

| Subject: | Re: gas prices- a canadian perspective |
| From: | Greg Potts |
| Date: | Sat, 5 Mar 2005 20:44:39 -0500 |
Hi Jim, I've heard about that study, but have not looked at it in detail. But I can tell you this: If you want to know about the legitimacy of a study, look at who produced it and who is quoting it. My bets are that the study in question was done by the petrochemical industry, and being quoted by one of their lobby groups. Any study submitted to the press is designed to support an agenda. That's what they're for. Personally, I would expect that if ethanol actually cost more energy to produce than it contains, the price would reflect that. And I know that even *if* current ethanol production techniques are inefficient, that doesn't necessarily mean that they are going to stay that way as the demand for ethanol increases. Biodiesel is definitely worth looking at, but the cost of re-fitting my aircooled buses to a diesel powerplant is NOT insignificant. And as the cost of gasoline continues to increase I can only expect the cost of suitable donor diesel powerplants to increase. Sigh. I'm only just now getting somewhat proficient wrenching on my gasoline engines. Carbon added to the atmosphere due to transportation technology doesn't care if it's from corn, sugar beets or dead dinosaurs, the end result is no different. Happy trails, Greg Potts Toronto, Ontario, Canada 1973/74/79 Westfakia Conversion **Bob the Tomato** LY3H 1977 Sunroof Automatic L63H/L90D http://www.pottsfamily.ca/westfakia http://www.busesofthecorn.com On 5-Mar-05, at 8:24 PM, Jim Felder wrote: >> >> >> The bad news is that alcohol as an additive burns hotter and produces >> less power than gasoline. My air-cooled buses are going to hate that. >> > > I am all for paying farmers for fuel rather than mid-east royal > families, but I've seen studies--don't know if they're legit or > not--that show that the energy benefit from the ethanol is less than > the energy used to produce it. > > Vegetable diesel might do better. Besides, the carbon load it puts > into the air came from last year's crop, so there's no net co2 gain > unlike petro fuel which loads the atmosphere with carbon from long ago > that otherwise wouldn't be there. > > Jim > > >
Have something to add on this topic today? Revive this thread in the forum »