Ethanol requirement

Mott the Hoople said:
Right....and most of that corn is either green corn or surplus corn. Only about 5% of US corn production is exported (17 million metric tons in 2012) and the drought that year had a far, far greater impact than ethanol production did. Which again, is not really relevant as corn isn't needed to produce ethanol.
Click to expand...

It is relevant because it is mandated and used now, NOT some other source. Why are you purposely obtuse?
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Right....and most of that corn is either green corn or surplus corn. Only about 5% of US corn production is exported (17 million metric tons in 2012) and the drought that year had a far, far greater impact than ethanol production did. Which again, is not really relevant as corn isn't needed to produce ethanol.
Click to expand...

Do you understand even the most base tenets of supply and demand? Do you understand that the instant a commodity is no longer in surplus the price rises? Your responses are becoming laughable at this point.

From Pimp I expect lies, distortions and misinformation. From you I expect the truth, critical thought and research of any subject you are uncertain of before any pronouncements are made.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Why do you keep evading the point that ethanol can be easily produced without corn? You keep basing your argument on that premise. Remove corn from the equation and your argument pretty much falls apart.
Click to expand...

YES MOTT, AS SOON AS CORN IS REMOVED FROM THE EQUATION MY ARGUMENT WILL FALL APART.
Since it is mandated by the federal government though, that will not be anytime soon, hence your argument is both incorrect, harmful and dangerously ignorant on your part.
 
What you idiots refuse to understand is that for those who barely survive already, any increase in food costs lead to starvation.
This is not rocket surgery.

In Haiti people eat cookies made from dirt with almost no nutritional value at all, since it eases the pain of an empty stomach.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
if they had a quality electric car that worked now it would be selling like hotcakes.......they aren't.......
Click to expand...

Wrong.

Misinformation from the likes of you and your right wing corporate masters, in addition to the Cheney administrations actions have delayed the mass adoption of electric cars, again, an industry in it's infancy in it's modern incarnation. One hundred years ago, nearly 40% of all vehicles were electric, and due to the prevalence of steam powered vehicles at the time outnumbered petroleum fueled vehicles. Only corruption and backstabbing, dirty dealings between John Rockefeller (at the time owner of an illegal monopoly) and Henry Ford (innovative yet
ruthless automotive industrialist) ended the era of electric cars.

Then as now, the corrupt influence of oil producers prevented electric cars from flourishing.
Eventually the oil companies will see the light and become energy companies instead, in order to stay profitable and relevant.
 
Rune said:
Wrong.

Misinformation from the likes of you and your right wing corporate masters, in addition to the Cheney administrations actions have delayed the mass adoption of electric cars, again, an industry in it's infancy in it's modern incarnation. One hundred years ago, nearly 40% of all vehicles were electric, and due to the prevalence of steam powered vehicles at the time outnumbered petroleum fueled vehicles. Only corruption and backstabbing, dirty dealings between John Rockefeller (at the time owner of an illegal monopoly) and Henry Ford (innovative yet
ruthless automotive industrialist) ended the era of electric cars.

Then as now, the corrupt influence of oil producers prevented electric cars from flourishing.
Eventually the oil companies will see the light and become energy companies instead, in order to stay profitable and relevant.
Click to expand...


Friends of mine are working with hotels/motels in town to get charging stations set up. Their hope is that then we can advertise them to tourists and bump our tourist count up a bit more. They see electric cars as a good market, as does our tourist board.

If electric cars got the support that gas-powered cars got early from the govt, they'd be booming more.

What happened last time electric cars started being popular - when the California Air Resources Board (CARB) mandated certain percent of alternate fuel cars - the car companies marketed electric cars here in California - but only as leased cars. When the CARB changed its rules, the car companies pulled those cars out of the market, even though many of the car owners wanted to keep them. Only a few were able to keep their vehicles (a different set of friends kept their electric truck). They were starting to boom at the time - but the car companies, with help from CARB, killed them.

Now the option is there again, but it's still very early; it's in the "early adapter" stage right now. As more get out there, more people will buy them; unless the car companies or govt kill them again.
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
Not so sure about the batteries though.

http://editorial.autos.msn.com/article.aspx?cp-documentid=1176838
Click to expand...

Tom, of course you are opposed to electric cars, since you are a proponent of an oil company, BP.
However, tekkychick actually vastly understates the benefits of electric cars, beyond the fact that they are the most efficient.
Some examples;

With regenerative brakes, brakes never need repair.
With lighter weight and better aero-dynamics as a result of not needing an air inlet at the front of the car for cooling purposes, tires and roads last longer.
There is no radiator, water pump or hoses to ever cause a breakdown or need repair.
There is no exhaust system to repair.
There is no ignition system, distributor, spark plugs or spark plug wires to replace.
There is no fuel system to repair (fuel tank, fuel pump, filters, lines, injectors, distribution system, etc.)
There is no starter to repair.
In many instances, there is no transmission.
Because of less parts and more flexibility in placement, perfect weight balance is readily achieved providing far superior handling and safety.
Electric motors last virtually indefinitely, have only one moving part and only two very cheap replaceable parts (bearings) as opposed to gas and diesel engines with their many hundreds of parts, all of which wear out. I have 80 year old electric motors running some of my machinery which have never been touched.
Your battery concerns are irrelevant; even with cheap antiquated design lead-acid batteries, electric cars are more efficient than any other type.
For this reason alone, their use should be prevalent.
 
tekkychick said:
Friends of mine are working with hotels/motels in town to get charging stations set up. Their hope is that then we can advertise them to tourists and bump our tourist count up a bit more. They see electric cars as a good market, as does our tourist board.

If electric cars got the support that gas-powered cars got early from the govt, they'd be booming more.

What happened last time electric cars started being popular - when the California Air Resources Board (CARB) mandated certain percent of alternate fuel cars - the car companies marketed electric cars here in California - but only as leased cars. When the CARB changed its rules, the car companies pulled those cars out of the market, even though many of the car owners wanted to keep them. Only a few were able to keep their vehicles (a different set of friends kept their electric truck). They were starting to boom at the time - but the car companies, with help from CARB, killed them.

Now the option is there again, but it's still very early; it's in the "early adapter" stage right now. As more get out there, more people will buy them; unless the car companies or govt kill them again.
Click to expand...

Yes, a horrible story of corruption that Cheney was also involved in, along with all the major oil companies. We are cutting off our own nose to spite our face.
 
Rune said:
Tom, of course you are opposed to electric cars, since you are a proponent of an oil company, BP.
However, tekkychick actually vastly understates the benefits of electric cars, beyond the fact that they are the most efficient.
Some examples;

With regenerative brakes, brakes never need repair.
With lighter weight and better aero-dynamics as a result of not needing an air inlet at the front of the car for cooling purposes, tires and roads last longer.
There is no radiator, water pump or hoses to ever cause a breakdown or need repair.
There is no exhaust system to repair.
There is no ignition system, distributor, spark plugs or spark plug wires to replace.
There is no fuel system to repair (fuel tank, fuel pump, filters, lines, injectors, distribution system, etc.)
There is no starter to repair.
In many instances, there is no transmission.
Because of less parts and more flexibility in placement, perfect weight balance is readily achieved providing far superior handling and safety.
Electric motors last virtually indefinitely, have only one moving part and only two very cheap replaceable parts (bearings) as opposed to gas and diesel engines with their many hundreds of parts, all of which wear out. I have 80 year old electric motors running some of my machinery which have never been touched.
Your battery concerns are irrelevant; even with cheap antiquated design lead-acid batteries, electric cars are more efficient than any other type.
For this reason alone, their use should be prevalent.
Click to expand...

I am not opposed to them, I just don't want to be a guinea pig. They are at least one technological leap, if not two, away from being mass market products. Whatever happened to fuel cells? I might also point out that I have shares in Rockwood Holdings and Molycorp both of which benefit from electric car sales. Rockwood deals in lithium and Molycorp in rare earth oxides.
 
Last edited:
Aoxomoxoa said:
I am not opposed to them, I just don't want to be a guinea pig. They are at least one technological leap, if not two, away from being mass market products. Whatever happened to fuel cells?
Click to expand...

Nothing. Fuel cell technology has been "just a few years away" since the late forties. Simply speaking, hydrogen atoms are so small that they are nearly impossible to contain, especially at high pressure.
Of course there are plenty of other problems yet unsolved with hydrogen cells. Cheney used an imaginary "hydrogen economy" to both quash the EV-1 that tekky chick reffered to as well as delay the implementation of CAFE (corporate average fuel economy) standards which would have forced car companies to offer electric cars by 2004. Of course the auto manufacturers as well as oil companies are complicit as well.
 
Rune said:
Tom, of course you are opposed to electric cars, since you are a proponent of an oil company, BP.
However, tekkychick actually vastly understates the benefits of electric cars, beyond the fact that they are the most efficient.
Some examples;

With regenerative brakes, brakes never need repair.
With lighter weight and better aero-dynamics as a result of not needing an air inlet at the front of the car for cooling purposes, tires and roads last longer.
There is no radiator, water pump or hoses to ever cause a breakdown or need repair.
There is no exhaust system to repair.
There is no ignition system, distributor, spark plugs or spark plug wires to replace.
There is no fuel system to repair (fuel tank, fuel pump, filters, lines, injectors, distribution system, etc.)
There is no starter to repair.
In many instances, there is no transmission.
Because of less parts and more flexibility in placement, perfect weight balance is readily achieved providing far superior handling and safety.
Electric motors last virtually indefinitely, have only one moving part and only two very cheap replaceable parts (bearings) as opposed to gas and diesel engines with their many hundreds of parts, all of which wear out. I have 80 year old electric motors running some of my machinery which have never been touched.
Your battery concerns are irrelevant; even with cheap antiquated design lead-acid batteries, electric cars are more efficient than any other type.
For this reason alone, their use should be prevalent.
Click to expand...


thanks, Rune! Well said.

There's a documentary "Who Killed the Electric Car" - part of it covered how much less maintenance the cars need. Fascinating.
 
Rune said:
Nothing. Fuel cell technology has been "just a few years away" since the late forties. Simply speaking, hydrogen atoms are so small that they are nearly impossible to contain, especially at high pressure.
Of course there are plenty of other problems yet unsolved with hydrogen cells. Cheney used an imaginary "hydrogen economy" to both quash the EV-1 that tekky chick reffered to as well as delay the implementation of CAFE (corporate average fuel economy) standards which would have forced car companies to offer electric cars by 2004. Of course the auto manufacturers as well as oil companies are complicit as well.
Click to expand...

Jumping the gun again, I hadn't finished.

I am not opposed to them, I just don't want to be a guinea pig. They are at least one technological leap, if not two, away from being mass market products. Whatever happened to fuel cells? I might also point out that I have shares in Rockwood Holdings and Molycorp both of which benefit from electric car sales. Rockwood deals in lithium and Molycorp in rare earth oxides.
 
Rune said:
whereas here only the kernels are used
Click to expand...

which is ideal, because in the Midwest we NEED the stalk put back into the soil to replenish it.....remember, that was the reason they were growing the corn in the first place, before they started doing research on how they could use the kernels that were surplus......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top