Wow, have you seen the Price of corn!!!

[Shadowrider]

Just FYI to all the anti-ethanol people: the corn used for ethanol production is sold off as cattle feed, the same corn that would have otherwise just been sold as cattle feed in the first damn place. Ethanol is not a bad thing, it is not as corrosive as some would have you believe. in 10 and 15% levels, there is not enough content to do any damage, that is BS. E85 is 85% ethanol, now that stuff requires different types of hoses and pumps in your car, but that is it. Most new cars are compatible with it. On top of all that, I have done the research and testing myself- my van got 2-3 MPGs better when running ethanol over straight gas. I have verified this with several tests.

That is a physical impossibility. Ethanol contains less energy than gasoline. If you got better mileage then your driving habits and/or the driving conditions were better.

 

[LightningCrash]

LC, just look at the past few winters where we had the largest percentage of snow cover in the US. Also, all the record low temps in the winter of 10/11. Now I know you cannot prove or disprove a trend based on statistical anomalies but remember what the GW crowd was saying? They were saying that the record cold and snow was proof of GW. So basically no matter what the weather, they will claim and manipulate data to try and bolster their theory.

Also, if the GW people were serious about CO2 concerns, they would be rabid in their support of nuclear energy. It is the only 0 carbon source of energy capable of meeting demand. Instead the GW crowd pushes solutions like cap and trade, wind, solar, and conservation. They are not proposing serious solutions but rather political ones.

Look, I don't have a problem with wind or solar power but that is not a source that will replace fossil fuels and I don't think many people are willing to go back to living like the Amish to save mother earth. So yes I am very skeptical of the GW movement based on their lack of solutions and irrefutable evidence that our current weather is unprecedented.

We could cut back and ride bikes and use candles, then one volcano will erupt and spew out a decades worth of CO2 and make it a moot point. We are not as big and important as we may think we are to mother earth.

look, you're just arguing against the people instead of the science. who has time for that.

Also, volcano CO2 emissions have never matched our current CO2 emissions rate. We would need around 700 Mount Pinatubo-sized eruptions to match one year of our current CO2 emissions rate.

 

[71buickfreak]

That is a physical impossibility. Ethanol contains less energy than gasoline. If you got better mileage then your driving habits and/or the driving conditions were better.

I never said it made a lot of sense, but it is in fact the truth. I would do same day test using E10 and straight gas, driving the same distances, the same speed, etc. It's kind of my job to this sort of thing. There is a lot of misinformation out there. With straight fuel every single time I bought it, the fuel economy in my van (which was a flexfuel vehicle- 2008 Chevy Uplander 3900 V6) I averaged 20-21 on the highway at 75-80 mph. The same vehicle, the same distance the same road, the same day with E10 averaged 23-24 MPG. the data doesn't lie, maybe the gas station was cutting their gas with something, but the data shows the gain.

 

[DPI]

I never said it made a lot of sense, but it is in fact the truth. I would do same day test using E10 and straight gas, driving the same distances, the same speed, etc. It's kind of my job to this sort of thing. There is a lot of misinformation out there. With straight fuel every single time I bought it, the fuel economy in my van (which was a flexfuel vehicle- 2008 Chevy Uplander 3900 V6) I averaged 20-21 on the highway at 75-80 mph. The same vehicle, the same distance the same road, the same day with E10 averaged 23-24 MPG. the data doesn't lie, maybe the gas station was cutting their gas with something, but the data shows the gain.

Regular gasoline has approximately 114k btu per gallon. And gasoline with 10% mbte (ethanol) has 112k btu per gallon. Ethanol has less energy and has to burn 1.02 gge to every gge of 100% gasoline to produce the same amount of energy.

 

[DPI]

www.hho4free.com/gasoline_vs_ethanol.htm show energy comparisons from different types of liquid fuel.

 

[71buickfreak]

Trust me, I know how it sounds. All the formulas in the world don't change the FACT that my van got better MPGs with E10 than it did with straight gas.

 

[farmerbyron]

look, you're just arguing against the people instead of the science. who has time for that.

Also, volcano CO2 emissions have never matched our current CO2 emissions rate. We would need around 700 Mount Pinatubo-sized eruptions to match one year of our current CO2 emissions rate.

Yes I am arguing against the people behind the science. When they push grossly exaggerated climate models (see graph) and then after Katrina claim that hurricanes are going to be more frequent and violent due to GW and be so amazingly incorrect (see link) and also claim that a colder and snowier than normal winter is proof of GW (again see link) then yes, I doubt what these guys come up with. They are selling fear because pretty much all these climatologists are publicly funded and without fear of impending disaster, they lose funding and have to find a new job. It is obvious that we are not going to agree on this issue and we have derailed this thread enough. I'm sure it will come up again and I look forward to debating again.


[Broken External Image]


http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/05/16/hurricane-drought-days-at-an-all-time-high-katrina-karma/


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/26/opinion/26cohen.html?_r=1&src=twrhp

 

[LightningCrash]

Yes I am arguing against the people behind the science. When they push grossly exaggerated climate models (see graph) and then after Katrina claim that hurricanes are going to be more frequent and violent due to GW and be so amazingly incorrect (see link) and also claim that a colder and snowier than normal winter is proof of GW (again see link) then yes, I doubt what these guys come up with. They are selling fear because pretty much all these climatologists are publicly funded and without fear of impending disaster, they lose funding and have to find a new job. It is obvious that we are not going to agree on this issue and we have derailed this thread enough. I'm sure it will come up again and I look forward to debating again.


[Broken External Image]


http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/05/16/hurricane-drought-days-at-an-all-time-high-katrina-karma/


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/26/opinion/26cohen.html?_r=1&src=twrhp

graph's not showing up, guess you'll have to cherry pick something else to attack.

frequent use of "they" without attribution... in reality you're lambasting one or two people and claiming it represents the whole field.

good luck with that.

as i said before:
"look, you're just arguing against the people instead of the science. who has time for that."

just waste your time making fun of al gore.

 

[yukonjack]

Trust me, I know how it sounds. All the formulas in the world don't change the FACT that my van got better MPGs with E10 than it did with straight gas.

Yet my 1992 Ford F150 5.0 gets 4 miles more to the gallon on real gas vs. the ethanol blend.

 

[farmerbyron]

graph's not showing up, guess you'll have to cherry pick something else to attack.

frequent use of "they" without attribution... in reality you're lambasting one or two people and claiming it represents the whole field.

good luck with that.

as i said before:
"look, you're just arguing against the people instead of the science. who has time for that."

just waste your time making fun of al gore.

Thought there was a consensus among climatologists? Huh.


Well regardless of anything I am going to burn 100 gal of diesel per day until the ground is tilled because hungry people are far more dangerous than whatever in the hell my carbon footprint is.