One fuel alternative that is being considered is ethanol that is made by corn. Congress and President Bush want 20% of gas to be ethanol by 2024 which would approximately be 35 billion gallons of ethanol. Approximately 270,000 square miles of fields would be needed to make this work. The states of Pennsylvania, New York, and New England must be fields of corn. This does not include the farmer’s houses and parking the vehicles. All of the crops in this gigantic field must be harvested 100%. Any crop damage from weather or animals in this gigantic field will not meet the needs for our gas stations. In order to make sure this works West Virginia and Ohio would have to become fields, houses, and places to park the tractors in order to have a chance to make sure this works.
All of the food that America eats would have to be imported including corn from other countries. Right now, the prices of corn have gone up because it is going to ethanol gasoline so there is less corn to purchase which makes the prices go up. Also the price of milk has now gone up to an all time high because the cows are fed corn and since the price goes up on feeding them, their product must rise. If Congress and President Bush somehow achieve this plan, the price of milk will skyrocket.
Right now if every field in America was corn to be used for Corn Ethanol, only 20% of the ethanol would be produced to meet this demand. This means we are 80% shy of the corn we need to achieve this almost impossible demand.
Ethanol is also worse for the environment then the gas we are burning now. Also ethanol gasoline cannot be put into boats because there have been many cases where the ethanol gas has dissolved the gas tank and the damaged the engine. Please also read "The Dark Side of Ethanol" by TromboneErik http://unity08.com/node/447 for other interesting points about ethanol. We just simply cannot use ethanol as an alternative fuel.
Corn ethanol is a problem because so many other commodities depend and can result is many problems, like you highlighted. Additionally, I have read that corn based ethanol is not efficient, in that you only get the same amount of energy you put into it. It also does not perform well within the role of fuel economy. Corn based ethanol is a feel good notion to placate and Green lobby and provide a boon to agribusiness.
That being said, it is still worthy to pursue, along with other forms of bio-fuels. One bio-fuel we need to look at is glucose based ethanol, the kind Brazil uses, along with traditional fossil fuels, making them energy independent and has sparked interest with China. GM even stated modifying vehicles to burn glucose ethanol and fossil fuels takes only a microchip, showing we already have the ability.
One big impediment, however, are our agriculture lobbies, which seek to maintain the price of sugar, making it unattractive for research and importing.
This alone won’t solve our problems, but every little bit helps.
I totally agree of what your saying Keith and I totally agree we should look at glucose ethanol. I just can't stand how the Bush Administration and Congress think Corn Ethanol is the way to go as the bill was already passed, signed, and they think it's possible of having fields the size of the North East of our country. Also don't forget Corn Ethanol is worse for the environment and I don't get why green organizations supported this bill and Al Gore. It's just sad that our country is even trying this impossible task of Corn Ethanol and wasting taxpayers’ money on it.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Learn from our mistakes, history's mistakes, and other countries mistakes, so we don't make the same mistakes today.
FireBird1138@aol.com
I think the power of corn ethanol comes from agri-business, to include ADM, which can dominate both parties in the Middle West. The US as a whole, is very protectionist in terms of farming, and the ethanol issue falls within that context.
As for Al Gore and the Green movement, I have my doubts about them. Gore and his father owe their political fortunes to oil, namely Occidental Petroleum. Gore seems desperate to maintain the spotlight, and his recent PR blitz has been quite effective.
The Green Movement, on the other hand, seems like a fad. Most people don't really understand the whole global warming debate or are interested to learn. They enjoy sound bites, which is what the recent legislation is about (i.e. the likely result of the fuel efficient vehicles are likely to be smaller and lightweight vehicles that won't withstand crashes as well, but it is an indirect after thought, so no one cares). The Green Movement also seems to get hijacked for political expediency, such as a British PM calling for banning sports cars because they use too much gas, or even more comical (in a tragic way) is the carbon offset commodities market being created in Britain and being thought about here. Just another gimmick.
Honestly, though, I'm not even entirely convinced of the "man made" global warming, but that being said, I do like clean air and water. Having lived in New Orleans, I have witnessed the poor air quality from various chemical plants. Additionally, as long as we are dependent on oil, we are shackled to the Middle East and all the problems that come along with.
It is just impossible to use Corn Ethanol as an alternative fuel. There is no way we can produce that much corn let alone import ALL of the food America eats. Glucose Ethanol seems to work very well in countries like Brazil as they have become energy independent in a very short amount of time. We should look into Glucose Ethanol as an alternative. Some may argue that they are only doing this help farmers but they are really hurting them because farmers plant corn to feed their cattle (also to sell it) but since it must go to make ethanol, they can't keep any for their cattle so they have to buy corn for them and since it has gone up because it all goes into ethanol, farmers end up loosing money to feed their cattle so than milk must go up, which now it is at an all time high which hurts the customers who buy milk, so really it hurts farmers instead of helping them.
I agree. Call me pessimistic, but I think the whole notion is being served as a silver bullet to rally support which will only end up improving the bottom line of the keys players in the whole corn based ethanol industry. There are no simple solutions, especially with such a massive energy consumer as the US, but unfortunately, complex solutions do not fit nicely into sound bites or 5-10 minute segments on the evening news.
Keith you said it well in you last sentence "as long as we are dependent on oil, we are shackled to the Middle East and all the problems that come along with." That is the puported prime directive that a lot of the Kstreet corn lobbyist group use to fund their latest green fad this corn ethanol which si and energy negative all toll. Coming from Iowa I can vouch for how it is benefiting immensly the state but at what downstream cost?? and whether it will help get us to energy independence is highly in doubt IMHO
Whether the green Global warming science is or is not correct is beside the point - the feed the oil Dictators is the paramount problem we need to be worried about. If it Greenie science is correct, what we can do now and should do in the next 5 to 7 years is simple raise the price at the pump of gas about $2 (Fed tax) and THEN let the market dictate the carb/energy conservation via peopels energy use habits (more conservation/more efficient cars) and manufacturers building to that demand. Plus for the medium/long-term I would have that fed tax money funnelling into a public/private Manhattan like project for new technologies/conservation measues via basic/applied research. So keep it simple at the pump and let those market foces work their wonders.
At the pocket book and at the pump and by the market forces is the way we will get people weaned off these carbons so the inane feed-the-oil-dictators' policy and suck up to the K Street profiteers (Corn Lobby,etc policy will finally be on the decline.
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
Inserting a $2 federal tax into the equation would obliterate any market forces, and would, instead, implement social engineering.
So what if you need 270,000 (or more) Square miles of fields? Have you ever driven through the Midwest? There is more land than people know what to do with, MUCH larger than PA, NY and New England. The Farmers would love this, and so would the government. The US government has actually been paying farmers to burn crops for over 50 years, in order to make sure that the market wasn't flooded with porduct and diluting the price. That is why we haven't been ready for the demand, the Farmers were'nt prepared for the increased demand, but it's coming.
And while it is true that Ethanol isn't very efficient, and still creates greenhouse gases when burned, at least it is 100% renewable, the plants themselves actually help reduce the greenhouse gas emmsions by by actually "breathing" some of the very carbon it creates. Not to mentiopn that we can get the hell out of, and stay out of, theat hell hole in the Middle East.
I'm from thataway and the corn prices are going thru the roof causing farmers to dump their regular soybean rotation to the detriment of the soil. The sudden increse in demand for corn is distorting the environmental effect on the land, beef/soy prices are skyrocketing, and many of the corn-fed food prices may soon follow. Plus they need lots of Dakota coal and water to manufacture the ethanol that will be eventually shipped to Chicago fo use. Energy intensive/carb burning increase all through the pipeline/cycle. Gets glossed over though in the nice pretty photo-ops the politicians love to do. We'll be seeing a lot up that in the leadup to Iowa caucus time. I do think that if we get some key breakthroughs in cellulosic ethanol, THEN the ethanol gamble will pay off big time. But NOT until then.
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
If Unity08 desires to change the political process, it should as a matter of course avoid the traps of the other parties. This discussion group does not differentiate Unity08 from the rhetoric of the other groups. The discussion lacks inspiration and credibility because it lacks facts. The passionate endorsement of a position without facts (scientific and supportable and not taken out of context for the purposes of marketing) appears to be the norm for politicians and bloggers today.
First argue the validity of the facts then extrapolate the future consequences.
What should we know in order to decide? The following questions are a sample of what I want to know before proffering an opinion.
1. How much acreage is required to make an impact on hydrocarbon imports given current corn yields?
2. How much are corn yields per acre expected to increase in the near, middle and long term?
3. How much fertilizer will be required?
4. How much pesticide will be required?
5. What environmental impacts will result from the fertilizer and pesticide uses?
6. How susceptible is corn to disease/blight?
7. Can corn be targeted by terrorists with a disease/blight?
8. How much energy is required today to produce a gallon of ethanol from corn?
9. What is the maximum theoretical energy yield from an entire corn plant (cobs, leaves, roots, etc.)?
10. How will the conversion of acreage to corn production effect shortages of other agricultural products?
11. What do we do in the event of drought to replace lost crops? How do we deal with this risk and the pricing impact at the pump? How often do droughts of magnitude occur? What will be the replacement strategy?
12. Conversely, what do we do in the event of flooding to replace lost crops? How do we deal with this risk and the pricing impact at the pump? How often do floods of magnitude occur? What will be the replcement strategy?
13. What alternatives (sugar cane, sorghum, etc) to corn exist that have a higher energy yield?
14. What are the potential energy yields of algae biodiesel?
15. What are the pros and cons of biodiesel versus ethanol and how will those evolve over the near, middle and long term?
Beware of propaganda such as the website www.ethanolfacts.com which is presented by the National Corn Growers Association. There is no balance presented on this website. The questions above are not addressed. This site targets self interest not science.
Energy security is too important to be decided by the uninformed. How do we educate ourselves so that our discussions can move to a higher level? How do we balance the risks?
Out of all of the fields we have in America if every single field was corn, only 20% of the ethanol could be produced of this demand for corn ethanol. We need 4 times of the amount of fields we have today. Even though the west is bigger than the north east we are not even close to achieving this with just corn ethanol.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Learn from our mistakes, history's mistakes, and other countries mistakes, so we don't make the same mistakes today.
FireBird1138@aol.com
So what if you need 270,000 (or more) Square miles of fields? Have you ever driven through the Midwest? There is more land than people know what to do with, MUCH larger than PA, NY and New England. The Farmers would love this, and so would the government. The US government has actually been paying farmers to burn crops for over 50 years, in order to make sure that the market wasn't flooded with porduct and diluting the price. That is why we haven't been ready for the demand, the Farmers were'nt prepared for the increased demand, but it's coming.
And while it is true that Ethanol isn't very efficient, and still creates greenhouse gases when burned, at least it is 100% renewable, the plants themselves actually help reduce the greenhouse gas emmsions by by actually "breathing" some of the very carbon it creates. Not to mentiopn that we can get the hell out of, and stay out of, theat hell hole in the Middle East.
Absolutely true.
We would still have issues in the Middle East. We are dealing with a group of people that are almost as bad as the Nazi (the extremist, I realize it isn't all of them)
------MYSPACE URL myspace.com/sketical_believer OR E-MAIL zappafication@hotmail.com------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
You burn 8 gallons of gasoline to have 10 gallons made that is a bad ratio, plus our energy demand will be doubled in the next 50 years so we will ned 540,000 square miles of corn fields. I am all for getting rid of our addiction from oil but Politicians are only saying this because of the Iowa Caucus. Hillary Clinton voted 14 times against Ethanol while she was in the Senate, now when she is running for president she supports it, I wonder why?
To get votes, all politicans are crooked two faced asses. But, that's the system we have at the moment. Hopefully we can change that.
------MY MYSPACE www.myspace.com/themanwhohasnoname E-MAIL zappafication@hotmail.com------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
I know of a company that is developing a process to get ethanol from waste products.
What Company is delovping a process to get ethanol from waste products Jack?
With proper microbes, virtually any cellulose can be made into a sugar and sugar into ethanol.
Ethanol from corn isn't the way to get it.
US Marine vet Vietnam 4/68 - 8/69 5th District, NJ
methanol jack ass
No matter what we replace gasoline with, in the long run we will find out that it does just as much damage as gas (if we are burning it). Not only that, all that corn farming could also have an effect on our land, over farming of land makes it useless. It will slowly turn into desert, leaving us in the same boat as The Middle East (very dry humor there). I also believe Hydrogen power will harm the environment sooner or later. Solar is one the cleanest power sources (windmills and damns too) out there, sadly it isn't efficient yet, MAYBE SOMEDAY. The way I look at it goes like this, we are human and of this earth, everything we do/make is of this earth, pollution is natural, life will evolve and adjust. If we end up killing ourselves by our own stupidity we deserve it. So lets hope and pray one day in the future we can find an efficient way to use solar, windmills and damns (mainly solar).
---Props 4 Buddha---
any alternate energy sources we develop don't have to replace oil, just compete. They also have to be sustainable if oil prices start to drop.
And totally agree, I was simply trying to say it is not as "clean" as some may think.
------MYSPACE URL myspace.com/sketical_believer OR E-MAIL zappafication@hotmail.com------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
Here in Florida, we used to grow a lot of potential fuel sources, sugar cane that can be used for ethanol production, and soybeans for biodiesel for example, but those have been replaced with fields of grass. Saint Augustine, Zoysia and Centipede are grown for golf courses and the little postage stamp lawns of suburbia. We have got to decide what our priorities are and stick to them! Make it more profitable for farmers to grow our way to energy independance.
Perhaps that land became useless for farmin, who konws. Either way I do not fear that we do not have the capabilities.
------MYSPACE URL myspace.com/sketical_believer OR E-MAIL zappafication@hotmail.com------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
corn ethanol is definately not a viable solution and will jut cause more problems. I'm glad I'm not the only american that pays attention and doesn't jump on a "quick fix" bandwagon without knowing the facts.
True, but that does not mean mean that we should not look into. At the same time we should also look at other options.
But it never hurts to look at your options.
------MYSPACE URL myspace.com/sketical_believer OR E-MAIL zappafication@hotmail.com------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
It's viable. It is one of many long-term solutions. Not THE answer. One answer. It will help get the US OFF OPEC Oil.
I'm not saying we shouldn't use it for the time being. At the moment it works, but we should still continue to look for a replacement for that. If you catch my drift.
------MYSPACE URL myspace.com/sketical_believer OR E-MAIL zappafication@hotmail.com------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
Coffeegroup, your statment is partly right.
Ethanol is a viable short term (next 5 years) helper in this battle. We can quickly grow more crops and we will soon have increased refining capacity. This will help us with the energy independence side of things, but the science is clear: ethanol can not help us combat global warming. It is nuetral in energy in minus energy out. But it can help us, for the short term, reduce our dependence on foreign oil. We will never be able to grow enough for all of our oil needs, so it is not a long term solution (not to mention that we need just as much energy to produce it as it gives back).
An interesting fact that I have noted is conspicuously missing from this string is that if we used all of the existing farmland in the U.S. to produce ethanol, we could only produce 12% of our energy needs. So it's not as viable an alternative as some would have us think.
It actually does say that ngc "Right now if every field in America was corn to be used for Corn Ethanol, only 20% of the ethanol would be produced to meet this demand. This means we are 80% shy of the corn we need to achieve this almost impossible demand." It is actually 20% not 12% but still it is not a good alternative.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Learn from our mistakes, history's mistakes, and other countries mistakes, so we don't make the same mistakes today.
FireBird1138@aol.com
The premise that we would, or even could, switch our transportation fuel from fossil fuel (gas and diesel) to corn based ethanol is inherently nonsensical. To spout off unsubstantiated opinions based on who knows what sound bite or lobbied interest group propaganda is wholly unproductive to what it is that U08 is espousing to accomplish. No offense to the original poster but your whole arguement is flawed from the outset with your assumption that the "20% of gas to be ethanol by 2024" is to be wholly derived from 'corn squeezins'.
I agree entirely with jgibson as stated on July 25, 2024 - 9:33am.
"If Unity08 desires to change the political process, it should as a matter of course avoid the traps of the other parties. This discussion group does not differentiate Unity08 from the rhetoric of the other groups. The discussion lacks inspiration and credibility because it lacks facts. The passionate endorsement of a position without facts (scientific and supportable and not taken out of context for the purposes of marketing) appears to be the norm for politicians and bloggers today.
First argue the validity of the facts then extrapolate the future consequences."
First and foremost, we need to establish our position concerning our energy future by assessing and prioritizing our goals. One thing that is for sure is that there will be no singular crop nor even fuel type that will supplant fossil fuel. Even if there was some 'miracle fuel' to be found, to place all our eggs in that or any one basket would inevitably end up exactly where we find ourselves today....broken and at the mercy of others to feed us the sustinence we're capable of providing ourselves if undertaken with care and intelligent purpose.
We can't solve all of the problems, but we can make a start.
Totally agreed. And suplimenting is a good word!
Cheers
------MYSPACE URL myspace.com/sketical_believer OR E-MAIL zappafication@hotmail.com------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
270,000 square miles of corn for fuel. Take kansas, nebraska, iowa, and oklahoma, convert all that land to corn for fuel. Whats left to eat? Or for feed? Those four states have a total land area of 285868 square miles. That leaves only 15000 square miles for the population of four states to live in. Not to mention, what about soybeans, or wheat? We just converted most of land that grows them to corn for fuel.
Browncoats Unite!
Brazil uses waste sugar cane to produce ethanol. That makes it economical because they grow two crops in one. The sugar is the main crop and ethanol is a waste by-product. We have plenty of trash to use for making methane and ethanol but the politicians concentrate on corn so the subsidies that are paid out of our taxes can line the pockets of the big corporate farms and force the little family farms out of business. We need to move away from corn based ethanol and into waste product ethanol.
Estimated by 2024, 50% of the animal species in brazil will become extinct from habitate loss.
Browncoats Unite!
Shiny we don't need the animals they just get in the way of the four wheelers and logging equipment. Besides they are pretty tasty on the grill.
Most of the animals living in that area live through out America, and feed on our crops anyway. The meat eaters eat the one that eat the crops.
But I will agree with Shiny on some level. We do not want to over farm the land. If we do it will become infertile ground, and who know we might end up with another dust bowl effect.
Although I do believe we are smart enough to find a balance that works without destroying the eco-system.
----JOIN MY UNITY 08 TRAILBLAZER GROUP AT unity08trailblazers.com/teams/zappafication----
------MY MYSPACE www.myspace.com/themanwhohasnoname orE-MAIL zappafication@hotmail.com------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
GREAT IDEA ABOUT CONVERTING OUR TRASH TO FUEL Stumpylarue, PERHAPS WE CAN USE A MIXTURE OF CORN AND TRASH, MAKE TWICE AS MUCH
----JOIN MY UNITY 08 TRAILBLAZER GROUP AT unity08trailblazers.com/teams/zappafication----
------MY MYSPACE www.myspace.com/themanwhohasnoname orE-MAIL zappafication@hotmail.com------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
All of the comments here address the supply side of this problem. What also needs to be discussed is the demand side. It's not a very pleasant conversation but it's necessary. It seems like everyone wants to blame the bogeyman for our energy problems. The arabs are holding us hostage, the oil companies are gouging us and the government is not doing anything to address the problem. While all of that may be true to a degree the main problem as I see it is our insatiable thirst for cheap energy and our unwillingness to adjust our lifestyles to the changing world of energy supplies.
Here's some of the things I've done to reduce my consumption. My wife and I started carpooling. I was fortunate enough to be able to adjust my work schedule to accomodate this. Not only are we spending 75.00 a week less on gas, we sold our extra vehicle and are paying less on upkeep, insurance etc. Our next step is to sell our mid-sized car and replace it with a smaller, more fuel efficient model.
I live in the Northeast and heat with oil. Next summer we are converting our furnace to a geothermal heat pump. It can provide home heating, domestic hot water and air conditioning in the summer. This is a much more efficient and economical way to provide warmth than the old oil or gas fired furnaces.
My wife and I took these steps not because of the middle east or oil companies but because we're saving money.
Until people decide they are going to change their little part of this problem no amount of government intervention, regulating or witch hunts for price gouging are going to change a thing. It's time to start thinking and discussing how we as individuals will contribute to solving the problem and not waiting for big brother or big oil to solve it for us.
I totally agree with you
----JOIN MY UNITY 08 TRAILBLAZER GROUP AT unity08trailblazers.com/teams/zappafication----
------MY MYSPACE www.myspace.com/themanwhohasnoname orE-MAIL zappafication@hotmail.com------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
I was only joking about the animals bothering the four wheelers. Don't be too offended shiny.
I find the main problem with your approach Fatmandu is the expense to the little guy, although it is a good idea. Conservation always works. The new technology is great but most people cannot afford to make any changes like you suggest until they need repairs or the prices for new tech comes down. When computers were first introduced they were $4000 or $5000. Now you can get a machine for $400 or $500. Research is limited by what the public is willing to pay, even if it will save them money. They are not willing to throw a good refrigerator away to save energy. As much as I hate to admit it until running our present system gets too expensive, we will be stuck with oil. There are some things that just require a squirt now and then and only real oil will do. However that is no excuse for innovation. I am particularly intriqued by electric cars. Did you know there is a electric car racing association that routinely races gasoline cars and wins? I can't figure why someone has not come up with a generator to recharge a battery car while it is driving? Ahh! maybe it would make all the gas cars obsolete.
Not only that but, do not forget to factor in cost of research and testing. Which will then effect the cost of the car, just like your refrigerator. But I'm sure you already though of that.
Just figured I would state the obvious
----JOIN MY UNITY 08 TRAILBLAZER GROUP AT unity08trailblazers.com/teams/zappafication----
------MY MYSPACE www.myspace.com/themanwhohasnoname orE-MAIL zappafication@hotmail.com------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
For me the costs have already reached the point of making changes in my lifestyle. Carpooling with my wife will be saving us 4 - 5 thousand a year between gas, insurance, maint. etc. I intend to apply that savings in 2 ways, trading in my '03 6-banger for an '05-four cylinder saving additional money on operating costs and updating my home heating system.
As far as geothermal being new technology, well it isn't really new, just under advertised and utilized. We lived in southern VA the last half of the 1980's and they were available then. The equipment is more expensive than oil/gas furnaces but the payback period at current electric rates is in the neighborhood of 5 years, excluding any federal tax credits. The biggest cost is the ground loop installation. I have to go vertical instead of horizontal which means the added expense of well drilling.
If you notice all of my motivation is strictly financial, not that I don't care about greenhouse gases etc but my energy consumption has hit me in the pocketbook like everyone else. I've had enough and plan on doing something about it besides complaining about the oil companies, government and foriegn countries. Hopefully more people will reach this point and start making changes. In the short term conservation is the easiest solution to implement. All that is required is a bunch of pi**ed off citizens. Mid and long term solutions have to come from government encouraged research.
I knew about the electric racing circuit. I've watched a couple of drag races with those cars. It's awesome but going 100+ MPH over a quarter of a mile is a totally different technology than daily driving with electricity.
GM is taking one of their concept vehicles from a couple of years ago and making a production car that is totally electric. They are installing a small gas engine in it to run an electric generator to charge the batteries while driving. It's called the Chevy Volt. Last I looked it's supposed to be out in 2024. Maybe this is the beginning of Corporate America paying attention to nut cases like me who want affordable, reliable transportation at a reasonable cost.
I see where you are coming from, savings on any fuel beats the current system. In 1989 I built my house in the Endless Mountains of Northeastern Pa. The locals said I was so far in the boonies they did not want to visit. My nearest neighbor was 2 miles away that, means electric too. They just recently put in electric wire up here aroundthis area in 1950. That is not a typo. My house was self-sufficient I installed a propane co-generator. It provided all the electric and hotwater and heating for less than all the other conventional utilities combined would have cost. Every snow storm the power would go out, all over the county, and my house was the place everyone came for the power out party. This sytem was operating for ten years. The power company was so worried I would sue them, for not providing power to my area, they ran a pole line for me (it normal costs $600 to $1000 per pole), they put in ten poles for free. They are also required to buy any excess power I generated. Alas nothing lasts forever and I accepted their generous offer of free power line, although I still pay for the power. Now pluming and heating is one of my "talents" so I had no problem with my "new fangled system" matter of fact I had several local universities come to "investigate" my system to see if it worked. Some times book smarts and street smarts are not compatible. My idea for an electric car is to have a generator run an electric motor, forget the batteries. A portable generator would provide all the power the system would need and you could drive around all day on a gallon of gas, ethanol or whatever the generator would burn. Methane, propane, hydrogen, natural gas. Maybe that's a plan.
Good lord we're neighbors. I'm from Shavertown.
I like your idea about the car. The railroads have been doing it for half a century. It's called a diesel engine. The diesel runs a generator that produces electricity to drive the traction motors connected to each wheelset.
All of you do realize that more then half the country is farm land already, right? Have any of you been to Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Oklahoma, Michigan, or pretty much any state this side of the Rocky Mountains but the other side of the Appalachians? They are giant corn fields. I had the unpleasant experience of driving through Illinois and Indiana a couple years ago and was nearly driven insane by the non-stop sight of CORN! Now I don't think that ethanol is a practical replacement, but with flex fuel cars we can at least reduce our exuberant need for oil and try to help improve things. If we just sit around waiting for a total solution to come around then we'll be doing it in the dark.
At least Illinoin and Indiana have slight ups and downs. Kansas is utterly flat, and corn all the way to the horizion in 360 degrees.
Now for the bad part, all those states have been growning corn and other crops for the last 60 or so years. Thats what feeds our nation. Not our gas tanks, our mouths. To get 20% of our yearly usage of gas converted to ethanol, we would need to plant another 270,000 square miles of corn.
Oh, and Stumpylarue. No worries. I love animals. Nothing better than a rare steak. Just the numbers on Brazil shocked me.
Browncoats Unite!