightly more expensive parts for a few things but nothing major

[bouncertime]

I just hope they start opening up more E85 stations in my area.

[Fandango]

I want to see the new Camaro be E85 capable.

Actually I'd like to know what it cost to make this gas because it's more combustable than regualar unleaded. I want to know what's taking so long to make it available. Then I also here that corn costs a lot too. What gives?

Any one got some articles or expert knowledge on this stuff?

[Scotsman]

I personally couldn't care less about E85, I want cellulosic ethanol (if you haven't noticed ready, I'm quite a "C85" fanboy)!!! E85 is bad for us and doesn't work so well in the real world.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by Scotsman

I personally couldn't care less about E85, I want cellulosic ethanol (if you haven't noticed ready, I'm quite a "C85" fanboy)!!! E85 is bad for us and doesn't work so well in the real world.

chemically they are no different -85% ethanol 15% gasoline. Cellulose is a feedstock to produce ethanol, just like corn is. So "C85" could stand for corn as much as cellulose. so how about CE85 as a name? GAH - could still be Corn Ethanol. How about we change the spelling of corn to korn (not to be confused with the band KoRn)

[Scotsman]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

chemically they are no different -85% ethanol 15% gasoline. Cellulose is a feedstock to produce ethanol, just like corn is. So "C85" could stand for corn as much as cellulose. so how about CE85 as a name? GAH - could still be Corn Ethanol. How about we change the spelling of corn to korn (not to be confused with the band KoRn)

I understand that. I included the "C" because to me that represents cellulose.

[ihc95]

I would love to have a flex fuel camaro! but please, not with a diesel

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by Fandango

I want to see the new Camaro be E85 capable.

Actually I'd like to know what it cost to make this gas because it's more combustable than regualar unleaded. I want to know what's taking so long to make it available. Then I also here that corn costs a lot too. What gives?

Any one got some articles or expert knowledge on this stuff?

As I understand it, the cost of production is around $1/gal. On top of that there are taxes and profits. In the end, it costs a bit more to fuel up on E85 because of reduced economy. The reason it is taking so long is because gas stations need to do large overhauls to handle the more corrosive fuel. That and there isn't much availible, for two reasons 1) most gets used in E10, and 2) not enough stations to sell E85, so why produce it! It is more popular in the midwest where the corn is grown.


And scotsman, I figured you knew what you were talking about but there may have been others who read your post and get confused. I agree 100% though, corn ethanol bad, cellulose ethanol good.

[theholycow]

Originally Posted by Fandango

I want to see the new Camaro be E85 capable.

Actually I'd like to know what it cost to make this gas because it's more combustable than regualar unleaded. I want to know what's taking so long to make it available. Then I also here that corn costs a lot too. What gives?

Any one got some articles or expert knowledge on this stuff?

Well, here's portions of what I know as they relate to your post...

I don't know that it's "more combustible", but it does hold less energy than gasoline. It may be possible to adjust the engine to more efficiently extract that energy, which could result in real-world results that are pretty much even with gasoline. The real advantages, though, are that it's renewable so it will never have to run out and that (in the US) it supports local farmers who otherwise have get paid by the government to NOT grow stuff, a tremendous waste of money and people.

Corn doesn't really cost that much, food prices are so high because energy prices are so high. There's a couple ethanol discussions over on gmfullsize.com where we've got some farmers who actually grow the stuff and they have a pretty thorough understanding of the market, and that's where that info came from.

However, there's a couple problems with corn as ethanol. One is that they don't use the whole plant, just the kernel. They're throwing away large amounts of energy that way. Another is that corn just isn't the most efficient plant for the job. Sugar cane, where the climate permits, makes much more ethanol, but there are other options. Soybeans have been proposed, and I suspect that sugar beets might be pretty good too.

Personally, I think we should be looking to the waste stream for energy sources and materials to be converted into fuel. Those are two separate things; converting biomass into fuel often uses as much or more energy than the fuel delivers, which means that the fuel is really a storage medium, not an energy source. That's fine with me, because what I want is liquid fuel for internal combustion engines; I really enjoy driving that type of vehicle and want there to always be fuel. The energy can be produced whatever way we want, and we'll always find a way to produce energy.

Anyway, back to the waste stream. Much of it can be turned into energy. Any biomatter, of course, can; there is a company that makes biodiesel out of turkey giblets from a turkey-trimming factory. More interestingly, there's a company making biodiesel out of algae semi-naturally growing on sewage retention ponds; they get the algae started and then don't have to put money or effort in, the algae eats up the sewage leaving nearly-clean water, and the end result is easy to convert into biodiesel.

I keep mentioning biodiesel, because that's where more R&D is going, but I'm pretty sure anything that can be made into biodiesel can be made into ethanol with a little more effort.

For other energy sources, there are the usual candidates -- solar, wind, hydro, geothermal, ocean wave, nuclear, etc. I fear that the end of fossil fuels, if it really happens, is going to happy very suddenly; and in that case, I bet nuclear will end up being used, because it will probably be the quickest and cheapest way to get a lot of energy. I don't really mind which one it is, but that seems most likely to me.

[Scotsman]

See the things is, it probably won't be any one thing, I think we're learning not to depend on a "sole provider" as that hasn't worked out for us and has put us in a real crunch in more ways than one. So more than likely there will be several solutions when it comes to choosing a power source for alternative propulsion and fueling.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by Scotsman

See the things is, it probably won't be any one thing, I think we're learning not to depend on a "sole provider" as that hasn't worked out for us and has put us in a real crunch in more ways than one. So more than likely there will be several solutions when it comes to choosing a power source for alternative propulsion and fueling.