• Welcome to OS2World OLD-STATIC-BACKUP Forum.
 

News:

This is an old OS2World backup forum for reference only. IT IS READ ONLY!!!

If you need help with OS/2 - eComStation visit http://www.os2world.com/forum

Main Menu

My Smart Fortwo Pure

Started by BigWarpGuy, 2008.03.28, 19:31:41

Previous topic - Next topic

Robert Deed

#45
First of all..  I really doubt that people are pawning things to pay for fuel, and if they were then they would be doing it anyway because the 4 dollars per fillup extra that it has cost me over the last 2 years is certainly not causing me to go out on a pawning spree.

The U.S. economy is less about the price of fuel and more about everything else which is wrong today.  We are still on average paying less per gallon of fuel then most of the world is paying for a liter  (3.8l per gallon dude). 

Second, Ethanol is NOT A SUSTAINABLE PRODUCT.  Ethanol production is very expensive and uses huge amounts of resources (diesel for the tractors, petroleum or petroleum or coal based electric for the refinement, WATER.. yes.. Corn needs WATER to grow).  It uses up crops which would be otherwise used for food.  It does not burn at a sufficient temperature to be used efficiently in current cars.  Cars which are compatible with it get much worse fuel economy while using it.  A current production car would need larger fuel tanks (to keep the same range on lower mileage), larger fuel pumps to pump the extra volume required to MOVE THE CAR.  Larger injectors to get the fuel into the engine, higher voltage ignition systems to get the fuel to the correct temperature in order to have a clean burn and avoid detonation.   

Do you even understand how an internal combustion engine functions?


Third.. E85 IS AN AMERICAN PRODUCT.  IT COMES FROM AMERICAN FARMERS.  We sell it to other countries.

Quote from: saborion2 on 2008.04.22, 18:25:47
QuotePosted by: Robert Deed
Ethanol requires radical redesign in order to be feasible.   Per gallon ethanol has a much lower btu output which translates into less power, which means larger fuel pumps, larger injectors, lower fuel mileage and larger fuel tanks.

Ethanol also is expensive to produce and since ethanol cannot be feasibly used to power tanker trucks or tractors then the production of ethanol is going to be dependent on another fuel.

Hey Robert;

From what I saw on the news after posting my earlier comment it will appear that the economic situation for some folks living here in the US is really getting bad - can you imagine folks taking long held family jewels to the pawn shops to be able to afford a few gallons of gas at the petrol station (in some cases to be able to keep a roof over their heads); so, come on dude where are the comparison figures to show that ethanol cannot be a viable alternative to imported petroleum products; also, why does it appear that the Brazilian engineers, scientists and other business people can get it right with Ethanol 85 (E85) whilst Americans cannot. Do you honestly believe that this is a time to be debating or is it a time for some real action? ??? ::) 8)



Robert Deed

Brazil still is using E85, good old American corn ethanol.  While they have discovered ways of producing ethanol from other crops, as far as I am aware none are currently in production today.  I have alot more faith in sunfuel since it is close to being viable, can be used in any currently available diesel engine without modification, has close to no co2 impact and diesel engines are more efficient then gassers anyway.

That being said, I love my Volkswagen 1.8t gasser =)  Just wish it didn't use so much gas.. =)  29mpg isn't cutting it with my commute.

Quote from: lwriemen on 2008.04.22, 19:34:29
Quote from: kimhav on 2008.04.22, 18:58:36
... corn has sky rocket as well due to ... the ethanol producers. So I guess that there are some valid arguments in that ethanol hurts food production and is just not a smear campaign from the oil industry.

Also ethanol costs twice as much as gasoline produce and consume 30% compared when driving a car on gas.

There are a better ways to produce ethanol than with corn. As someone alluded to, Brazil is using sugar cane, which is more cost effective.

Scientists have found that switchgrass is also another cost effective source for ethanol, but in the USA, the corn producers have a good lobby that is keeping government subsidies for ethanol targeted at corn. Don't blame the scientists; they aren't the ones pulling the purse strings.


saborion2

#47
QuoteFirst of all..  I really doubt that people are pawning things to pay for fuel, and if they were then they would be doing it anyway because the 4 dollars per fillup extra that it has cost me over the last 2 years is certainly not causing me to go out on a pawning spree.

Second, Ethanol is NOT A SUSTAINABLE PRODUCT.  Ethanol production is very expensive and uses huge amounts of resources (diesel for the tractors, petroleum or petroleum or coal based electric for the refinement, WATER.. yes.. Corn needs WATER to grow).  It uses up crops which would be otherwise used for food.  It does not burn at a sufficient temperature to be used efficiently in current cars.  Cars which are compatible with it get much worse fuel economy while using it.  A current production car would need larger fuel tanks (to keep the same range on lower mileage), larger fuel pumps to pump the extra volume required to MOVE THE CAR.  Larger injectors to get the fuel into the engine, higher voltage ignition systems to get the fuel to the correct temperature in order to have a clean burn and avoid detonation.   

Do you even understand how an internal combustion engine functions?


Third.. E85 IS AN AMERICAN PRODUCT.  IT COMES FROM AMERICAN FARMERS.  We sell it to other countries.

I am a Certified Level 11 NDT Tech. and attended Technical College in England and also prepared samples for materials testing for the "Concorde" airplane (and can tell you a few things about the production of SWEDISH STEEL). Do the words Engineering Thermodynamics make much sense to you?. And, Do you wish to know more. I can be your teacher. 8)

Robert Deed

#48
Actually yes, Engineering thermodynamics does make sense to me.  Though I have never worked on a project as vast as the Concorde, I understand most principles of engineering.  And obviously when you are dealing with an aircraft of supersonic speeds you are going to need to understand the effect temperature has on any materials which the aircraft is constructed. 

This however does not have any relation to the argument that ethanol is a good product.  It is clearly documented even by ethanol producers and the auto industry that ethanol is not a good way to power an internal combustion engine.  Any product which uses more energy to create then can be gained from the use of that energy source is non-sustainable.  This doesn't change no matter how much you "know".


Quote from: saborion2 on 2008.04.23, 07:57:42
QuoteFirst of all..  I really doubt that people are pawning things to pay for fuel, and if they were then they would be doing it anyway because the 4 dollars per fillup extra that it has cost me over the last 2 years is certainly not causing me to go out on a pawning spree.

Second, Ethanol is NOT A SUSTAINABLE PRODUCT.  Ethanol production is very expensive and uses huge amounts of resources (diesel for the tractors, petroleum or petroleum or coal based electric for the refinement, WATER.. yes.. Corn needs WATER to grow).  It uses up crops which would be otherwise used for food.  It does not burn at a sufficient temperature to be used efficiently in current cars.  Cars which are compatible with it get much worse fuel economy while using it.  A current production car would need larger fuel tanks (to keep the same range on lower mileage), larger fuel pumps to pump the extra volume required to MOVE THE CAR.  Larger injectors to get the fuel into the engine, higher voltage ignition systems to get the fuel to the correct temperature in order to have a clean burn and avoid detonation.   

Do you even understand how an internal combustion engine functions?


Third.. E85 IS AN AMERICAN PRODUCT.  IT COMES FROM AMERICAN FARMERS.  We sell it to other countries.

I am a Certified Level 11 NDT Tech. and attended Technical College in England and also prepared samples for materials testing for the "Concorde" airplane (and can tell you a few things about the production of SWEDISH STEEL). Do the words Engineering Thermodynamics make much sense to you?. And, Do you wish to know more. I can be your teacher. 8)


RobertM

saborion2,

Here's a link to something interesting...
$1/Gallon "Green Gasoline" In Sight

And, unlike your links and posts, it's actually relevant!  ;)

Enjoy!
Robert


|
|
Kirk's 5 Year Mission Continues at:
Star Trek New Voyages
|
|


saborion2

Re:
QuoteThis however does not have any relation to the argument that ethanol is a good product.  It is clearly documented even by ethanol producers and the auto industry that ethanol is not a good way to power an internal combustion engine.  Any product which uses more energy to create then can be gained from the use of that energy source is non-sustainable.  This doesn't change no matter how much you "know".

Guess that you are quite free to say whatever "you" wish, anyway it will all come down to this; and, that is - others will have their "say" too: ;D

QuoteWhat really interested me about this was that grain alcohol (ethanol) is a renewable fuel, and also, it is pretty much pollution free, since the by-products of combustion are only water and CO2. Furthermore, it is economical to make,  and your car will run cooler, faster, and better on ethanol. And, best of all, you don't have to fight wars in the Middle East to protect it.

The reason I call it "sunlight in a bottle" is because ethanol is a liquid solar fuel which can be used in internal combustion engines. It really is a very concentrated form of sunlight. (Moonshiners call it "white lightining", but for a very different reason.)

Think about it: plants are the world's most advanced solar collectors, and they have been at it for millions of years. Petroleum is fossilized solar energy, but present-day sunlight is stored by plants in the form of sugars and starches. Yeasts are little critters which like to eat sugar and alcohol is their waste product. Yeast organisms convert the sugar into a simpler and more useable form of energy.
You don't have to throw away the internal combustion engine to convert a car to run on alcohol: just some minor adjustments, really. Electric cars will still need to get their power from somewhere (usually the dirty old electrical grid), and they have to carry around a lot of heavy batteries, but only have an effective range of a couple hundred miles.

Alcohol, on the other hand, can give you the same miles per tank of fuel, with the same or better acceleration.
I personally have driven five of my own cars on it, as well as many others. I have been able to get the same miles per gallon on 160 to 180 proof as I did with gasoline. There is hardly any pollution: no heavy hydrocarbons, so no SMOG. Best of all, I found I had the freedom of driving around on a fuel I had made instead of buying it from fat cat oil barons. I didn't mix the alcohol with gas in those days: I ran it straight.

Quotehttp://running_on_alcohol.tripod.com/

QuotePaul Dana racing with E85 power!


saborion2

Quote from: RobertM on 2008.04.23, 21:02:20
saborion2,

Here's a link to something interesting...
$1/Gallon "Green Gasoline" In Sight

And, unlike your links and posts, it's actually relevant!  ;)

Enjoy!


Your post was hilarious; ;D  I actually served a "five-year" period of apprenticeship with a large sugar corporation is South America; and, alcohol was one of the by-products that were manufactured. After graduation I moved up in the management structure that ran the operations.

And; "Experience teaches wisdom".  8)



Robert Deed

And here is one which is relevant today because this plant is currently in operation and should be able to meet full production shortly, and to boot it can be used in any unmodified diesel car or truck, which means it can be used in all stages of product creation and transportation.. (hence sustainable).

http://www.azom.com/news.asp?newsID=3752

Quote from: RobertM on 2008.04.23, 21:02:20
saborion2,

Here's a link to something interesting...
$1/Gallon "Green Gasoline" In Sight

And, unlike your links and posts, it's actually relevant!  ;)

Enjoy!
Robert

Robert Deed

#53
Quote from: saborion2 on 2008.04.23, 21:05:18
Re:
QuoteThis however does not have any relation to the argument that ethanol is a good product.  It is clearly documented even by ethanol producers and the auto industry that ethanol is not a good way to power an internal combustion engine.  Any product which uses more energy to create then can be gained from the use of that energy source is non-sustainable.  This doesn't change no matter how much you "know".

Guess that you are quite free to say whatever "you" wish, anyway it will all come down to this; and, that is - others will have their "say" too: ;D


This isn't an advertising campaign.  Believe and say whatever you wish, this will not change physics.  This will not change the facts.  A bad product is a bad product no matter how good you may personally believe it to be.  It is simply a matter of a particular molecular bond not being able to release enough energy to be worth the cost of refining said product.

Yes, Formula races are run on e85.  These cars had a 30% drop in performance, so bad they were thinking about bringing the limit back up to 10 cylinders to make up for the difference.   There is a big difference between competive racing and something which could be used in a street car.  For one, the race cars are going around a track and their fuel supply is never far away.  Also, f1 in general has fixed pit stops and regulated how often they need to refuel.  Also, racing is heavily subsidized by sponsorships.. in this case.. a few companies which create and market e85.   

Many of these cars have engines swapped out within one season.  As internal combustion engines age their energy creation potential drops.  This is because of wear of the pistons and seals and change in the compression of the engine.  While formula cars will never experience this issue, a road car will over it's lifespan.. when you start with 30% less power, and then  have to deal with the effects of time on the engine you will very quickly have a car which drives unsatisfactory.  Not to mention, it makes for very hard cold weather starts.

I tend not to pay attention to adverts because it just leaves me looking like a fool.

saborion2

#54
Quote from: Robert Deed on 2008.04.24, 02:55:08
Quote from: saborion2 on 2008.04.23, 21:05:18
Re:
QuoteThis however does not have any relation to the argument that ethanol is a good product.  It is clearly documented even by ethanol producers and the auto industry that ethanol is not a good way to power an internal combustion engine.  Any product which uses more energy to create then can be gained from the use of that energy source is non-sustainable.  This doesn't change no matter how much you "know".

Guess that you are quite free to say whatever "you" wish, anyway it will all come down to this; and, that is - others will have their "say" too: ;D


This isn't an advertising campaign.  Believe and say whatever you wish, this will not change physics.  This will not change the facts.  A bad product is a bad product no matter how good you may personally believe it to be.  It is simply a matter of a particular molecular bond not being able to release enough energy to be worth the cost of refining said product.

Yes, Formula races are run on e85.  These cars had a 30% drop in performance, so bad they were thinking about bringing the limit back up to 10 cylinders to make up for the difference.   There is a big difference between competive racing and something which could be used in a street car.  For one, the race cars are going around a track and their fuel supply is never far away.  Also, f1 in general has fixed pit stops and regulated how often they need to refuel.  Also, racing is heavily subsidized by sponsorships.. in this case.. a few companies which create and market e85.   

Many of these cars have engines swapped out within one season.  As internal combustion engines age their energy creation potential drops.  This is because of wear of the pistons and seals and change in the compression of the engine.  While formula cars will never experience this issue, a road car will over it's lifespan.. when you start with 30% less power, and then  have to deal with the effects of time on the engine you will very quickly have a car which drives unsatisfactory.  Not to mention, it makes for very hard cold weather starts.

I tend not to pay attention to adverts because it just leaves me looking like a fool.

Agreed,
Quotethis is not an advertising campaign
in addition to this, it is sincerely hoped that you are keeping an eye on the "economics" as this is where the
Quote"numbers crunching"
aspects these discussions come in - hence the relevant sophisticated computer applications; and, this is where we are at with COMFETAR - LIVE. Hope you get the idea.  ;D ::) ;D

Anyway, regardless of what you or I may think others are actually doing what they think is best for them and are pressing on with their activities.  ;) re:
QuoteSugar cane diesel, gas, and jet fuel coming from Amyris

Amyris, a rapidly growing biotech company that coaxes genetically enhanced microbes to produce fuel and medicine, has signed a deal with two Brazilian companies to come out with a sugar-cane-based diesel and other fuels by 2010.

Right now, Brazilian sugar cane growers convert a substantial amount of their crop into ethanol. Ethanol, however, isn't as flexible a fuel as biodiesel. For one thing, only certain types of cars can run on ethanol-heavy fuels like E85. Biodiesel works pretty much in any diesel engine. Ethanol is an alcohol. Biodiesel and other fuels produced via Amyris' process are hydrocarbons. The hydrocarbons get produced by designer microbes turning food into fuel rather than geological forces, but they are hydrocarbons nonetheless. The well-to-wheel (or crop-to-exhaust pipe) output of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, however, is lower with biofuels.

http://www.news.com/8301-11128_3-9926823-54.html?tag=nefd.top

EVERYONE CAN APPRECIATE TECHNOLOGIES THAT GO FROM GAS-FRIENDLY TO GAS-FREE.

That's why Chevy offers seven models with an EPA estimated 30 MPG highway or better,(1) plus more vehicle choices today than any brand that can run on cleaner–burning, mostly renewable E85 ethanol.(2) It's also why we've introduced both Malibu Hybrid and Tahoe Hybrid–America's first full–size hybrid SUV.(3)

http://www.chevrolet.com/fuelsolutions/


RobertM

I know this thread is in the "Off Topic discussions" section... but the title of that section means...
NOT OS/2 related BUT on topic for the particular thread... what that means is if the thread in that section is about Nuclear Physics, then the posts should be about Nuclear Physics...

...the occassional off topic post is fine. But it would be appreciated if the continuous, repeated, off-topic posts were minimized such as the repeated (in a dozen threads, including this totally unrelated one) posts that pretty much say nothing more than:
Quote
aspects these discussions come in - hence the relevant sophisticated computer applications; and, this is where we are at with COMFETAR - LIVE. Hope you get the idea. 

...or perhaps I have missed the relationship of that to the current (and various other) discussion.

Thanks,
Robert


|
|
Kirk's 5 Year Mission Continues at:
Star Trek New Voyages
|
|


saborion2

#56
Quote from: RobertM on 2008.04.24, 03:30:18
I know this thread is in the "Off Topic discussions" section... but the title of that section means...
NOT OS/2 related BUT on topic for the particular thread... what that means is if the thread in that section is about Nuclear Physics, then the posts should be about Nuclear Physics...

...the occassional off topic post is fine. But it would be appreciated if the continuous, repeated, off-topic posts were minimized such as the repeated (in a dozen threads, including this totally unrelated one) posts that pretty much say nothing more than:
Quote
aspects these discussions come in - hence the relevant sophisticated computer applications; and, this is where we are at with COMFETAR - LIVE. Hope you get the idea. 

...or perhaps I have missed the relationship of that to the current (and various other) discussion.


Do you actually read the comments, understand fully what is being gotten at with regards to the requirements for an international project implementation such as that of a large hydro-electric facility or aluminum smelter; or, are you just commenting for that sole purpose?  8)

BTW; COMFETAR - LIVE is the acronym for Computerized Model For Financial, Economic and Technical Analyses and Reporting - Live (Real Time)

All for your information and guidance.

Regards.


Robert Deed

But Robert, we all know that hyping a product up is much more important then actually having a product which can be delivered.  So actually, I see the connection.  Ethanol is not a deliverable sustainable product, and neither is his much mentioned software =).

However, I actually enjoyed the original discussion about the smart and it actually did help me decide about some things, mainly that I would love to own one of those cute little cars except for the conditions of the roads on my commute.  Anyway, I am stepping out of this.

Quote from: RobertM on 2008.04.24, 03:30:18
I know this thread is in the "Off Topic discussions" section... but the title of that section means...
NOT OS/2 related BUT on topic for the particular thread... what that means is if the thread in that section is about Nuclear Physics, then the posts should be about Nuclear Physics...

...the occassional off topic post is fine. But it would be appreciated if the continuous, repeated, off-topic posts were minimized such as the repeated (in a dozen threads, including this totally unrelated one) posts that pretty much say nothing more than:
Quote
aspects these discussions come in - hence the relevant sophisticated computer applications; and, this is where we are at with COMFETAR - LIVE. Hope you get the idea. 

...or perhaps I have missed the relationship of that to the current (and various other) discussion.

Thanks,
Robert


RobertM

Hey Robert,

As a relatively related side note, Chrysler just recently announced (most recent Detroit Auto Show) that they plan on releasing an all electric car in the very near future that should get over 250miles/charge and cost about the same as equivalent capability/size gas cars.

I'm looking forward to a solution such as that, which then can be charged via a home solar setup or a bio-generator or geothermal setup (a lot of promising things in the works in that front using geothermal and Sterling Engines).

Robert


|
|
Kirk's 5 Year Mission Continues at:
Star Trek New Voyages
|
|


Robert Deed

That does sound interesting.  I would love to see if Chrysler could do it, it might just make Diamler keep them around.  Especially since chrylser/dodge one of the most fuel inefficient companies out there (along with ford).  I really wish Chevy could get the volt out the door a bit quicker because that is one of the first electric cars I find somewhat interesting.

On the other hand, my home is fairly insuitable for solar panels and using public service would just be wasteful.  However, I wouldn't mind having a volt for my commute and then having my gasser for when I would require greater range.

Quote from: RobertM on 2008.04.24, 05:04:24
Hey Robert,

As a relatively related side note, Chrysler just recently announced (most recent Detroit Auto Show) that they plan on releasing an all electric car in the very near future that should get over 250miles/charge and cost about the same as equivalent capability/size gas cars.

I'm looking forward to a solution such as that, which then can be charged via a home solar setup or a bio-generator or geothermal setup (a lot of promising things in the works in that front using geothermal and Sterling Engines).

Robert