Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Bill USA

(6,436 posts)
Thu Feb 9, 2012, 06:54 PM Feb 2012

UH-OH, secret document leaked: Ethanol gets about 7% less mpg than gas; 10% BETTER on energy equiv

basis. This is quite a bit different than the 35% mileage decrement so often quoted.

These are the results of a test of cars actually driven on the street, some using gasoline others using ethanol, over a two year period (not dynomometer tested) conducted by the Batelle Memorial Institute for the National Renewable Energy Lab - when was this done?...[font size="3"]in 1998![/font] (got this off a web site that indicated it was last update for content on Jan 30, 2012).


summary table of fuel efficiency results


"The fuel economy for the ethanol fleet has been consistently higher than the gasoline control vehicles (12
percent higher for the total data collection period and 10 percent higher for the last year, all on an energy
equivalent basis)."

link to page for quote


... for those interested you might want to down-load the pdf file NOW, before this report disappears!

11 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

Old and In the Way

(37,540 posts)
1. Don't you mean 7% MORE mpg?
Thu Feb 9, 2012, 07:44 PM
Feb 2012

Good news, but I'm not convinced that ethanol is our best long term energy source for powering vehicles.

Bill USA

(6,436 posts)
5. No, I averaged the actual mpg shown in the chart and it is 7% less than gasoline's but this is FAR
Thu Feb 9, 2012, 08:17 PM
Feb 2012

better than the mpg decrement that has so often been quoted of 35%.


I'm pretty cautious about predicting for "the long term". I am worried enough about tomorrow. Oil has been flirting with $100 (West Texas, NOrth Sea Brent with $110 a barrel) thanks to 1) the Arab Spring and 2) Iran nuclear program. Experts are now saying once we get to Memorial day gas could easily be at $4.00 a gallon. If (When?) Israel strikes Iran's nuclear facilities I think $4.00 gas will quickly become a fond memory.

Gas at $4.00 a gallon will take a good deal out of our meagre recovery. If it goes above that (depending on how far) we could see zero growth and increased Unemployment. These developments for the long term do not bode well for developing and deploying other more technically advanced, and more expensive, technologies such as electric cars. NOT good.

I have said before that we should be increasing methanol production (from natural gas) to be added to ethanol to further reduce our need for petroleum fuel. Of course, we are not going to do that. At least not until we have petroleum prices strangling our economy. Then we might do it.

Unfortuitous developments in the short term will dramatically affect what we will be able to do in the long term ---- unless we take such actions that can produce short term changes in our dependency on petroleum. (note in addition to adding methanol to the ethanol supply we should have been promoting the development of the Ethanol Enabled Direct Injection engine designed by three MIT scientists, which gets 30% better fuel economy (comparable to conventional hybrids) for about one fourth the cost.

Ethanol Boosting Systems

These steps might have saved the economy from the coming petroleum cost contraction (or at least minimized the damage) which will put off deployment of electric cars even further (you have to have quite a few people who have enough free money to buy electric cars to expand their use.).


Old and In the Way

(37,540 posts)
8. I guess I'm a little confused.
Thu Feb 9, 2012, 09:59 PM
Feb 2012

If ethanol as 10% better energy efficiency than gas, why does this translate to 7% less mpg? I want to moderate my original comment to agree that ethanol would certainly be a strategic optional source of fuel should petroleum futures escalate on geo-political events. I think there may be better longer terms options to the internal combustion engine, but it will take better battery storage technology and more investment in solar energy in general.

Bill USA

(6,436 posts)
3. Well, I was being a little sarcastic. It only took 13+ years to release this report.
Thu Feb 9, 2012, 08:01 PM
Feb 2012

... I was implying maybe somebody slipped this on without authorization.....(from Sec Chu).


hunter

(38,316 posts)
4. So?
Thu Feb 9, 2012, 08:16 PM
Feb 2012

Converting corn to fuel ethanol damages the environment in many ways.

Nothing good comes from this kind of corn growing -- not factory farmed meat, not high fructose corn syrup, not ethanol fuel.

We've let other industries die, some that actually improved life in the U.S.A. with well paying U.S. jobs and some of the highest quality products in the world. Gone, so many of them replaced with lower quality, short-lived goods made in low-wage nations where workers suffer unspeakable abuses.

Growing mutant monster corn ought to be on a list of industries that need to die, right up there with mountaintop removal coal mining, uranium mining, and much of our corrupt-beyond-redemption "defense" industry.

You know what I'd like to see instead of ethanol? How about hemp clothing grown and made by union workers in the U.S.A.... How about electric cars powered by solar panels, all made in the USA by union workers... How about banning inhumane factory farms and raising our livestock in open places? How about we turn some of our corn fields back into wild prairie, with bison, wolves roaming free...


Bill USA

(6,436 posts)
6. Sounds great! Now if you can just keep the price of oil from killing our economy (jeopardizing your
Thu Feb 9, 2012, 08:29 PM
Feb 2012

plans rather dramatically) -- say for about twenty years (the time required to realize your ideas .. to some degree) I'll sing your praises. (as for your notions re ethanol, not really in the mood to disabuse you of all the disinformation you've been ingesting about that fuel.)

Oil price spike expected by May

Oil Prices Rise as IRan Threaten EU supply cut


Iran nuclear ambitions not going away and neither is the Arab Spring.

hunter

(38,316 posts)
7. "Iran nuclear ambitions???"
Thu Feb 9, 2012, 09:44 PM
Feb 2012


"Once they have a nuclear weapon, let me assure you, you will not be safe, even here in Missouri. These are folks who have been and are at war with us since 1979. This is a country that has killed more troops in Afghanistan and Iraq than the Iraqis and the Afghans."

Bill USA

(6,436 posts)
9. here's another good one from Santorum: "man-made global warming is a HOAX" ....LOL...LOL
Fri Feb 10, 2012, 06:29 PM
Feb 2012
http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2012/02/07/420181/santorum-manmade-global-warming-hoax-science-stewards/?mobile=nc

Santorum’s Incoherence: Manmade Global Warming Is a “Hoax”....


with Michelle Bachman out of the GOP nomination circus, it's good we have Santorum to hold up her standard of idiocy!!

Thanks for your comment. Sometimes you need a good laugh!


Bill USA

(6,436 posts)
10. here's another corker: Saudia Arabia to buy Nuclear Weapons if Iran tests A-Bomb
Fri Feb 10, 2012, 06:35 PM
Feb 2012
http://worldnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/10/10369793-report-saudi-arabia-to-buy-nukes-if-iran-tests-a-bomb

Saudia Arabia would move quickly to acquire nuclear weapons if Iran successfully tests an atomic bomb, according to a report.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»UH-OH, secret document le...