All this is proof that E85 is no magic bullet. It may be working on a small scale, but scaling it up is going to bring problems. Scaling up to handle gasoline happend over a long period, but with E85, you can't even pump it through a pipe. Besides corn pickers, I'll bet truck drivers like the idea of growing corn and shipping it all over the place. With all the cars and the lousy mileage there is going to have to be a lot of corn pickers and truckers. We're going to have a corn pickin' truck driving economy. We'll switch from dealing with OPEC to dealing with S(cociety) for the P(revention) of A(ribs) G(etting) E(verything).
Who believes that ...
- Thread starter LarryL
- Start date
- Status
We could be like the Euros and create (GASP) light rail all over this country. Heck, make the airlines create them and you can fly or ride Southwest/Delta/American rail lines as well as air lines. Maglev would be quiet amd fast, and only use electricity, which could in theory be made with nuclear power. But then again, who wants that plant in their backyard. I bet with today's designs we could virtually eliminate the computer/human mistakes of the past in newly built plants.
Or, we could turn Iowa into the United Arab Emirates of this country and everyone would be driving Bentleys!
Or, we could turn Iowa into the United Arab Emirates of this country and everyone would be driving Bentleys!
The purpose of E85 is not to replace regular gas. E85 is simply another alternative fuel choice. I have not seen anyone claim that it is the solution to our energy problems, it is just one more step in the process of finding new fuels.
Flex fuel vehicles do not cost more than regular vehicles. I have never seen a manufacturer charge for the option (and there are a couple flex fuel vehicles in the family, so I should know). Fuel filters do cost more because production of E85 capable filters is lower, but they do not amount to much in the overall cost of maintaining the vehicle. Other non-maintenence parts of the fuel system (lines, injectors, etc...) are expensive in all new cars regardless of if they have flex fuel capability or not. According to the owner's manual for my parent's flex fuel Ranger, using E85 is actually better for the longevity of a fuel system designed to use it anyway.
My parents have been filling their flex fuel Ranger with E85 since they got it in their area. The truck does get slightly worse fuel economy, but that is the price we currently have to pay to use a cleaner burning, US produced, better performing fuel. You give some to get some. For my parents the trade off is worth it, and their Ranger will continue to be fueled with E85 as long as it is available, like it or not.
If you do not like E85, don't use it. It is that simple. All production Flex Fuel vehicles can run on plain gas too. The Ranger mentioned above did for over four years because no E85 was available locally. I personally like the idea of having a cleaner burning, domestically produced, high octane fuel though. I wish my truck had flex fuel capability.
Flex fuel vehicles do not cost more than regular vehicles. I have never seen a manufacturer charge for the option (and there are a couple flex fuel vehicles in the family, so I should know). Fuel filters do cost more because production of E85 capable filters is lower, but they do not amount to much in the overall cost of maintaining the vehicle. Other non-maintenence parts of the fuel system (lines, injectors, etc...) are expensive in all new cars regardless of if they have flex fuel capability or not. According to the owner's manual for my parent's flex fuel Ranger, using E85 is actually better for the longevity of a fuel system designed to use it anyway.
My parents have been filling their flex fuel Ranger with E85 since they got it in their area. The truck does get slightly worse fuel economy, but that is the price we currently have to pay to use a cleaner burning, US produced, better performing fuel. You give some to get some. For my parents the trade off is worth it, and their Ranger will continue to be fueled with E85 as long as it is available, like it or not.
If you do not like E85, don't use it. It is that simple. All production Flex Fuel vehicles can run on plain gas too. The Ranger mentioned above did for over four years because no E85 was available locally. I personally like the idea of having a cleaner burning, domestically produced, high octane fuel though. I wish my truck had flex fuel capability.
Be aware that the cost of flex fuel E85 is not being charged by GM, but in meetings with share holders, it's been promised that this will not continue and the true cost of E85 vehicles will be disclosed. Also the EPA mileage reports do not include E85 mileage. It is much lower. These vehicles cost quite a bit more, and there will be maintenance expenses connected with flex fuel, and quality control problems as usual with such production expansion. If your vehicle has to run on gasoline, too, you can not take advantage of E85, things like the compression ration and coolant temperature changes that would make E85 perform better.
All this keeps pointing back to diesel, the ugly step sister of the energy world.
All this keeps pointing back to diesel, the ugly step sister of the energy world.
When I see a company actually charge for E85, I'll believe it. Ford and Chrysler have been building flex fuel vehicles for a number of years now and still are not charging for it.
IIRC, flex fuel vehicles have sensors that help them detect differences in octane (perhaps someone can elaborate more on this). I do know from experience that the flex fuel Ranger I mentioned in my previous post runs better with E85.
And I would like to see solid proof that flex fuel vehicles cost astronomically more to maintain and fix. Like I said before, more expensive flex fuel filters do not add up to much during the life of a vehicle.
Biodiesel, WVO, etc... are great alternative fuels, but until car buyers forget the '80s, diesels won't be widely available in regular cars.
[ August 30, 2006, 09:43 PM: Message edited by: 01rangerxl ]
IIRC, flex fuel vehicles have sensors that help them detect differences in octane (perhaps someone can elaborate more on this). I do know from experience that the flex fuel Ranger I mentioned in my previous post runs better with E85.
And I would like to see solid proof that flex fuel vehicles cost astronomically more to maintain and fix. Like I said before, more expensive flex fuel filters do not add up to much during the life of a vehicle.
Biodiesel, WVO, etc... are great alternative fuels, but until car buyers forget the '80s, diesels won't be widely available in regular cars.
[ August 30, 2006, 09:43 PM: Message edited by: 01rangerxl ]
I wonder when all of you are going to realize that E85 produced from US grown corn is a negative BTU.
Folks, there's a good side to E85. Unfortunately, the big corporate heads of America can't realize what they need to do to get ahead.
Folks, there's a good side to E85. Unfortunately, the big corporate heads of America can't realize what they need to do to get ahead.
When you want to do something about the energy problems, you have to go out and buy your own politicians. I just wish that the diesel people could afford to buy some better politicans. If they let the current trend continue, driving a diesel passenger car might become a felony. I think the diesel people should hire the photo enforcement group to help them out. Anyone that can sell our local governments on giving tickets with a camera and then keeping most of the money while telling the public it's good for them should be able to populate this country with diesel powered passenger cars. Everything about diesel cars and the infrastructure to support diesel passenger cars is already here. The only problem to overcome are those rules aimed at banning them. And the farmers can get involved, too, with biodiesel. The dual fuel cars could be biodiesel/diesel. Then you can say that by eating french fries you are supporting a nation plan to reduce dependency on foreign oil. If Honda would bring in the European Civic (ie Acura TSX) with the same diesel engine, I'd say, sign me up. Same for the SUV's, sign me up.
- Status
