Now that the "Republipedo" party is washed up, watch for Congressional pushes on ALL auto makers doing business in the US for alternative fuel vehicles. Ford's well positioned and is probably further ahead than anyone else on hydrogen fuel cells. Infrastructure will be the big bugaboo. E85 will now start marching toward the coasts. Again, Ford is building the most "switch fuel" vehicles that can handle 100% ethanol.
There is a great article in Mopar Action magazine's Feb '07 issue (on the newstands now) titled "Boozepower" that is worth reading. It explores some of the truths and myths associated with alcohol blends.
Pay particular attention to the data about how much energy is contained in some quantity of each fuel and how much energy is required to produce that said amount.
The move toward Ethanol may be more of a vote-getter than we realize. It certainly isn't about reducing dependency on foreign oil or consumer costs.
you DUMB ASS- synthetic fuels cost even more to produce than petroleum based gasoline- and already the sugar growers in USA have established a cartel to limit imports of cheap foreign cane, so they can maintain market share- the people DEFENDING that cartel, are DEMOCRATS
anything that comes out that is an improvement, we ALL benefit from- a Republican can fill his car up with ethanol and enjoy clean air the same as you can...only his car will be a Cadillac limousine, while your's will be the same old POS rotted 1978 Honda....
Actually the wall street journal had published some articles in the last 90's and the early 2000's about the big sugar cartel and their strong & successful lobby effort for high sugar import tariffs/low import quotas. They were strong supporters of then President, but they probably support whoever protects their interests.
According to a recent Consumer Reports E85 fuels will increase the buying of excessively large vehicles, with which the buyers won't be using E85 fuel. They have a good point. E85 appears to be mainly to reduce USA imports of oil.
Glad to see you took the time to read the article before responding. Are all of your opinions so well researched and developed?
As a periodic contributor to this...a Chrysler discussion group...it would seem that some of the others here are similarly Mopar fans who may in fact value the whit and enlightement of the publication to which I refer. In your attempt to dismiss me, you also dismiss them.
Regardless of the opinions of others who seemed to express some disgust with your views, I am willing to consider your input as an opinion to which you are entitled. If you really want to be taken seriously, however, you must at least have the decency to allow others to hold their and sometimes contrasting opinions.
I continue to recommend that you find a copy of that publication and read the connected to the sidebar. It echos the scientific research I've also found in many other publicaitons (yes, I read them, too), some of which you might consider more credible.
Fact: There is very little consensus regarding the merits of Ethenol. Some data finds it takes more energy to produce than a similar quanitiry of gasoline. More interesting, however, is that some other data finds that it actually takes more energy to make a gallon than that gallon gives back.
If you were a business person, you wouldn't buy something at a wholesale price that is higher than you could get for it at retail unless it were for some otehr purpose, perhaps as a price leader drawing business to other items in your store.
At it relates to Ethanol, politicians in Ethanol source states certainly have a reason to support it (votes), but I'm not sure it really provides the purported benefits of reducing our reliance on foreign energy sources. It clearly can't sustain the claim that it's cheaper to produce and prices should go down. that dog simply don't hunt.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.