Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Neoliberalnot

Yes, and has produced studies jointly with those who have the expertise he lacks.

The ethanol boondoggle does help the other side, has not produced an iota of energy independence and is not practical in this country.

Look up Bill Talbert’s patent on E II gasoline. In tests it has been shown to produce zero pollution of THC, NOx, and CO.
It appears it may be developed to produce no more CO2 than is in the ambient air. Because it burns almost completely in the chamber it enormously reduces engine wear. The mileage gain from it was first tested, under EPA hot city driving conditions in 2000 at 7%. It now appears that the outer limit of mileage gain is 40% and that that can be further increased by combining its use with other technology. Because it is a far simpler fuel it can be produced in commercial quantities far cheaper than present gasoline. However it does not have any significant lobby behind it and we have not spent millions in subsidies and tax breaks upon it. So the choice is clear, we can either engage in subsidizing a farm lobby or we can win the war.

Moreover, it can be used as cars as is, although some improvement could be made in knock sensor technology to optimize its use, which would not be expensive. It transports as well as any other gasoline and does not corrode like ethanol or harm engines like ethanol. But hey we wouldn’t want to win the war when we could subsidize ADM and boondoggles, would we?


130 posted on 12/01/2008 8:29:59 AM PST by AmericanVictory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies ]


To: AmericanVictory

Let me know when the infrastructure for this mysterious E II is in place and I will listen. I have nothing against viable alternatives. Where is the infrastructure for E II and who can make this mysterious formulation at a cost competitive price?? If it were so easy and cheap it would be in the market now. Small companies and venture capitalists are looking for just such a product.

ETOH does not cause undue engine wear—people in Iowa, Neb, and ILL have been burning it for 100s of millions of miles in all manner of vehicles since the 70s. I burned it in a Datsun truck in the early 80s—sold the truck with 112K miles to a guy that ran it for another 50K and sold it—this is not undue unusual engine wear. You are buying the vilification of the petroleum competitors and I am not. Every industry is subsidized down to the city level—where even small towns pay subsidies to attract industry with 50 employees or more. ADM does not own all the ETOH plants—many are farmer-owned co-ops.


131 posted on 12/01/2008 9:08:04 AM PST by Neoliberalnot ((Hallmarks of Liberalism: Ingratitude and Envy))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson