Originally posted by Tigger29
I diagnose and repair cars for a living as well. I am an ASE L1 certified master technician with 15 years of experience.
You are both correct and incorrect. In the long run, yes ethanol is more expensive.. both to use and to produce. The decrease per gallon cost is offset by the loss of fuel economy.
There are two reasons I like to use it. For one, my truck absolutely loves the stuff.. runs great.. has more power.. smoother. Plus "bragging rights" to having something different.
Two... It supports local farmers more so than middle eastern oil. This is not for a political discussion at this time though, and I don't use it for political reasons. All I know is I like it.. my truck likes it.. and even if it costs a bit more, I'll still continue to use it.
Now as far as producing less power.. yes and no. While gallon per gallon, ethanol has less energy than gasoline (thus making it less efficient), but in theory a vehicle can crank out more power using it... but you have to use MORE of it. This is why using E85 typically results in a 10 to 15.. to 20% decrease in economy.
To classify it as an "all around really bad idea"... well this is more opinion than fact. As technology evolves and we're able to produce E85 more efficiently and from more products than CORN... well heck look at South America.. they are using Soy.. then there's switchblade alcohol. If they can essentially use WEEDS that nobody is going to in their right minds consume or use for anything else than throwing away... then how is this an overall bad idea?
The problem is that this technology will never get developed if nobody supports it. Our current methods of using Corn may be inefficient, but it is a "stepping stone" for our country. The USA is driven by business. A business is not going to develop a product (unless mandated by the government, and we all know how well that works out) that has little or no demand. If people keep discounting E85 as a viable solution, then no one will invest in it and it will die away.
If we DO show this to be a profitable, viable option, they will explore further technologies, and eventually will be using weeds and garbage to fuel our cars. Now.. is THAT a bad idea?
same approximate experience here.....areound 18-20 years, ase L1, state emissions repair license, brakes, suspension, electrical, heating, a/c, engine repair, state inspection license engine performance....i think that's it....
if i thought it would work better, then i'd back it in the blink of an eye....but brazille, i believe did try to use only ethonol...and they've reverted back to using gasoline if i recall.....
i like the idea of hydrogen...again, if i remember correctly, there's a company in norway that's been using hydrogen in their vehicles since the 60's. they've got converters powered by the sun, about the size of a large refrigerator, that extract hydrogen from water, and they do it safely....when it's burned in the cars, the only thing to come out of the tailpipe is water. sounds much more efficient than ethonol.......and i understand how to make more power too........built a 9 second camaro for track only, and a 12 second mustang(100% street legal in NJ). the ethonol doesn't burn as hot, and i think this is why more is needed........
i'll google some of the things i just mentioned when i get home tonight.....but please..keep these things comming! good conversation...and we all learn from it.....i never thought of the weeds idea.........
<
>
