94extreme Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 is it the future? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12676374/ i didn't watch dateline last night but i know that brazil is off the oil tit and it seems to work for them just fine. what do you guys think? is it gonna happen here? my state already produces ethanol and is gearing up to increase the production. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12600726/ of course the latest enviro deregulation by shrub has crimped the industry somewhat in the name of dropping gas prices. of course the price has only increased since but i didn't really expect anything different. i am all for it because i am tired of stuffing the pockets of the oil barrons. i know our pathys arent ready to take the ethanol but i surely would like to find a NG kit for my truck for now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nycxice13 Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 (edited) COOlForget the natural gas go for this baby Ethanol converter Or this READY FOR R50s 98 to 2000 Edited May 8, 2006 by nycxice13 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
94extreme Posted May 8, 2006 Author Share Posted May 8, 2006 NG would give me bigger range. not looking to comletely dump the petrol just yet. NG is $1.70ish/gal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nycxice13 Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 1.70 WOW, I PRAY we get ethanol so I can fuel up on 10 bucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
94extreme Posted May 8, 2006 Author Share Posted May 8, 2006 that natural gas price.. not sure about ethanol. will have to check a station next time i am by one. there are a few of those around and opening more and more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nycxice13 Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 They say Ethanol could be less then a buck, thats what I was talking about with the 10 dollar fueling. I remember when premium gas was a 1.25 I miss those days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
94extreme Posted May 8, 2006 Author Share Posted May 8, 2006 yeah. i am pretty sure it's about the same price as gas or maybe even a little higher right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nycxice13 Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 Well you have to take into account that they don't really have the automotive production demands for it just yet. Once that kicks in and they put up more ethanol refineries, prices will drop massively. And we will finally have a renewable, clean burning fuel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mws Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 The last time I researched ethanol, it required refinining and consuming almost 1.5 gallons of petroleum based fuel to produce 1 gallon of ethanol - between the fuel to power the equipment to grow and harvest the corn and then the biggy - the fuel to power the ethanol production facility. It takes a lot of electricity to produce ethanol, and the power plants near the corn are largely oil burning. And even if we invested billions in a new infrastructure it would still cost more than gasoline. By about $5 or $6 per gallon for gasoline it becomes viable. With billions invested in infrastructure, of course. Unfortunately, all the money that could be used for that is being used to make some kind of point in Iraq. This explains why it is so slow to take off in the US. It takes more fuel to produce than it provides. That fact is commonly ignored by those wishing it wasn't true. As I understand it, to be a viable option in the US we need massive amounts of near free (and definitely not petroleum based!) sources of electricity. I suspect this is why Bush is pushing for new nuclear facilities. A couple/few big-A nuclear facilities in the middle of Kansas and Nebraska would make ethanol very viable for the midwest! And makes a lot of sense - if you are able to ignore the negative ramifications of nuclear power. The other options are many, many, many new hydroelectric plants (which wouldn't be anywhere near the corn supply) or more coal fired plants - which are notoriously environmentally unfriendly. I believe most of the countries that are mentioned as big users of ethanol have huge quantities of free byproducts to use as raw materials (not commercially growing corn for $$$ to use), massive government subsidies, and/or lots of nukes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nycxice13 Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 Wind powered generators, problem solved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
94extreme Posted May 8, 2006 Author Share Posted May 8, 2006 The last time I researched ethanol, it required refinining and consuming almost 1.5 gallons of petroleum based fuel to produce 1 gallon of ethanol - between the fuel to power the equipment to grow and harvest the corn and then the biggy - the fuel to power the ethanol production facility. It takes a lot of electricity to produce ethanol, and the power plants near the corn are largely oil burning. And even if we invested billions in a new infrastructure it would still cost more than gasoline. By about $5 or $6 per gallon for gasoline it becomes viable. With billions invested in infrastructure, of course. Unfortunately, all the money that could be used for that is being used to make some kind of point in Iraq. This explains why it is so slow to take off in the US. It takes more fuel to produce than it provides. That fact is commonly ignored by those wishing it wasn't true. As I understand it, to be a viable option in the US we need massive amounts of near free (and definitely not petroleum based!) sources of electricity. I suspect this is why Bush is pushing for new nuclear facilities. A couple/few big-A nuclear facilities in the middle of Kansas and Nebraska would make ethanol very viable for the midwest! And makes a lot of sense - if you are able to ignore the negative ramifications of nuclear power. The other options are many, many, many new hydroelectric plants (which wouldn't be anywhere near the corn supply) or more coal fired plants - which are notoriously environmentally unfriendly. I believe most of the countries that are mentioned as big users of ethanol have huge quantities of free byproducts to use as raw materials (not commercially growing corn for $$$ to use), massive government subsidies, and/or lots of nukes. dude, they are talking brazil for the most part. i don't think they are all nuke nor do they have planty of anything besides sugar cane and oranges. their government isn't even remotly rich and yet the price of ethanol is relatively cheap. how come they can do it but we can't? big oil is the answer. btw. would like to see some links to what you're talking aobut though. thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mws Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 What is it, something like 30 million wind turbines to equal the power output of 1 nuke? Well, that is (probably) a bit of an exaggeration, but not as much as I wish. My point is, it will take a whole freaking LOT of them. And someone will have to pay to build them. Ideally, it should be funded by all of us under the auspices of our federal government, but it is busy spending all of our money (and then even a whole bunch more!) on other things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mws Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 (edited) A blurb on Brazilian nukes and future plans: http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/may2006/2006-05-08-04.asp In the middle, it mentions plans to build seven more. Edited May 8, 2006 by mws Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
94extreme Posted May 8, 2006 Author Share Posted May 8, 2006 thanks but that's 2 plants thusfar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nycxice13 Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 FIRST URANIUM ENRICHMENT FACILITY Read that line please, does that indicate an ENERGY RICH area? Could it be possible what you read is dare I say WRONG? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mws Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 Here's one blurb that points out some of the numbers. As with all things on the internet, consider the source and do your own research as well. http://i-r-squared.blogspot.com/2006/03/gr...perors-new.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
94extreme Posted May 8, 2006 Author Share Posted May 8, 2006 according to this -> http://www.renewables2004.de/ppt/Presentat...h)-LaRovere.pdf the cost of producing ethanol is around $20/barrel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mws Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 (edited) And let me go on record as saying I want us to become less petroleum dependent as much or more so than the next person. Heck, I ride my 50 mpg motorcycle and infinite mpg bicycle whenever I can! And I chose to live within 4 miles of my work to minimize driving. My point is that it will require a lot of investment and is not as easy a slam dunk solution as some are presenting it to be. Ethanol should be considered as one of the options. But right now, it is not looking all that great and appears will always be self limiting. Solar is looking better to me. Edited May 8, 2006 by mws Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mws Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 FIRST URANIUM ENRICHMENT FACILITY Read that line please, does that indicate an ENERGY RICH area? Could it be possible what you read is dare I say WRONG? Huh? No, that's not what it says. It says they are going to start enriching their own uranium to lower the cost of producing power at their existing and planned nukes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unccpathfinder Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 i know areva has ties with a plant in Brazil already... Link to their site locations Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nycxice13 Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 Its either Ethanol, Hydrogen or Biodiesel, biodiesel appears to be ruled out almost, and Im not to comfortable with driving right next to some yahoo with an H-bomb under their trunk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mws Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 One technology I like is on board hydrogen generation... So your vehicle is hydrogen powered, but carries very little on board at any given time. And when you get right down to it, hydrogen is really no worse to transport than gasoline. If a gas bag the size of the Hindenburg had been filled with gasoline vapor and ignited, it would have been several time more dramatic.... Instead of a big fireball, it would have been an unbelievable explosion with absolutely no chance of survivors - on board or on the ground. Probably for several miles. Definitely would not have been any surviving film footage for us to see decades later - but one heck of a crater! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
94extreme Posted May 8, 2006 Author Share Posted May 8, 2006 hydrogen is widely used in Iceland already. bio diesel is great and i know a few folks that brew it for less then a dollar per gallon. there is absolutely nothing wrong with it and i don't understand why one would say that it's not a viable option. besides it's recycling at it's best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mws Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 Biodiesel is a supply limited option. Although America uses more than its fair share of french fry oil, I don't think we use enough to power more than a few thousand or maybe tens of thousands of bio-diesel vehicles. The average fast food restaurant discards maybe 50 gallons per week. But I sure love the concept! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
94extreme Posted May 8, 2006 Author Share Posted May 8, 2006 how many MCD in your town.. there are freaking hundreds of them here. then add another hundreds of BKs and hundreds of Hardees... there is plenty of them around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now