Comments on: Why I hate E85 (part 1)

By: L. N. Falandino » California, what’s the deal?

L. N. Falandino » California, what’s the deal? — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 16:01:20 +0000

[...] LA Times has reported that CA will begin subsidizing E85. Now, I know that I’ve made my views relatively clear, so it should come to no shock that I’m not really pleased with [...]

By: L. N. Falandino » Why I hate E85 (part 2)

L. N. Falandino » Why I hate E85 (part 2) — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 00:28:04 +0000

[...] part 1 of Why I hate E85 I examined some of the background principles at work and why alcohol based fuels can actually be [...]

By: Andy

Andy — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 04:25:56 +0000

I know, the high fructose stuff is cheaper and easier to supply than sugar. Only if passover came 6 or 7 times a year…

By: L. N. Falandino » NAIAS 2008 aka the Detroit Auto Show (part 1)

L. N. Falandino » NAIAS 2008 aka the Detroit Auto Show (part 1) — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 21:51:28 +0000

[...] « Why I hate E85 (part 1) [...]

By: Naim

Naim — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:37:28 +0000

Very good points Andy. Unfortunately I don’t think we’ll be switching back to sugar any time soon. My buddy Julius here mentioned the corn subsidies that the US currently has, and those will be a big reason. So it’s more likely that many foods will just get more expensive as the result.

By: a musing julius… » Blog Archive » why corn and e85 suck.

a musing julius… » Blog Archive » why corn and e85 suck. — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 16:30:47 +0000

[...] buddy naim wrote a great article on why he hates e85 today and i felt like backing him up, but in a different [...]

By: Andy

Andy — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 01:20:30 +0000

Not sure where you are going in part 2 or 3, but you still have to use fossil fuels (natural gas, coal, nuclear) to turn corn into ethanol.

For those who depend on low food prices to survive, ethanol is terrible. However, taking corn and converting it is a very popular idea in the midwest, as it will drive up the price of their product. Much like politicians in Texas guard the oil business, the representatives of these farmers guard them heavily. There are laws now that require the use of ethanol, they have banned the use of similar octane boosters (such as MTBE), and have a 54 cent import tariff.

In Houston, right outside of the ship channel known as refinery row (something like 20-25% of the nations oil is refined here) was a sign put up by GM that said “Don’t drill for fuel, plant it” It was literally up for one day, I guess they figured out the reaction from the oil crowd. GM is able to make a few slight modifications to their vehicles, and they can sell it as flex fuel. They know the majority of people won’t use it, but it is an extra selling point, just in case we completely switch over to ethanol tomorrow.

On the bright side of things, maybe this will force food produces to quit using high fructose corn syrup and switch back to sugar

By: Jason

Jason — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 20:27:13 +0000

Nicely written, I haven’t actually put a whole lot of thought in to E85 as of yet. I am however, of the understanding that the idea of ramping up corn production to match estimated consumption goals for E85 is kind of an unrealistic goal. Ideally, if we are talking about remodeling transportation why not put some stricter rules on vehicle weights and dimensions. Make it an eventual thing to have much smaller cars be the norm, if you can get all the massive small-car eater vehicles off the road, then there is not much of a reason a small car would be any less safe. Better gas mileage, cheaper vehicles, etc. Look forward to part two.

By: Julius

Julius — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 20:06:23 +0000

I’m a big fan. I’m happy my modular v8 only needs 87 octane to run properly.

By: Cheez

Cheez — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 18:32:40 +0000

THIS IS QUITE LENGTHY. And interesting to a performance vehicle owner like moi. Looking forward to reading future parts!