In the end however we need to utilize all of these resources. As far as making the new SUV flex over an existing car will why not do both. I would like nothing better then to get 50 mpg with my Escape hybrid. I think it was completely stupid that they did not make it so this car could run on E85. There just is no good reason not too. Over all it was a good article. The points being made where spot on.

In the end however we need to utilize all of these resources. As far as making the new SUV flex over an existing car will why not do both. I would like nothing better then to get 50 mpg with my Escape hybrid. I think it was completely stupid that they did not make it so this car could run on E85. There just is no good reason not too. Over all it was a good article. The points being made where spot on.

And although there’s room for discussion on how it affects the price of corn (which is down 30% despite demand for ethanol not being down). We have not come close to maxing out this country’s crop production ever. We are not, forgive the play on words, at Peak Corn.

And, I in no small part I call ‘shenanigans’ on the negativity to which seems to have targeted ethanol specifically and not ‘crops for food’.

I guess its a random coincidence, that in about a month of companies announcing cellulosic ethanol processes are ready for prime time and they could produce ethanol for $1 a gallon, all this negative press which usually mentions ‘ethanol’, not ‘food for fuel’ or even ‘corn for ethanol’, come out.

Never mind the E85 production is small fraction of ethanol usage in vehicles today. Sources espousing ethanol’s evil nature seem to make sure the public believes its the E85 biofuel programs that are driving these issues.

I can only surmise there are people out there who are threatened financially either through their employment or personal investments that know cellulosic ethanol can put a huge damper on the price situation. They do not want competition with cellulosic ethanol. Its ironic, but usually the espousers of ethanol’s evils that say ‘let the market decide’.

Add to the fact the cellulosic ethanol is near the top of the list for reducing net C02 emission added to its cheaper cost will only speed up its adoption.

I suspect they want to criticize corn ethanol while they still can to negatively impact the E85 ethanol infrastructure. Possibly even get Washington to scrap support for it al together.

And although there’s room for discussion on how it affects the price of corn (which is down 30% despite demand for ethanol not being down). We have not come close to maxing out this country’s crop production ever. We are not, forgive the play on words, at Peak Corn.

And, I in no small part I call ‘shenanigans’ on the negativity to which seems to have targeted ethanol specifically and not ‘crops for food’.

I guess its a random coincidence, that in about a month of companies announcing cellulosic ethanol processes are ready for prime time and they could produce ethanol for $1 a gallon, all this negative press which usually mentions ‘ethanol’, not ‘food for fuel’ or even ‘corn for ethanol’, come out.

Never mind the E85 production is small fraction of ethanol usage in vehicles today. Sources espousing ethanol’s evil nature seem to make sure the public believes its the E85 biofuel programs that are driving these issues.

I can only surmise there are people out there who are threatened financially either through their employment or personal investments that know cellulosic ethanol can put a huge damper on the price situation. They do not want competition with cellulosic ethanol. Its ironic, but usually the espousers of ethanol’s evils that say ‘let the market decide’.

Add to the fact the cellulosic ethanol is near the top of the list for reducing net C02 emission added to its cheaper cost will only speed up its adoption.

I suspect they want to criticize corn ethanol while they still can to negatively impact the E85 ethanol infrastructure. Possibly even get Washington to scrap support for it al together.

a Hybrid Ford Escape that runs on E85 might get 88 miles per petro-gallon, but it’s overall fuel efficiency will be lower than just the hybrid because of the reduced fuel efficiency of E85. I’m not knocking E85 as I’ll likely be converting a vehicle myself to an FFV using one of the kits you note above and I fully support ethanol, just wanted the facts to be clear on the fuel economy. If a Hybrid Escape gets lets say 35 mpg, then one running E85 will get on the order of 30ish mpg. The reduced petroleum demand is very important, but keep the facts clear.

a Hybrid Ford Escape that runs on E85 might get 88 miles per petro-gallon, but it’s overall fuel efficiency will be lower than just the hybrid because of the reduced fuel efficiency of E85. I’m not knocking E85 as I’ll likely be converting a vehicle myself to an FFV using one of the kits you note above and I fully support ethanol, just wanted the facts to be clear on the fuel economy. If a Hybrid Escape gets lets say 35 mpg, then one running E85 will get on the order of 30ish mpg. The reduced petroleum demand is very important, but keep the facts clear.

Yes, it makes all the difference. Please refer to the related articles above, or duke it out with me in the discussion forums:

“Do Biofuels Suck?”

http://discuss.greenoptions.com/viewtopic.php?f=39&t=622