Gas Problem solved...

[willie]

Unfortunately, I can see a re-run of the '80's with this push for oil independence. We don't have the backbone to go through with it. It's exactly like the stock market, if you can't handle the lean days...stay out of it. As soon as the ayrabs sense that we are serious, they will cut the price and like a bunch of lemmings, we'll chase the cheap oil. That's when we need a monster import tax.

 

[ylexot]

Sugar vs. corn...alcohol is the product of fermentation which is where yeast eats sugar and produces alcohol and CO2 (Hmmm...I wonder if the environmentalists know that).

 

[Vince]

...the current ethanol producers have federal help for the use of their product.

You and I need to get a lease on, say, 100 million acres, hire some farmers, build some big stills (which is how you make this stuff) and get us a lobbyist to get Uncle George to sign us up. Maybe we get the lobbyist first.

And if you can't use it to fuel automobiles, you can just flip a switch on the still and make corn liquor.

 

[ServiceGuy]

Last summer I drove across the country 5500 miles in my flex fuel van. After doing a little research about E85 or ethanol and looking for E85 at every stop for gas / fuel. I was only lucky enough to find E85 once, most all of the gas pumps in the mid-west are marked 15% ethanol. So the 10% that Maryland started is still a little weak by the stardards in other states. Gas prices were an average of 2.60 / 2.80 and the ethanol was a 1.42. The problem here ( east coast) is that there are NO plants to manufacture ethanol so there for the cost is high ( transportation cost mosty ) Ethanal can be made from many different crops ie: corn, sugar beats, sugar cane, rice and if you really research this topic there are more, so we ( the US ) wouldn't need to rely on just corn crops there are other crop that we can produce ethanal from. Here is a web-site that has some ethanal info http://www.e85fuel.com/index.php

 

[Larry Gude]

Do not dispair...

Unfortunately, I can see a re-run of the '80's with this push for oil independence. We don't have the backbone to go through with it. It's exactly like the stock market, if you can't handle the lean days...stay out of it. As soon as the ayrabs sense that we are serious, they will cut the price and like a bunch of lemmings, we'll chase the cheap oil. That's when we need a monster import tax.

...because the 70's, which I think is more remembered as a shock than the 80's, did beget significantly more efficient homes and cars and equipment. The thing 'conservers' do not want to recognize is that conservation does NOT lead to less overall use; it leads to more.

Think about it; a more energy efficient home is going to lead to...bigger homes. And it did.

More efficient cars lead to...longer commutes AND larger cars. And they did.

If you have a tool that does twice the work at 1/2 the cost, you're gonna look at ways of employing it more.

Now, back bone would be nice to get us in a position to be able to quickly respond to unstable oil prices because, once the infrastructure is in place it is easy, cheap and short term to increase refining capacity and enlarge crops; six months to a year, not years and years as oil originally took.

All this is is moonshining on a grand scale because that's pretty much what ethanol is.

We gotta coalesce as a people around the fundamental issue of national security that domestic bio fuel sounds like it would lead to. As you say, find some backbone.

This could be a golden opportunity politically.

 

[Larry Gude]

As I understand it...

Sugar vs. corn...alcohol is the product of fermentation which is where yeast eats sugar and produces alcohol and CO2 (Hmmm...I wonder if the environmentalists know that).

...nitrous oxide is a big by product. It's not a panacea for all things but not being oil, not being imported AND being renewable are desirable traits.

Think of it; not only will the fuel for your car be stable price wise but, a flip of a botton and BOOM...you got 1/3 more horsepower! Or....flip a button and be able to laugh and giggle as the cop writes your funny car azz up.

 

[Railroad]

Not that I care anymore since I don't drink, but I like the emoticon involved: WHAT ABOUT THE PRICE OF GOOD CORN WHISKEY?!?!?

 

[Larry Gude]

You got the idea, bro...

Last summer I drove across the country 5500 miles in my flex fuel van. After doing a little research about E85 or ethanol and looking for E85 at every stop for gas / fuel. I was only lucky enough to find E85 once, most all of the gas pumps in the mid-west are marked 15% ethanol. So the 10% that Maryland started is still a little weak by the stardards in other states. Gas prices were an average of 2.60 / 2.80 and the ethanol was a 1.42. The problem here ( east coast) is that there are NO plants to manufacture ethanol so there for the cost is high ( transportation cost mosty ) Ethanal can be made from many different crops ie: corn, sugar beats, sugar cane, rice and if you really research this topic there are more, so we ( the US ) wouldn't need to rely on just corn crops there are other crop that we can produce ethanal from. Here is a web-site that has some ethanal info http://www.e85fuel.com/index.php

...preach on.

 

[Larry Gude]

This is America...

Not that I care anymore since I don't drink, but I like the emoticon involved: WHAT ABOUT THE PRICE OF GOOD CORN WHISKEY?!?!?

...what're you worried about?

We put all the moonshiners on welfare!

 

[dck4shrt]

...preach on.

I'm glad that these gas price threads have moved out of the whining/complaining/kill the oil exec stage and onto some constructive thoughts. Now we're getting somewhere.

 

[dck4shrt]

...because the 70's, which I think is more remembered as a shock than the 80's, did beget significantly more efficient homes and cars and equipment. The thing 'conservers' do not want to recognize is that conservation does NOT lead to less overall use; it leads to more.

Think about it; a more energy efficient home is going to lead to...bigger homes. And it did.

More efficient cars lead to...longer commutes AND larger cars. And they did.

If you have a tool that does twice the work at 1/2 the cost, you're gonna look at ways of employing it more.

Now, back bone would be nice to get us in a position to be able to quickly respond to unstable oil prices because, once the infrastructure is in place it is easy, cheap and short term to increase refining capacity and enlarge crops; six months to a year, not years and years as oil originally took.

All this is is moonshining on a grand scale because that's pretty much what ethanol is.

We gotta coalesce as a people around the fundamental issue of national security that domestic bio fuel sounds like it would lead to. As you say, find some backbone.

This could be a golden opportunity politically.

Conservation does lead to less useage for that individual though, and that is money in the bank. If I want to conserve, I'll use less gas, I'll get myself around in a smaller car (same amount of useful work, and I'll save $). Not to sound selfish, but I don't care about what your weekly gas bill is, just mine. It's obvious that people aren't interested in national security via oil independence or else they would 'take one for the team'. It's more obvious that people are willing to trade a certain percentage of their capital on energy expenses, and that's it. If the price goes down/efficiency goes up, they'll use more, if the price goes up/efficiency goes down, they'll complain first, and then try to use less.

 

[Ponytail]

Anybody on here making their own diesel yet? Takes a little effort and small initial investment, but a guy that I used to work with here is doing it, tho he now lives in CA.

My HOA would prolly put a stop to it, somehow. Dunno. Curious though if any other diesel drivers outthere have looked into it and are currently doing it, or contemplating it.

 

[Larry Gude]

Well...

I'm glad that these gas price threads have moved out of the whining/complaining/kill the oil exec stage and onto some constructive thoughts. Now we're getting somewhere.

...this is going to be a titanic PR battle; a clear, feasible alternative to oil long before oils natural, market driven decline.

Either party faces all those 'record' profits in election battles pitting a 'new and green' candidate against a status quo candidate.

Oil is, by and large, imported only for gasoline and heating oil by us. We only use oil for something like 3-4% of electrical generation. So, between coal and bio grown fuels and nuke and all the benefits they would provide for domestic companies and employees, plus the environmental benefits plus the national security benefits plus the market stability benefits, I mean, this is THE uphill battle of the next 20 years.

We are still the #1 global consumer of fossil energy, using 25%. Us going 'native' makes ALL the sense you'd ever need for us as a nation and means, for the world, HUGE losses. Pumping slashed, tankers idled, platforms going under utilized, refining needs cut.

There would be a titanic crash in oil prices which we would need to find the resolve to resist.

 

[Larry Gude]

Yeah I agree...

Conservation does lead to less useage for that individual though, and that is money in the bank. If I want to conserve, I'll use less gas, I'll get myself around in a smaller car (same amount of useful work, and I'll save $). Not to sound selfish, but I don't care about what your weekly gas bill is, just mine. It's obvious that people aren't interested in national security via oil independence or else they would 'take one for the team'. It's more obvious that people are willing to trade a certain percentage of their capital on energy expenses, and that's it. If the price goes down/efficiency goes up, they'll use more, if the price goes up/efficiency goes down, they'll complain first, and then try to use less.

...100% but we're sold oil conservation as the responsible thing to do for us all, resulting in a longer lasting oil supply, less burning and all the rest, which could not be further from the truth.

Frankly, not to sound to selfish, but 'selfishness' is the very thing we need most; national self interest. Nothing, NOTHING would achieve the goals of 'greens' and people freaking over gas prices faster than us burning up oil as fast as we can because THAT would provide the economic, market driven tipping point to get on to the next great thing.

 

[dck4shrt]

...100% but we're sold oil conservation as the responsible thing to do for us all, resulting in a longer lasting oil supply, less burning and all the rest, which could not be further from the truth.

Frankly, not to sound to selfish, but 'selfishness' is the very thing we need most; national self interest. Nothing, NOTHING would achieve the goals of 'greens' and people freaking over gas prices faster than us burning up oil as fast as we can because THAT would provide the economic, market driven tipping point to get on to the next great thing.

Vote for Larry!

It's obvious that our interests lie in burning as much oil as possible for as cheap as we possibly can. The initiatives for conservation would always have to be market-driven or grass roots, although I'm not sure a grass roots approach would work because human biology might not work that way.

 

[Larry Gude]

The awesome power of SOMD.com...

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/05/08/D8HFP2702.html

Crude-oil prices dropped below $69 a barrel Monday on rising U.S. gasoline supplies and a letter from Iran's leader to President Bush proposing "new solutions" to escalating tensions. This unprecedented sea change in attitude and willingness to seek compromise is said to have been precipitated over Iranian concerns that the smart azzes over at somd.com (an on-line Southern Maryland relocation and resource guide) are busily promoting effective solutions to the US's national energy policy needs which represent an intense and deep, but peaceful, challenge to Iraq's goal of wringing every last dollar out of Bruzillas pocket so that he has to actually borrow a dollar to pay off a Presidential sweepstakes gambling dept. Sources say this financial blow to Iran, not Bruzzilla, could also delay, by years, long standing plans to bring about armageddon and the end of Iran by precipitating a nuclear exchange with Israel.

Developing...

 

[Larry Gude]

Link...

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/05/08/D8HFP2702.html


..stink, a bottle of ink...

 

[wileyCoyote]

Sugar vs. corn...alcohol is the product of fermentation which is where yeast eats sugar and produces alcohol and CO2 (Hmmm...I wonder if the environmentalists know that).

Yes, but the CO2 from ethanol production is "free"...ie already in the environment so its not as bad. Besides by growing more corn or sugar beets (or whatever) this CO2 is recaptured. The CO2 and other gases emitted from burning fossil fuels is locked up in those fuels, or in other words produces a net growth in the amount of CO2.

 

[jazz lady]

"Automobile Internal Combustion Engine Fuel Source Problem Solved"

Better?

Much.

Life with the over-educated.

Ain't it a beyotch?

 

[kom526]

All this is is moonshining on a grand scale because that's pretty much what ethanol is.

Maryland rocked with stills during Prohibition, the eastern shore was riddled with them. ->"Rumrunners of the Chesapeake"


This sounds good in theory but, in order for this to work completely, the price of the corn per bushel has to be more than the cost to produce it. You know as a nurseryman the costs of equipment, maintenance, fuels and property. I'm not saying these are insurmountable but there has to be viable solutions. Short term solutions could be 0-.5% loans for equipment purchases, reduction in land taxes for land used only for the production of corn, sugar beets and or cane. Low rate long term loans for land purchases, and forgiveness of debts and/or back taxes...to an extent.