This morning I wrote a piece about how GM is lamenting the lack of E85 fueling stations in the United States. But the other interesting tidbit of information in there was a simple statement by GM’s Tony Posawat that the generator in the upcoming Chevy Volt extended range electric vehicle would not support E85 (85% ethanol/15% gasoline) initially.
This came as a shock to me, especially considering that of all the car makers, GM has invested the most time and resources to make a huge portion of their vehicles flex-fuel E85 capable. It was also quite a strange statement because as recently as last October GM was proudly touting the fact that their Flint, MI, assembly plant would be building the Volt’s “flex-fuel 1.4 liter” engine.
I couldn’t accept the announcement at face value, so I decided to contact not one, not two, but three GM representatives to hear for myself that GM would not support E85 in the Volt initially.
As it turns out, it’s true. And I’m bummed.
But as it also turns out, GM’s decision is based on a thorough market analysis and, begrudgingly, makes some amount of sense. According to Alan Adler, GM News Relations and Communications, “Flex-fuel availability for the Volt at launch has been delayed. Our decision is based in part on the Volt rollout plan to California, Washington, DC, and Michigan. Of the three launch markets, only Michigan has any significant availability of E85 ethanol. California has a handful of stations, most in the Sacramento area; DC may have one or two; Michigan has more than 60.”
He also added that “right now the price of E85 vs. gasoline is uncompetitive.”
While I understand the reasoning, it seems to me that the people who will be buying this car initially are the types that are very well educated on these things and are forward thinking. You know, the types that, even though they may not have access to E85 right now, are excited about the prospects of using it say 5 years down the road. It’s not that the early adopters are only going to have the car for 1 year and then give it up… especially not when they’ve invested so much money in it.
So the lack of E85 support could be a deal breaker for some early adopters. Nevertheless, those folks can just wait a year until the E85 support is added in, I’m sure there will be plenty of others to step in and fill the early demand.
According to Rob Peterson, another GM communications specialist, GM has calculated that most Volt owners will only use the range extending engine once in a blue moon—with almost all of their time spent driving as a pure EV; therefore it really doesn’t matter what type of fuel they use because they will be using so little of it. And, with roughly only 8,000 Volts planned to be sold the first year, the impact from the lack of E85 support during that year will be minimal.
None of this will affect the scheduled production of the Volt’s engine at the Flint Engine South facility, said Tom Wickham, a communications specialist for the Flint facility. From an engineering perspective, it seems that it wouldn’t be that hard to add the E85 support in later—potentially just a few tubes and some upgraded software. When asked about the prospect of early adopters getting E85 support after the first year, Wickham and Peterson were both unable to answer directly, but said they would get back to me as that would likely be a question that their customers would ask.
Does the initial lack of E85 support in the Volt bum you out? Or is it completely unimportant?
PDF 
I’m pretty upset with them, after talking up the Volt for some time now. Also, E85 is NOT uncompetive with regular unleaded in Minnesota. I understand the need to hit the big cities, but why not send a few FFV Volts to International Falls (which has E85) to prove they can work in the one of the coldest areas in the US? Or even Minneapolis?
I’m pretty upset with them, after talking up the Volt for some time now. Also, E85 is NOT uncompetive with regular unleaded in Minnesota. I understand the need to hit the big cities, but why not send a few FFV Volts to International Falls (which has E85) to prove they can work in the one of the coldest areas in the US? Or even Minneapolis?
It does seem like a dumb idea not to have their greenest car not have flex fuel. I wonder if it has to do with the fact that that engine is designed to work at it’s most efficient rpm. Maybe E85 changes that.
More likely, GM probably did a market analysis and determined that for the limited number of Volts they’ll make in the first year, there will be enough people that live less than 40 miles from work who won’t give a rats patootie about what kind of fuel it takes.
It does seem like a dumb idea not to have their greenest car not have flex fuel. I wonder if it has to do with the fact that that engine is designed to work at it’s most efficient rpm. Maybe E85 changes that.
More likely, GM probably did a market analysis and determined that for the limited number of Volts they’ll make in the first year, there will be enough people that live less than 40 miles from work who won’t give a rats patootie about what kind of fuel it takes.
I agree with GM. Frankly flex fuel is an expensive bust and a creation of artificial tax subsidies. Flex fuel needs to disappear.
What I don’t get is why GM isn’t using Micro-turbines instead of a ICE. That way the volt could use ANY kind of fuel including diesel.
I’d also want to know why the volt’s batteries sren’t recharged while it runs on its hydro-carbon engine. What’s the point of that?
I agree with GM. Frankly flex fuel is an expensive bust and a creation of artificial tax subsidies. Flex fuel needs to disappear.
What I don’t get is why GM isn’t using Micro-turbines instead of a ICE. That way the volt could use ANY kind of fuel including diesel.
I’d also want to know why the volt’s batteries sren’t recharged while it runs on its hydro-carbon engine. What’s the point of that?
Minnesota is 1 of 6 states that are marginally competitively priced with E85 vs regular. Remove the state subsidy of 20 cents a gallon, the federal subsidy of 45 cents a gallon, the import tariff of 54 cents a gallon, and the mandate of 10% blending accross all gasoline and you end up with a very expensive gallon of E85 in MN which comes to $3.12.
http://www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/progs/ind_state_laws.php/MN/ETH http://e85prices.com/
Minnesota is 1 of 6 states that are marginally competitively priced with E85 vs regular. Remove the state subsidy of 20 cents a gallon, the federal subsidy of 45 cents a gallon, the import tariff of 54 cents a gallon, and the mandate of 10% blending accross all gasoline and you end up with a very expensive gallon of E85 in MN which comes to $3.12.
http://www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/progs/ind_state_laws.php/MN/ETH http://e85prices.com/
Yes I am bummed out by GM’s decision, and probably won’t consider the Volt because of that detail. It will probably mean less sales, because others who want that feature will simply leave their buying decision in the drawer for another year, or until GM includes a flex engine in the Volt. Low expected sales or liquid fuel use are weak arguments – GM sells thousands of FFVs to people who don’t even realize they are buying one, and never use E85 in them… even Obama admitted to once owning a flex car and never fueling it up with E85! This translates into a missed opportunity for GM, and weakens their message about being the most engaged automaker when it comes to making and supporting flex cars and flex technology. The seed of doubt has been planted!!
Yes I am bummed out by GM’s decision, and probably won’t consider the Volt because of that detail. It will probably mean less sales, because others who want that feature will simply leave their buying decision in the drawer for another year, or until GM includes a flex engine in the Volt. Low expected sales or liquid fuel use are weak arguments – GM sells thousands of FFVs to people who don’t even realize they are buying one, and never use E85 in them… even Obama admitted to once owning a flex car and never fueling it up with E85! This translates into a missed opportunity for GM, and weakens their message about being the most engaged automaker when it comes to making and supporting flex cars and flex technology. The seed of doubt has been planted!!
This announcement does not trouble me. It does make me think about GMs hyperbolic mileage claims which definitely could not be improved by adding 15% ethanol to the equation. For the time being, they are better without it and would be far better off with a diesel hybrid combo, if efficiency is an important parameter of design.
This announcement does not trouble me. It does make me think about GMs hyperbolic mileage claims which definitely could not be improved by adding 15% ethanol to the equation. For the time being, they are better without it and would be far better off with a diesel hybrid combo, if efficiency is an important parameter of design.
The introduction of a new vehicle, such as the Volt, comes with great fanfare and expense. The big initial splash would also be an excellent time to promote GMs longer term support for ethanol and flexi-fuel. Also their intent to downsize engines with turbocharging, which will exploit the 30% higher octane of ethanol. Just add the $135 upgrade to the Volt now, and make a bigger splash. Lack of infrastructure is a lame excuse. Ethanol infrastructure is expanding rapidly, and even first generation Volts will be on the road for 20 years. The infrastructure will be there.
With the mandates that are now in place, all that expanded ethanol has to go somewhere. You can count on ethanol related pumps spreading everywhere, even in California, where C-ARB is illegally trying to ban them. Blender pumps are the best. They give you more choices, such as E-20 or E-30. Wherever the “sweetspot is for your particular vehicle. And especially if you have turbocharging, where ethanol shines, you’re going to love mid level blends.
There’s also a game changing add-on device coming. See “CleanFlex Power System” – that vaporizes a solution of 60% ethanol and 40% water. This is introduced through the air intake, bypassing the main fuel tank, the fuel pump, and the fuel lines – the susceptible hardware in question. This device, initially designed for supplementing 15-30% of diesel engine fuel, cleans-up dirty diesel exhaust, increases power and mileage, and saves a dollar an hour – using the cheaper fuel. So truckers are jumping on this. Farmers with diesel tractors too.
CleanFlex will also be adapted to conventional and flexi-fueled “gasoline” engines. This will eliminate the blend wall. It will also dramatically improve the feedstock production, fuel transportation, and “end use” carbon footprint of ethanol. 60-40 Ethanol-water, derived mostly from recycled CO2, should get a credit for displacing 15-30% of newly mined CO2, emitted by dirty diesel fuel consumption in farm tractors and long haul trucks, etc..This may also be adapted to diesel locomotives and boats, and possibly even ocean going ships burning dirty bunker fuel. Ethanol-water should get another credit for cleaning-up all this diesel exhaust, including sulfurous black carbon soot – the real pollutant – that actually has a bigger environmental impact than CO2.
Fuel reformers are also on the horizon. They reform 50-50 ethanol-water, onboard the vehicle, into hydrogen. Reformers strip Half the hydrogen from the water, and all the hydrogen from the ethanol.
Ethanol, lowers the cohesive surface tension of water, changes the molecular orientation, enhances vaporization, and adds carbon-electrical conductivity (which can accomodate an electromagnetic splitting field). This facilitates the splitting of the water. In other words, it’s a lot easier to split water for hydrogen when it’s mixed with ethanol. Fuel reformers can be electrically powered and-or powered by recycled exhaust heat. They typically use an electromagnet vortex of spinning hot and cold gases going in opposite directions. This can provide onboard hydrogen on demand for ICEs, fuel cells, turbines, and next generation range extender engines.
This technology may also supplement or even replace home heating oil… Possibly even coal and natural gas electric power plants, using 50-50 ethanol water reformed onsite.
The introduction of a new vehicle, such as the Volt, comes with great fanfare and expense. The big initial splash would also be an excellent time to promote GMs longer term support for ethanol and flexi-fuel. Also their intent to downsize engines with turbocharging, which will exploit the 30% higher octane of ethanol. Just add the $135 upgrade to the Volt now, and make a bigger splash. Lack of infrastructure is a lame excuse. Ethanol infrastructure is expanding rapidly, and even first generation Volts will be on the road for 20 years. The infrastructure will be there.
With the mandates that are now in place, all that expanded ethanol has to go somewhere. You can count on ethanol related pumps spreading everywhere, even in California, where C-ARB is illegally trying to ban them. Blender pumps are the best. They give you more choices, such as E-20 or E-30. Wherever the “sweetspot is for your particular vehicle. And especially if you have turbocharging, where ethanol shines, you’re going to love mid level blends.
There’s also a game changing add-on device coming. See “CleanFlex Power System” – that vaporizes a solution of 60% ethanol and 40% water. This is introduced through the air intake, bypassing the main fuel tank, the fuel pump, and the fuel lines – the susceptible hardware in question. This device, initially designed for supplementing 15-30% of diesel engine fuel, cleans-up dirty diesel exhaust, increases power and mileage, and saves a dollar an hour – using the cheaper fuel. So truckers are jumping on this. Farmers with diesel tractors too.
CleanFlex will also be adapted to conventional and flexi-fueled “gasoline” engines. This will eliminate the blend wall. It will also dramatically improve the feedstock production, fuel transportation, and “end use” carbon footprint of ethanol. 60-40 Ethanol-water, derived mostly from recycled CO2, should get a credit for displacing 15-30% of newly mined CO2, emitted by dirty diesel fuel consumption in farm tractors and long haul trucks, etc..This may also be adapted to diesel locomotives and boats, and possibly even ocean going ships burning dirty bunker fuel. Ethanol-water should get another credit for cleaning-up all this diesel exhaust, including sulfurous black carbon soot – the real pollutant – that actually has a bigger environmental impact than CO2.
Fuel reformers are also on the horizon. They reform 50-50 ethanol-water, onboard the vehicle, into hydrogen. Reformers strip Half the hydrogen from the water, and all the hydrogen from the ethanol.
Ethanol, lowers the cohesive surface tension of water, changes the molecular orientation, enhances vaporization, and adds carbon-electrical conductivity (which can accomodate an electromagnetic splitting field). This facilitates the splitting of the water. In other words, it’s a lot easier to split water for hydrogen when it’s mixed with ethanol. Fuel reformers can be electrically powered and-or powered by recycled exhaust heat. They typically use an electromagnet vortex of spinning hot and cold gases going in opposite directions. This can provide onboard hydrogen on demand for ICEs, fuel cells, turbines, and next generation range extender engines.
This technology may also supplement or even replace home heating oil… Possibly even coal and natural gas electric power plants, using 50-50 ethanol water reformed onsite.
@ Aureon Kwolek
You fail to explain Why OH Why do we have flex fuel at all.
1) It is super expensive and the Tax subsidies used to produce it can be better put to Wind, Clean Coal or anything else that’s actually beneficial.
2) European diesel Technology is far more environmentally sound and fuel efficient.
3) Ethanol in E-Flex only increases the price of Corn for 3rd World countries.
4) The Manufacturing process of E-Flex Ethanol pours tons of CO2 into the atmosphere
4) There are better ways to improve Octain vallue of fuel, plus the highly tune computer controlled modern ignition system probably functions well without ethanol.
5) You can only go half the distance on Ethanol, while it’s actual cost is double gasoline.
I just can’t understand why the fixation on such a poorly conceived Fuel/Idea. Just let flex fuel die already.
@ Aureon Kwolek
You fail to explain Why OH Why do we have flex fuel at all.
1) It is super expensive and the Tax subsidies used to produce it can be better put to Wind, Clean Coal or anything else that’s actually beneficial.
2) European diesel Technology is far more environmentally sound and fuel efficient.
3) Ethanol in E-Flex only increases the price of Corn for 3rd World countries.
4) The Manufacturing process of E-Flex Ethanol pours tons of CO2 into the atmosphere
4) There are better ways to improve Octain vallue of fuel, plus the highly tune computer controlled modern ignition system probably functions well without ethanol.
5) You can only go half the distance on Ethanol, while it’s actual cost is double gasoline.
I just can’t understand why the fixation on such a poorly conceived Fuel/Idea. Just let flex fuel die already.
Paulbee: You’re spewing a lot of false information about ethanol. You obviously haven’t done your homework:
(1)Ethanol is Not expensive, and its getting cheaper to make, due to evolving technology. It’s also getting more and more localized, in contrast to the petroleum industry, which is currently restricted to where oil fields and refineries are located. Ethanol production is now spreading to every state. Long distance petroleum based fuels are no match for domestic biofuels that are produced and consumed locally. Wholesale in the US, ethanol is $1.70 a gallon, and gasoline is $2.00 a gallon. Ethanol subsidies pay for themselves many times over. We are already subsidizing wind and rightly so. But wind is not portable liquid fuel. Oil, natural gas and coal are also subsidized, and clean coal may be a decade or two away, if it ever becomes cost effective. Ethanol burns cleaner, displaces imported oil, and has many benefits. Starting with its use as an oxygenator, that cleans-up unburned gasoline residues, carcinogens and neurotoxins – that you would otherwise be breathing.
(2) European fuel technology is Not what you crack it up to be, especially using fuel that is 3 times more expensive. That increases the cost of living. Diesel fuel based on imported oil is Not environmentally superior to domestic Ethanol. Especially when its derived from energy and pollution intensive deep offshore oil wells, foreign oil that’s shipped thousands of miles burning dirty bunker fuel (a big source of sulfurous black carbon soot), and Canadian Tar Sands, which is deforesting millions of acres. What works in Europe is not suited to the US, where we have more than twice as many gasoline powered vehicles on the road than diesel. Ethanol now displaces part of that gasoline, and will soon displace a portion of diesel fuel as well, gaining in market share over both fuels. The footprint of ethanol is over 61% cleaner than gasoline, and it is also going to clean-up existing diesel engines, which are worse yet. Ricardo “ethanol optimized” engines have all the power and efficiency of diesel, with a lower up-front cost and better mileage than gasoline, using the cheaper fuel.
(3)Ethanol does not increase the price of corn for third world countries – That’s False. Ethanol has a very negligible impact on the global price of corn – less than a penny a pound. The price of crude oil and transportation fuels and commodities speculation has a huge impact on the price of food, especially when you ship it around the globe. We have a surplus of corn and you can buy all you need for less than 7 cents a pound, that is, if you can afford to ship it. By the way, ethanol is made from livestock feed corn that is Not suitable for human consumption, so ethanol producers are Not taking food out of the mouths of the hungry. Again, we have a surplus of arable land and a surplus of available corn.
(4)The manufacturing process of gasoline and diesel fuel pours tons of CO2 into the atmosphere and sulfurous black carbon soot out the tailpipe when its burned. And that’s all newly mined Carbon that builds-up in the atmosphere, whereas ethanol is derived mostly from recycled CO2 that the corn crop absorbed. Yes we still use farm tractors that run on dirty diesel to grow the corn – the same fuel that we use to grow other food crops. Ethanol will be used to mitigate that. Tractors and trucks will use all or part ethanol. The natural gas used at ethanol plants is being displaced also, with a variety of renewables. The efficiency and the carbon footprint of ethanol production is constantly improving. The integration of algae production with corn ethanol refineries is now being developed. Algae will absorb the waste CO2, mitigate nutrient rich waste water effluent, and recycle waste heat. Onsite algae becomes feedstock for both ethanol and biodiesel, plus nutriceuticals, complete protein supplements for humans and livestock, bio-fertilizer and bio-plastics as well. The next generation ethanol refinery, that is integrated with algae, livestock feeding, and manure based biogas, has the potential to become a dynamic economic engine.
(5) Ethanol has 30% higher octane than gasoline, a faster flame speed, and a faster vaporization rate. When an engine is optimized for these characteristics, it is superior to both gasoline and diesel engines. The next step is 50-50 ethanol-water reformed onboard into hydrogen, and conventional gasoline and diesel engines don’t come close. You obviously haven’t heard of Douglas Pelmier’s 400 hp E-85 engines that get 110 mpg either.
(6) False: “You can only go half the distance on Ethanol, while it’s actual cost is double gasoline.” – False. It depends on the ethanol “sweetspot” of the engine. They’re not all the same. Recent studies show that flexi-fueled engines can get better mileage on E20 and E30 than they get on gasoline. Ethanol has about 30% less BTUs per gallon compared to gasoline. That still doesn’t equate to half the mileage in conventional engines. Turbocharged “ethanol optimized” engines get better mileage and more power than gasoline on cheaper, cleaner, domestic fuel – that creates jobs, generates tax revenue, and stimulates the economy – a competitive component of the fuel mix – in our drive toward energy independence.
Paulbee: You’re spewing a lot of false information about ethanol. You obviously haven’t done your homework:
(1)Ethanol is Not expensive, and its getting cheaper to make, due to evolving technology. It’s also getting more and more localized, in contrast to the petroleum industry, which is currently restricted to where oil fields and refineries are located. Ethanol production is now spreading to every state. Long distance petroleum based fuels are no match for domestic biofuels that are produced and consumed locally. Wholesale in the US, ethanol is $1.70 a gallon, and gasoline is $2.00 a gallon. Ethanol subsidies pay for themselves many times over. We are already subsidizing wind and rightly so. But wind is not portable liquid fuel. Oil, natural gas and coal are also subsidized, and clean coal may be a decade or two away, if it ever becomes cost effective. Ethanol burns cleaner, displaces imported oil, and has many benefits. Starting with its use as an oxygenator, that cleans-up unburned gasoline residues, carcinogens and neurotoxins – that you would otherwise be breathing.
(2) European fuel technology is Not what you crack it up to be, especially using fuel that is 3 times more expensive. That increases the cost of living. Diesel fuel based on imported oil is Not environmentally superior to domestic Ethanol. Especially when its derived from energy and pollution intensive deep offshore oil wells, foreign oil that’s shipped thousands of miles burning dirty bunker fuel (a big source of sulfurous black carbon soot), and Canadian Tar Sands, which is deforesting millions of acres. What works in Europe is not suited to the US, where we have more than twice as many gasoline powered vehicles on the road than diesel. Ethanol now displaces part of that gasoline, and will soon displace a portion of diesel fuel as well, gaining in market share over both fuels. The footprint of ethanol is over 61% cleaner than gasoline, and it is also going to clean-up existing diesel engines, which are worse yet. Ricardo “ethanol optimized” engines have all the power and efficiency of diesel, with a lower up-front cost and better mileage than gasoline, using the cheaper fuel.
(3)Ethanol does not increase the price of corn for third world countries – That’s False. Ethanol has a very negligible impact on the global price of corn – less than a penny a pound. The price of crude oil and transportation fuels and commodities speculation has a huge impact on the price of food, especially when you ship it around the globe. We have a surplus of corn and you can buy all you need for less than 7 cents a pound, that is, if you can afford to ship it. By the way, ethanol is made from livestock feed corn that is Not suitable for human consumption, so ethanol producers are Not taking food out of the mouths of the hungry. Again, we have a surplus of arable land and a surplus of available corn.
(4)The manufacturing process of gasoline and diesel fuel pours tons of CO2 into the atmosphere and sulfurous black carbon soot out the tailpipe when its burned. And that’s all newly mined Carbon that builds-up in the atmosphere, whereas ethanol is derived mostly from recycled CO2 that the corn crop absorbed. Yes we still use farm tractors that run on dirty diesel to grow the corn – the same fuel that we use to grow other food crops. Ethanol will be used to mitigate that. Tractors and trucks will use all or part ethanol. The natural gas used at ethanol plants is being displaced also, with a variety of renewables. The efficiency and the carbon footprint of ethanol production is constantly improving. The integration of algae production with corn ethanol refineries is now being developed. Algae will absorb the waste CO2, mitigate nutrient rich waste water effluent, and recycle waste heat. Onsite algae becomes feedstock for both ethanol and biodiesel, plus nutriceuticals, complete protein supplements for humans and livestock, bio-fertilizer and bio-plastics as well. The next generation ethanol refinery, that is integrated with algae, livestock feeding, and manure based biogas, has the potential to become a dynamic economic engine.
(5) Ethanol has 30% higher octane than gasoline, a faster flame speed, and a faster vaporization rate. When an engine is optimized for these characteristics, it is superior to both gasoline and diesel engines. The next step is 50-50 ethanol-water reformed onboard into hydrogen, and conventional gasoline and diesel engines don’t come close. You obviously haven’t heard of Douglas Pelmier’s 400 hp E-85 engines that get 110 mpg either.
(6) False: “You can only go half the distance on Ethanol, while it’s actual cost is double gasoline.” – False. It depends on the ethanol “sweetspot” of the engine. They’re not all the same. Recent studies show that flexi-fueled engines can get better mileage on E20 and E30 than they get on gasoline. Ethanol has about 30% less BTUs per gallon compared to gasoline. That still doesn’t equate to half the mileage in conventional engines. Turbocharged “ethanol optimized” engines get better mileage and more power than gasoline on cheaper, cleaner, domestic fuel – that creates jobs, generates tax revenue, and stimulates the economy – a competitive component of the fuel mix – in our drive toward energy independence.
Thank you Aureon Kwolek for setting the record straight on Ethanol. It is amusing to me how people who rant about govt. subsidies for E85 conveniently leave out the multi decade multi trillion dollar subsidy petroleum has enjoyed. The two trillion dollar misadventure in Iraq just the latest example.
As for the news of the Volt not having a Flex Fuel engine, I am devastated. I have been dreaming of owning a Volt since the moment I read about it.
GM may be right, most Volt owners will never use much liquid fuel, but that is not the point. Advancement and acceptance of a superior fuel like E85 is critical if we are going to get a handle on our out of control economy and ecology. E85 use emits far less CO2, protects our younger citizens from being sent to the middle east to protect our oil supply, and enhances our security by keeping our energy dollars here at home.
I will not buy any vehicle that does not have the ability to use E85.
Thank you Aureon Kwolek for setting the record straight on Ethanol. It is amusing to me how people who rant about govt. subsidies for E85 conveniently leave out the multi decade multi trillion dollar subsidy petroleum has enjoyed. The two trillion dollar misadventure in Iraq just the latest example.
As for the news of the Volt not having a Flex Fuel engine, I am devastated. I have been dreaming of owning a Volt since the moment I read about it.
GM may be right, most Volt owners will never use much liquid fuel, but that is not the point. Advancement and acceptance of a superior fuel like E85 is critical if we are going to get a handle on our out of control economy and ecology. E85 use emits far less CO2, protects our younger citizens from being sent to the middle east to protect our oil supply, and enhances our security by keeping our energy dollars here at home.
I will not buy any vehicle that does not have the ability to use E85.
Both ethanol and electric drive are ridiculous. Ethanol is not a good motor fuel compared to gaseous fuels such as propane and natural gas or gasoline and diesel. Cellulosic ethanol or ethanol derived from algae are thrown out at excuses to justify corn grown ethanol that can not economically or environmentally be justified in North America. I only use alcohol to clean injectors.
Electric drive in itself is fine but battery storage is far from a viable answer. The power to weight and energy to weight don’t make sense. Plus it is too expensive. Again, plug in electric has become the new excuse to keep the public and corporations happy. Despite the promise of renewable energy to power these high-tech boondoggles, big coal and nuclear energy interests are gleefully going along with the charade. Improved battery technology will be promised along with switchgrass and microalgae. Don’t be fooled.
GM is gambling our taxpayer dollars to pursue plug in electric vehicles. But that is where the politicians are putting their votes; votes that came well-financed from the power industry. Again, Americans must drive to keep the capitalist machine running. The day I sold my 2000 Honda Insight and bought a lighter bicycle and a bus pass was the happiest day of my life.
Americans are dying (killing) for a justification to continue driving and maintaining our gluttonous lifestyles. Stop this ethanol and plug in electric madness. Let’s conserve what energy we have until something realistic is pursued such as flywheel storage and hydraulic drive using a small displacement ICE.
Both ethanol and electric drive are ridiculous. Ethanol is not a good motor fuel compared to gaseous fuels such as propane and natural gas or gasoline and diesel. Cellulosic ethanol or ethanol derived from algae are thrown out at excuses to justify corn grown ethanol that can not economically or environmentally be justified in North America. I only use alcohol to clean injectors.
Electric drive in itself is fine but battery storage is far from a viable answer. The power to weight and energy to weight don’t make sense. Plus it is too expensive. Again, plug in electric has become the new excuse to keep the public and corporations happy. Despite the promise of renewable energy to power these high-tech boondoggles, big coal and nuclear energy interests are gleefully going along with the charade. Improved battery technology will be promised along with switchgrass and microalgae. Don’t be fooled.
GM is gambling our taxpayer dollars to pursue plug in electric vehicles. But that is where the politicians are putting their votes; votes that came well-financed from the power industry. Again, Americans must drive to keep the capitalist machine running. The day I sold my 2000 Honda Insight and bought a lighter bicycle and a bus pass was the happiest day of my life.
Americans are dying (killing) for a justification to continue driving and maintaining our gluttonous lifestyles. Stop this ethanol and plug in electric madness. Let’s conserve what energy we have until something realistic is pursued such as flywheel storage and hydraulic drive using a small displacement ICE.
And the fuel stations won’t offer E85 until there is a critical mass of flex fuel vehicles on the road. What a load of BS. I still have yet to understand *why* flexfuel vehicles cost more. By in large, all they are doing is adding some additional fuel maps to the the engine computer.
@Colin, I agree that we need to pay more attention to reducing our consumption. That is the best solution of all. I do not agree with your blanket dismissal of ethanol. Using corn as a feedstock is a poor choice. There are many better, more sustainable solutions as Aureon pointed out. Ethanol seems to be our best short term solution and if we are careful to fit it into a sustainable infrastructure, rather than a purely consumption focused one, a rather good one.
And the fuel stations won’t offer E85 until there is a critical mass of flex fuel vehicles on the road. What a load of BS. I still have yet to understand *why* flexfuel vehicles cost more. By in large, all they are doing is adding some additional fuel maps to the the engine computer.
@Colin, I agree that we need to pay more attention to reducing our consumption. That is the best solution of all. I do not agree with your blanket dismissal of ethanol. Using corn as a feedstock is a poor choice. There are many better, more sustainable solutions as Aureon pointed out. Ethanol seems to be our best short term solution and if we are careful to fit it into a sustainable infrastructure, rather than a purely consumption focused one, a rather good one.
I love how everyone starts trashing GM. It’s not their fault. E85 when available is not E85 at all at most stations. We race on E85 and trying to find true E85 is very hard,we now get all of ours from Sunoco. It’s not GM’s fault there are few suppliers. I read there were only like 4 stations in California that had true E85. The Volt is a great car and truly an American Car we can and should be proud of. Soon to be retired GM executive and Car Guru Bob Lutz say’s its his proudest accomplishment!
http://e85vehicles.com/e85-california.htm
I love how everyone starts trashing GM. It’s not their fault. E85 when available is not E85 at all at most stations. We race on E85 and trying to find true E85 is very hard,we now get all of ours from Sunoco. It’s not GM’s fault there are few suppliers. I read there were only like 4 stations in California that had true E85. The Volt is a great car and truly an American Car we can and should be proud of. Soon to be retired GM executive and Car Guru Bob Lutz say’s its his proudest accomplishment!
http://e85vehicles.com/e85-california.htm
A) Disclaimer: The current means of producing E85 is not sustainable.
B) There is virtually no cost in a new car line to enable E85 capability.
C) The infrastructure & fleet to support a switch to efficient means of producing E85 makes our fuel system more robust, our geopolitical situation less like drug addiction, and our future brighter in the event of Peak Oil or success in legislating Climate Change mitigation.
My conclusion after investigating the engineering is that any car should be able to use the full spectrum from 0% ethanol to 100% ethanol. If you accept the righteousness of national auto-fleet standards at all, this should be a really basic tenet of them at this point in time. In this case, the people that decided not to use ethanol-capable parts were likely in the marketing department, and were concerned about customer confusion.
A) Disclaimer: The current means of producing E85 is not sustainable.
B) There is virtually no cost in a new car line to enable E85 capability.
C) The infrastructure & fleet to support a switch to efficient means of producing E85 makes our fuel system more robust, our geopolitical situation less like drug addiction, and our future brighter in the event of Peak Oil or success in legislating Climate Change mitigation.
My conclusion after investigating the engineering is that any car should be able to use the full spectrum from 0% ethanol to 100% ethanol. If you accept the righteousness of national auto-fleet standards at all, this should be a really basic tenet of them at this point in time. In this case, the people that decided not to use ethanol-capable parts were likely in the marketing department, and were concerned about customer confusion.