h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Here's a link to some audio on the subject:
http://discover.npr.org/features/feature.jhtml?wfId=1145150

I haven't had the chance to listen to it yet (this terminal has no speakers) . . . I'll look for some text.

Almost all of the stories about ethanol are about the new energy bill, so I'm having a little trouble finding what I'm looking for. Here's something pretty close, though:
http://www.morningsun.net/stories/050402/usw_0504020025.shtml

Are they not the Governator's vehicle of choice? Says a lot, that does...

"Says a lot, that does..."

Certainly does. Since his own favourite vehicle is a Hummer, he's really going to have a responsible attitude towards the nation's energy usage!

If anyone is ever in any doubt about the innate stupidity of the average American, they need look no further than the fact that they elected Arnold as Governor of California.

In Arnold's own words: "You have to do everything possible to win, you know, no matter what..."

> If anyone is ever in any doubt about the innate stupidity of the average American, they need look no further than the fact that they elected Arnold as Governor of California.

I'm not sure it proves anything about the stupidity of the 'average' american, but it certainly shows how strange Californians are.

You guys overseas probably don't get to watch Conan O'Brien's late night talk show - he's had a couple of faked interviews with Schwarzenneger (a picture of Arnold is put on the pop-up tv screen, then somebody else is blue-screened in to provide his lip movements and speech.) They've been *really* funny.

I read this in the Straight Dope article, and this struck me as incorrect.

> Ethanol contains only about two-thirds as much energy per gallon as gasoline, so cars using ethanol blends get lower mileage.

If ethanol burns hotter and faster, it seems to me that it would contain more energy, not less.

Ethanol is an interesting connundrum (spelling?). In producing it we produce less food, since the *growing medium* is some kind of hydrocarbon type food, although *biomass* seems to be a logical, although labour intensive alternative-
http://rncan.gc.ca:80/es/etb/cetc/cetc01/htmldocs/factsheet_ethanol_the_green_gasoline_e.html.
At the same time, the pollution created by ethanol is minimal, water and CO2 when done right. At the same time it is easier to use to create H2 which is the ideal fuel. Also it is renewable, since food is growable rather than *mined* or drilled for. As to it's energy efficiency, from the same site above- "In 1974, it cost $2.50 to produce a litre of ethanol from wood. As a result of cooperative R&D, the cost is now estimated at $0.30-0.35/litre. Within ten years, researchers expect production costs to drop to $0.22/litre." which seems promising.

If we were to for example use logic rather than current practice, we could take the enormous methane produced by human waste and use it.
All it would take would be will and the ability to accept that one's vehicle was run by something similar to Grandpa's problem...

"I'm not sure it proves anything about the stupidity of the 'average' american, but it certainly shows how strange Californians are."

Great! Lentilla, now you've found yet another way for your countrymen to weasle out of taking any kind of responsibility for the people they are. Now it seems Californians are non-typical Americans. So the last resort, it seems, is to claim, state-by-state, that 'those people are not real Americans' until there's only your little corner of the world left.

What will it take for you to realise that Americans are the worst kind of dog filth on earth and it's all YOUR fault?

Empty

Your bitter posts have given you away. Clearly you are not a rational debater, but instead merely rabid & frothing at the mouth. Please, wipe the unsightly spittle from your mouth and go see a vet.

dave

Doc

great link. The article says the following:

First, ethanol produces less CO but more of other types of pollutants:
"Though ethanol can reduce carbon monoxide emissions, the fuel may well produce more of other air pollutants."

Second, it takes more energy to make ethanol based fuel than you get back!
"making a gallon of ethanol takes 70 percent more energy than the finished product contains. And because that production energy comes mostly from fossil fuels, gasohol isn't just wasting money but hastening the depletion of nonrenewable resources."

Lastly - someone commented that we need electricity to generate H2. I stated originally that we could use renewable sources. Not nuclear, not fossil, renewable. I was mainly thinking of wind power, which has been undergoing surprisng advances. There's also wave action - bouys whose motion generates electricity.

dave

" Clearly you are not a rational debater, but instead merely rabid & frothing at the mouth. Please, wipe the unsightly spittle from your mouth and go see a vet."

No, it's quite rational Dave. And, in Lentilla's case, quite well deserved.

"What will it take for you to realise that Americans are the worst kind of dog filth on earth and it's all YOUR fault?"

That's a plural "your," right? Because I know I sure wouldn't want the guilt of an entire country on my shoulders.

Have you gone to the vet yet, empty?

dave

Doc, that article may be a little suspect, or at the least may lean toward the petroleum industry.
*Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) being released by the ethanol plants include formaldehyde and acetic acid, both carcinogens. Methanol, although not known to cause cancer, also is classified as a hazardous pollutant.*

Formaldehyde is a common substance that the body itself produces now and then, acetic acid is....vinegar! If the tailpipes of these vehicles produce something that is in my gym shoes and fish and chips, I would prefer that to what comes out of a petroleum engine. As to methanol itself, it is poisonous, yes, but a lot less lethal than gasoline. http://www.prosint.com.br/met_ficha_us.htm
As far as the production facilities, as you can see by the article I posted the cost is dropping dramatically. If production facilities are polluting, that is just poor engineering and can be fixed.

We could look to Brasil, who is doing some interesting things including methanol fuel cell research, in order to reduce petrochemical usage.

> What will it take for you to realise that Americans are the worst kind of dog filth on earth and it's all YOUR fault?

Empty, the more you protest, the more you demonstrate how truly shallow and pitiful you are. Get a life!

Dave -

I like the wave action idea - that's something new! I'd like to see car manufacturers turn the axles of the car itself into electrical generators... the things are turning - there's got to be a way to turn that motion into energy.

"I'd like to see car manufacturers turn the axles of the car itself into electrical generators"

I don't get it . . . the car already has an alternator, which does more or less what you describe (that is, it produces electricity and is powered by the car's engine). Looping the alternator belt around an axle or two wouldn't serve much of a purpose. Am I missing part of the idea?

Electric cars generate force when generating force. When braking, electricity is generated to charge the batteries or fuel cells.

Ooops! not *when generating force*- *when draining power source*

Ah... that makes a certain amount of sense. I know that some cars are now equipped with a spring that winds up when the car brakes - and releases that kinetic energy when it's time for the car to accelerate.