I just watched a bit on CBS news about flex fuel cars (cars that can run on E85).
Here are some facts…
The flex fuel cars have less power when running E85.
Flex fuel cars get lower gas mileage with E85.
The E85 fuel also costs more per gallon.
There are 165000 gasoline stations in the US and only 650 Flex fuel stations.
That number will increase to 2000 by the end of 2006.
Domestic auto makers are going to make 750,000 flex fuel cars this year.
E85 is made with corn which helps US farmers and other US companies related to it.
POLL QUESTION…
Knowing that E85 fuel costs may come down with increased volume, would the fact that a car could run on E85 influence your decision to buy even though it is less efficient?
Possibly. I purchase cars based upon how fun they are to drive and how practical they are. I think that performance would have to increase for me to seriously look into it. I also think that it would have to go more mainstream so that I could refill anywhere.
These have been around for awhile. People on Taurus Car Club were running e85 during the issues with katrina. They definatly got less power/milage, but it was much cheaper during that time. But it might be useful if it gains acceptance.
It wouldn’t matter to me either way, so I didn’t vote. I couldn’t vote NO, because my next SUV, if it’s from Ford, will probably be able to run on it. I couldn’t vote YES though because the fact that it might be able to run on E85 will play no part in my decision to buy one. To me it’s like a backup camera, nav system or other novelty option. Sure, I might try it if the car had it, but in no way is it on my must have options list.
Diesel originally invented the diesel engine to run on anything organic (for the most part). Rather run that than E85, but any and all AFVs are good IMO.
I wouldn’t buy one because manufacturers are only making “flex fuel” vehicles to exploit a loophole that allows them to keep making less efficient models.
“For example, a flex-fuel Ford Explorer rated at 20 mpg is counted under federal rules as getting 33 mpg. Up to 1.2 mpg of an automakers’ fuel economy obligation can be met through this loophole.”
“Daimler/Chrysler has taken the greatest advantage of these phony mileage credits, boosting the fortunes of the oil-producing countries Dubai and Kuwait, which became the company’s first and third largest private investors earlier this year (2005). Ford and GM also have increasingly used these credits to avoid having to increase the fuel efficiency of pickup trucks and SUVs.”
Plus, how much energy derived from fossil fuels does it take to make ethanol?
Will this constant farming of a single crop ruin the soil, in turn causing more land to get diverted to growing corn for ethanol instead of other crops?
Maybe they could convert the rest of the Tobacco farms to corn… :gotme:
I’m all for it…
growing the corn is one thing, his point was the energy involved in creating the ethanol from it. its the same as hydrogen fuel. sure the car running on hydrogen has 0 emissions, but factor in that it used way more energy/polution to create the hydrogen than gas refineries/a car running on gas. so the point is are you really coming out ahead overall?
Interesting/good points.
ok, heres my whole thing with the alternative fuel cars:
as long as they will offer the same performance, same milage, and cost less than regular gas, then ok. if it limmits what the car can do or what you can do to the car, then i’ll stick with gas. i think a lot of this new fuel saving technology isnt 100% a step in the right direction. i think that thier heads are in the right place, just the technology isnt quite there yet. its a proven fact that hybrids, in fact, do not save you money because the cost of replacing the battery is so expensive and they havent developed a battery that will last long enough yet. The E85 cars, while cheaper to maintain, seem like would require a high cost to convert. and what are you going to do about cars that still need gas? i get a kick out of these people that say that ‘by year 20xx this whole country will run on ethanol’ or whatever. its not like everyone is gonna go buy a new car. and then what happens to all the old cars that run on gas? theres no way in hell that we will ever rely solely on E85. no matter what, we will always be dependant on gas because we have been fo so long. and because of this, we will always be the middle east’s bitch.
Growing corn to produce Ethanol is between 40 and 65% energy positive, according to Popular Mechanics. I could be off slightly on the numbers since I don’t have the article in front of me, but I know it was around there. So yes, it is a sustainable energy source because you get more energy out then you put in. It would take 75+% of the entire US farm land to make enough to replace our oil consumption though, so it will never be an oil replacement. Part of an oil replacement yes.
Call me a flag waver but, I think E85 could have a great positive affect on the US economy and for that reason I would buy it.
Anytime we can use less oil from other countries by increasing the workload here that is a good thing.
It is a win/win situation.
As far as performance, remember you can always use standard gas if you want to race someone.
Maybe the govt could/would put lower or no taxes on US made/enhanced fuel.:gotme:
Even if you did make all the ethanol you still have to use gas for the other 15% of the fuel. This whole ethanol thing feels like a sham. Cause you have large automakers using flex fuel as a loop hole for their Truck and SUV fleets and then they advertise that they are enviromentally friendly claiming E85 is the savior. It’s a start but doesn’t seem like the answer.
Studies vary on the energy balance of producing ethanol covering both extremes from your post, showing a postive balance, to a study that claims it takes 6 units of energy to produce one unit of ethanol energy.
Exactly…I cannot wait for the day that the mideast runs out of oil…probably not in my lifetime, but hey I can inly hope. At that point we will be supplying msot of the worlds energy, either through alt. fuels, like corn oil (yum!), or through what oil deposits we have in the gulf and alaska. Now if we can only get the dumbass eco nuts to start letting us drill more in those places!
the FFV taurii right now get about 350 miles on an 18-gal tank.
here’s some answers about the fuel itself: NEVC
didn’t know it was 105 octane, although gallon for gallon there’s less stored energy between that and gasoline. :fyi:
Yeah, and that’s the problem with the internet. Anyone can find a “study” to support thier position. It’s also why I trust sources like Popular Mechanics. When all the internet morons started to believe a plane never hit the pentagon PM did a great article showing all the real evidence that it was a plane. Just because “you read a study somewhere” doesn’t mean the people who did the study were honest.
I’d rather see a federal standard that all new “trucks” (SUVs, Pickups, etc…) have to run on diesel by like 2009…then we’d be able to have a real push w/ bio diesel.
Right on, but just because PM has a magazine on news stands doesn’t mean they aren’t biasing articles for thier largest advertisers either.
:word:
i would run it on a DD just to take some money away from the oil companies.
if its between 35 bucks to them, or 50 to us, ill take the 50 to us.