Scientists offered cash to dispute climate study

[LQDMTL]

Yeah, cause E85 isn't next gen. Car manufacturers have been building Flex Fuel engines into cars since 1999/2000 as a way of getting government subsidy money. Most of them never announced it to consumers because it wasn't a consumer concern. It's only been very recently that people, like myself, just found out that their cars can safely burn E85. So, yeah... it isn't next gen if it's been around for nearly a decade already. The tech is here, the fuel supply is coming along.

Want a model for proper move away from oil, read up on Brazil, adciv, and drop the pipe dreams. Anything that REQUIRES everyone in the US to buy a new car is going to take 5, 6 times as long to adopt. It is SENSELESS to ignore E85 just because YOU want to buy a new car and drive electric. Not everyone wants to, or even CAN, just drop everything and buy a new car right here and now. But most of the country CAN afford to plug 400 to 600 into the car they already own to make it burn E85. The ONLY thing holding us back is supply for the demand, and that supply is growing as we speak.

Sorry, I'd rather live in reality than in a pipe dream. No, E85 isn't the be-all, end-all solution. I've said repeatedly that it is the next step in getting us there. It's the difference between depending on oil for the next 10 years (without E85), or the next 2 (with E85).

[Captain Pink]

Just a thought: E85 hybrids.

[LQDMTL]

E85, then E85 hybrids (with electric / hydrogen) and eventually Methanol Fuel Cells with a spare E85 combustion engine to extend range.... then, who knows.

[Seraphim]

It occurred to me Why do we need cars with such long range? Seriously, why do we need to be able to drive 300 miles without refueling?
If we would set up more, and better mass transit. Like trains everywhere, like in Europe, then we wouldn't need to be a be to personally drive cross country only refueling a few times.
If we had a good network built up it would be cheaper than driving. It would use considerably less fuel per person. It would be faster. Honestly there's not good reason not to, other than it's never been like that, and we'd rather just keep on driving our shitty cars than do something that makes sense in every respect possible.

[LQDMTL]

Because of the sheer number of stations it would require, the insane volume of trucks on the road to deliver the fuel to each location... the logistics and transportation costs alone kill the idea.

[adciv]

But most of the country CAN afford to plug 400 to 600 into the car they already own to make it burn E85.

Converting regular cars over to E85 is a pipe dream. Unless you can get the manufacturers to support it, hardly anyone will do it. You would need to either get the manufacturers to either make their own or endorse one of these things for their vehicles.

I checked sites that say if cars are E85. Honda isn't even on the list. I don't recall Toyota being there either. Those two are a big chunk of the market at this point.

It is SENSELESS to ignore E85 just because YOU want to buy a new car and drive electric. Not everyone wants to, or even CAN, just drop everything and buy a new car right here and now.

Who said anything about me buying a new car soon? I just got a new one 3 years ago. It's going to be at least 9 more before I get a new one. I recognize that it will take DECADES to change over this country to something better than E10. I also think that the electric will be superior as regardless of what fuel it uses, it will be more efficient than any internal combustion equivalent.

Seraphim, To further add to that with some numbers. Europe has about 50% more people in 42% of the area. The closest you could do would be to find a few routes that have a high enough density to support the movement. The Northeast Amtrak corridor (DC to Maine) is the only one in the US that pays for itself.

[Captain Pink]

[quote="LQDMTL";p="718614"]Because of the sheer number of stations it would require, the insane volume of trucks on the road to deliver the fuel to each location... the logistics and transportation costs alone kill the idea.[/quote]

If you want you can have some of our TransRapid-Trains. The Chinese in Shanghai like it and I guess a railroad from Seattle to SanFran could be just the right place to but this baby on.

[LQDMTL]

[quote="adciv";p="718622"]Converting regular cars over to E85 is a pipe dream. Unless you can get the manufacturers to support it, hardly anyone will do it. You would need to either get the manufacturers to either make their own or endorse one of these things for their vehicles.[/quote]
Assuming everyone in the country was driving a car that was under warranty (not the case), you might be correct. Converting cars is not hard. It is not expensive. I can easily, very easily, see dealers offering to do the conversions under warranty in the near future should Shell, Walmart, Iogen and others have their way about it. Walmart could have 300 to 500 E85 pumps spread throughout the US within the next 2 years. Shell, if it succeeds with Iogen, will have hundreds more to add to that total within the next 2 to 3 years. And new stations are cropping up left and right all over the country.

The military, and many state government agencies, are also adding their own E85 pumps at locations across the US. 4 went into Virginia alone within the last 2 years, most within the last year.

Check it, and stop blindly discounting it.

You have to check vin numbers to find out if most newer cars can run E85. The manufacturers don't advertise it properly (only GM does, actually). Ford plans to have even it's worst gas guzzler, the Expedition, running on E85 in 2008...

Posted Tue Feb 13, 2007 12:01 pm:

More linkage

[adciv]

[quote="LQDMTL";p="718626"]Check it, and stop blindly discounting it.

You have to check vin numbers to find out if most newer cars can run E85. The manufacturers don't advertise it properly (only GM does, actually). Ford plans to have even it's worst gas guzzler, the Expedition, running on E85 in 2008...[/quote]

That would appear to be the one I checked before. I don't see Honda listed, nor Toyota. I drive an Accord. You do the math.

I can easily, very easily, see dealers offering to do the conversions under warranty in the near future should Shell, Walmart, Iogen and others have their way about it.

Somehow, I don't see them easily offering that.

Posted Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:28 pm:

Captain Pink, Actually, there is already an Amtrak route from Seattle to San Francisco. I doubt anyone would pay to add in a new type of track when the existing track could be used.

[LQDMTL]

The infrastructure for E85 is already being put into place nationwide (and is all over the place). The infrastructure for hydrog.. yeah, no. It's a thought though! For electri... um, not yet. Do you get the point yet?

[Seraphim]

[quote="LQDMTL";p="718614"]Because of the sheer number of stations it would require, the insane volume of trucks on the road to deliver the fuel to each location... the logistics and transportation costs alone kill the idea.[/quote]
We already have stations far more than every 300 miles, with the possible exception of the most remote locations. However, if we had good mass transit there would be little to no reason to cross such long distances with your personal vehicle.

[LQDMTL]

When you have a few trillion to lay down on stripping up impeding structures, laying tracks, etc, etc, etc, I'm sure the government will listen. Roads, stations, etc are all already in place and a solid, achievable solution will include making use of what we already have. Mass transit just isn't something that the American public wants, and our current transportation systems just don't accommodate the idea. You're talking about a hell of a massive change, and one that isn't likely to be profitable (making it less likely anyone with money will even think twice about it).

[Blaze]

[quote="Captain Pink";p="718625"][quote="LQDMTL";p="718614"]Because of the sheer number of stations it would require, the insane volume of trucks on the road to deliver the fuel to each location... the logistics and transportation costs alone kill the idea.[/quote]

If you want you can have some of our TransRapid-Trains. The Chinese in Shanghai like it and I guess a railroad from Seattle to SanFran could be just the right place to but this baby on.[/quote]

Trains are pretty common here between major metropolitan centers anyway, especially on the coasts, so I don't think that's the issue.

It's the drives between suburban centers that are the big issue.

[adciv]

[quote="LQDMTL";p="718635"]The infrastructure for E85 is already being put into place nationwide (and is all over the place). The infrastructure for hydrog.. yeah, no. It's a thought though! For electri... um, not yet. Do you get the point yet?[/quote]

Just because the infrastructure is there, does not mean the product is there. Again, unless you can get the manufacturers to actively support a conversion for the current cars it won't do jack.

[LQDMTL]

adciv, you're talking out of your ass. I say that because you're making bold assumptions and speaking with a lack of information that you seem hell bent upon ignoring. You assume that market, demand and economy have no play in this and that just isn't so. But hey, I'm done with this. You obviously aren't going to listen no matter what, so this entire conversation is pointless. There's simply some reading you need to do. I have not at all said that electric cars are bad or argued against your daydream. I've simply tried to show you reality and prove to you that, well, E85 is happening without your permission. There are over 1200 E85 stations in the country and growing, FAR MORE than any non-gas alternative. If you think for one second that manufacturers like honda or toyota (your pet cars) are going to ignore this, ignore their competition turning every engine into flex fuel engines, and ignore consumer demand... well you're just deluding yourself. So, whatever. Tomorrow I think I'll start pretending the sky doesn't exist... seems just about as fruitful.