The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.

Dearest America, ETHANOL THREAD

JimmyJimmy __BANNED USERS regular
edited November 2007 in Debate and/or Discourse
Why haven't we bought into Ethanol yet? Do we not see all the perks, with the very limited downsides? Please understand, we have everything we need to make this work. An america ran via ethanol becomes free of the hands of OPEC and the $100 a barrel oil. Gas prices go down, with the exporting of the ethanol our economy will go up, its better for the environment. I just....dont...understand. Please, explain to me my dearest america, why havent we told the oil barons to fuck off?


Yours Truely,
A perplexed American

Jimmy on
«134567

Posts

  • edited November 2007
    This content has been removed.

  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Ethanol is something to reduce the usage of oil very very slightly. There's no way to possibly produce enough of it as an whole alternative source of fuel.

    DarkPrimus on
  • ShogunShogun Hair long; money long; me and broke wizards we don't get along Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Seriously fuck ethanol.


    Hydrogen. The only company to even be ready or close is the only independent automobile maker in the world. Honda is a close second. American car companies? What a joke. Ford is at least a decade away. I hope they all go bankrupt.

    Shogun on
  • edited November 2007
    This content has been removed.

  • ShogunShogun Hair long; money long; me and broke wizards we don't get along Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    I don't like hydrogen either. It's a gas and thus annoying as hell to store. I vote electric highways.

    It is stored as a liquid. Sort of like the gas we use now. Also do you realize the cost of re-doing our entire highway infrastructure for electric highways? And don't even get me started about the money and resources wasted on highways and interstates to begin with. We could all be traveling on super-efficient trains that go 200MPH but then truckers would be out of jobs.

    Shogun on
  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Hydrogen/electricity hybrids would be cool. Electricity for local travel (easily charged at homes or in residential access points), hydrogen for long distances at refueling stations.

    DarkPrimus on
  • TehSpectreTehSpectre Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    I like the idea of solar power as an alternative fuel source.

    TehSpectre on
    9u72nmv0y64e.jpg
  • edited November 2007
    This content has been removed.

  • ShogunShogun Hair long; money long; me and broke wizards we don't get along Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Shogun wrote: »
    I don't like hydrogen either. It's a gas and thus annoying as hell to store. I vote electric highways.

    It is stored as a liquid. Sort of like the gas we use now. Also do you realize the cost of re-doing our entire highway infrastructure for electric highways? And don't even get me started about the money and resources wasted on highways and interstates to begin with. We could all be traveling on super-efficient trains that go 200MPH but then truckers would be out of jobs.
    We should be using trains. Major cities need to be linked in a more or less fuel independent capacity and we should have been building the links decades ago for freight and industry. Trucking between cities is a retarded waste of resources - whatever happened to the great American railroads to say the least.

    They got corrupted from the very start. Built with slaves and then ultimately abandoned. The trucking industry got ahold of congress half a century ago and we've payed for it ever since. Trains in this country are a joke, a lot like everything else.

    Man I'm making myself depressed.

    edit: I was just stating that in the case of hydrogen powering cars the hydrogen is stored as liquid hydrogen. No it is not similar to ethanol or octane at all. However hydrogen is the most abundant molecule in the universe. The problem is that it usually has all this other shit stuck to it.

    Shogun on
  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    TehSpectre wrote: »
    I like the idea of solar power as an alternative fuel source.

    Hahahaha, yeah right. Ain't gonna be worth shit in places where there's snowfall.

    DarkPrimus on
  • edited November 2007
    This content has been removed.

  • ShogunShogun Hair long; money long; me and broke wizards we don't get along Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    TehSpectre wrote: »
    I like the idea of solar power as an alternative fuel source.

    Hahahaha, yeah right. Ain't gonna be worth shit in places where there's snowfall.

    Or clouds for that matter. That isn't to say I don't support solar power because I do. Hopefully within the next 5 years the government will get off their asses and start subsidizing solar panels. Advancements within the last 7 years have made leaps and bounds in this industry and I'm hoping (really really hoping) that within that same 5 year time period it will become economical for Americans to start putting them all over their homes and businesses.

    Shogun on
  • edited November 2007
    This content has been removed.

  • ShogunShogun Hair long; money long; me and broke wizards we don't get along Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Shogun wrote: »
    Shogun wrote: »
    I don't like hydrogen either. It's a gas and thus annoying as hell to store. I vote electric highways.

    It is stored as a liquid. Sort of like the gas we use now. Also do you realize the cost of re-doing our entire highway infrastructure for electric highways? And don't even get me started about the money and resources wasted on highways and interstates to begin with. We could all be traveling on super-efficient trains that go 200MPH but then truckers would be out of jobs.
    We should be using trains. Major cities need to be linked in a more or less fuel independent capacity and we should have been building the links decades ago for freight and industry. Trucking between cities is a retarded waste of resources - whatever happened to the great American railroads to say the least.

    They got corrupted from the very start. Built with slaves and then ultimately abandoned. The trucking industry got ahold of congress half a century ago and we've payed for it ever since. Trains in this country are a joke, a lot like everything else.

    Man I'm making myself depressed.
    This is more or less why I advocate the electric highway idea. All the benefits of trucking, with the power independence of trains. Then we just have to fuck around with where we're getting electricity from. Would work better in cities, but we build highway more consistently.

    That electricity is still generated predominantly with fossil fuels. Unfortunately so is hydrogen. For now. But the point of this whole thread is that ethanol is the biggest waste of time and resources in terms of getting us off our 'addiction to oil.' It is a very shitty bandaid for a gargantuan problem.

    Shogun on
  • ShogunShogun Hair long; money long; me and broke wizards we don't get along Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Solar power can't be used to support major industry because it is not a constant power source, and storing energy on a grid scale just isn't practical.

    That does not mean it is not viable. If every home in America had solar panels electric bills would plummet. In fact we'd all be getting checks from your respective electric company for putting energy back in the grid. The sun was there yesterday and it will be there tomorrow. If it isn't we have much larger problems on our hands anyway. Ignoring that power is stupid frankly.

    Shogun on
  • Loren MichaelLoren Michael Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    If roads were moved to underground, airtight tunnels, could the CO2 be captured and put to some kind of use?

    Loren Michael on
    a7iea7nzewtq.jpg
  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Solar power is fine for use in a home as supplemental energy. Any you can glean is fine, and in the summer you can sell the extra juice to the power company.

    But it is not a solution for large-scale usage. Solar and wind are both too inefficient to be used as total replacements, despite what those "green energy" hippies want you to think. Really, we should be building more nuclear power plants, but the fucking green propaganda about them is so ingrained into our culture now that no one will do it.

    DarkPrimus on
  • edited November 2007
    This content has been removed.

  • ShogunShogun Hair long; money long; me and broke wizards we don't get along Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    Solar power is fine for use in a home as supplemental energy. Any you can glean is fine, and in the summer you can sell the extra juice to the power company.

    But it is not a solution for large-scale usage. Solar and wind are both too inefficient to be used as total replacements. Really, we should be building more nuclear power plants, but the fucking propaganda about them is so ingrained into our culture now that no one will do it.

    Nuclear power generates a metric fuck ton of waste. We already have more than we know what to do with and we can only store it. You can't dump it or recycle it. All it can do is sit somewhere safe. A facility is being constructed right now in a giant mountain to store it. It will not be finished until 2017 and we already have more than enough to fill it up. We're close to being able to extract more energy out of the waste though so it won't be quite as bad. It still is not the answer.

    Shogun on
  • TehSpectreTehSpectre Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    Solar power is fine for use in a home as supplemental energy. Any you can glean is fine, and in the summer you can sell the extra juice to the power company.

    But it is not a solution for large-scale usage. Solar and wind are both too inefficient to be used as total replacements, despite what those "green energy" hippies want you to think. Really, we should be building more nuclear power plants, but the fucking green propaganda about them is so ingrained into our culture now that no one will do it.

    Man, we just need a way of storing solar power more effeciently, so we can get past those cloudy days.

    TehSpectre on
    9u72nmv0y64e.jpg
  • edited November 2007
    This content has been removed.

  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    TehSpectre wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    Solar power is fine for use in a home as supplemental energy. Any you can glean is fine, and in the summer you can sell the extra juice to the power company.

    But it is not a solution for large-scale usage. Solar and wind are both too inefficient to be used as total replacements, despite what those "green energy" hippies want you to think. Really, we should be building more nuclear power plants, but the fucking green propaganda about them is so ingrained into our culture now that no one will do it.

    Man, we just need a way of storing solar power more effeciently, so we can get past those cloudy days.

    Solar panels also take up a lot of space in comparison to how much energy they collect, same as wind generators. But that goes along with what I said before about them being inefficient.

    I'm not saying "oh no we shouldn't use solar or wind power at all". It's fine to use them as part of generating power for us, but it is not the solution to our dependency on fossil fuels.

    DarkPrimus on
  • evilbobevilbob RADELAIDERegistered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Whatever we all end up switching to, I hope it comes late enough that petrol has gotten expensive enough for people to have been forced to learn not to use their cars so fucking much.

    evilbob on
    l5sruu1fyatf.jpg

  • TehSpectreTehSpectre Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    TehSpectre wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    Solar power is fine for use in a home as supplemental energy. Any you can glean is fine, and in the summer you can sell the extra juice to the power company.

    But it is not a solution for large-scale usage. Solar and wind are both too inefficient to be used as total replacements, despite what those "green energy" hippies want you to think. Really, we should be building more nuclear power plants, but the fucking green propaganda about them is so ingrained into our culture now that no one will do it.

    Man, we just need a way of storing solar power more effeciently, so we can get past those cloudy days.

    Solar panels also take up a lot of space in comparison to how much energy they collect, same as wind generators. But that goes along with what I said before about them being inefficient.

    All I am saying is an increase in solar panel technology as well as a more effecient battery could make it viable.

    Computers started out as gigantic monsters that couldn't hold near as much data as a newage small laptop today.

    TehSpectre on
    9u72nmv0y64e.jpg
  • ShogunShogun Hair long; money long; me and broke wizards we don't get along Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    TehSpectre wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    TehSpectre wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    Solar power is fine for use in a home as supplemental energy. Any you can glean is fine, and in the summer you can sell the extra juice to the power company.

    But it is not a solution for large-scale usage. Solar and wind are both too inefficient to be used as total replacements, despite what those "green energy" hippies want you to think. Really, we should be building more nuclear power plants, but the fucking green propaganda about them is so ingrained into our culture now that no one will do it.

    Man, we just need a way of storing solar power more effeciently, so we can get past those cloudy days.

    Solar panels also take up a lot of space in comparison to how much energy they collect, same as wind generators. But that goes along with what I said before about them being inefficient.

    All I am saying is an increase in solar panel technology as well as a more effecient battery could make it viable.

    Computers started out as gigantic monsters that couldn't hold near as much data as a newage small laptop today.

    Currently the solar power industry is growing at something like 17% per year. I'm really shooting for that 5 year mass-market penetration. Every home in America with solar panels would do us a lot of good.

    Shogun on
  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    The roofer unions won't stand for it!

    I kid, but Americans has always resisted any sort of step towards efficiency in energy if it is going to cost a lot of money or result in a loss of profits. Hell, Detroit was throwing a hissy fit about the fuel economy regulations that were passed recently, and that's to give them like ten years to get to the point that the rest of the world's standards are already at.

    DarkPrimus on
  • itylusitylus Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Lighter cars, that use LPG, would be a good idea in the short to medium term. In the longer term, I think getting used to the idea of doing a bit less travelling would be helpful. Bicycles are great. Eventually some kind of super future-tech may swoop in and save us all but for the moment, rising populations and declining oil stocks should make us at least try to think in terms of scarcity.

    itylus on
  • TehSpectreTehSpectre Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    The roofer unions won't stand for it!

    I kid, but Americans has always resisted any sort of step towards efficiency in energy if it is going to cost a lot of money or result in a loss of profits. Hell, Detroit was throwing a hissy fit about the fuel economy regulations that were passed recently, and that's to give them like ten years to get to the point that the rest of the world's standards are already at.

    I just like to compare solar energy advancement like computer advancement.

    Think about how fast computers have evolved. Solar energy is moving just as fast.

    I don't see why in 30 years we don't have a solarpanel only a fraction of the size of the ones now, and can hold much more energy.

    TehSpectre on
    9u72nmv0y64e.jpg
  • edited November 2007
    This content has been removed.

  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    TehSpectre wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    The roofer unions won't stand for it!

    I kid, but Americans has always resisted any sort of step towards efficiency in energy if it is going to cost a lot of money or result in a loss of profits. Hell, Detroit was throwing a hissy fit about the fuel economy regulations that were passed recently, and that's to give them like ten years to get to the point that the rest of the world's standards are already at.

    I just like to compare solar energy advancement like computer advancement.

    Think about how fast computers have evolved. Solar energy is moving just as fast.

    I don't see why in 30 years we don't have a solarpanel only a fraction of the size of the ones now, and can hold much more energy.

    Well, we could, but that doesn't mean anyone would be using them. That's kind of what my quoted post is saying.

    If a presidential candidate had the balls when asked about the "energy crisis" to respond that they would start construction of nuclear power plants, they would get my vote. Assuming they weren't an asshat about the other issues, obviously.

    DarkPrimus on
  • TehSpectreTehSpectre Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    "Computers in the future may weigh no more than 1.5 tons."
    - Popular Mechanics, 1949
    "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."
    - Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943

    "I have travelled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people, and I can assure you that data processings is a fad that won't last out the year."
    - The editor in charge of business books for Prentice-Hall, 1957

    "But what...is it good for?"
    - Engineer at the Advanced Computing Systems Division of IBM, 1968, commenting on the microchip

    "There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home."
    - Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of DEC

    TehSpectre on
    9u72nmv0y64e.jpg
  • edited November 2007
    This content has been removed.

  • TehSpectreTehSpectre Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Yeah....talking about how people underestimated microprocessor technology doesn't say anything about energy generation and storage. We've been trying to do it for centuries, and decades seriously, and nothing big has really happened. The computer was a bold new idea requiring a paradigm shift in our thinking about how things could get done - the bigger battery isn't. The fact is LiIon batteries are still expensive and haven't really gotten significantly better even if they've gotten somewhat cheaper due to volume and plant costs.

    I got nothin.

    I just think it is the best idea available. Maybe the way we store solar energy needs to be re-evaluated. I believe that there is a better way, if not making an improved source of containment.

    TehSpectre on
    9u72nmv0y64e.jpg
  • The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited November 2007
    Fuck scarcity. We don't need to compromise on things, we need to stop being retarded (can you tell I support nuclear power?)

    Nuclear's not economically feasible here. Also, that sentiment in no way necessitates supporting it.

    OP, next time try naming your thread something remotely relevant so I don't have to mess with it, mk?

    The Cat on
    tmsig.jpg
  • LondonBridgeLondonBridge __BANNED USERS regular
    edited November 2007
    Shogun wrote: »
    Seriously fuck ethanol.


    Hydrogen. The only company to even be ready or close is the only independent automobile maker in the world. Honda is a close second. American car companies? What a joke. Ford is at least a decade away. I hope they all go bankrupt.

    Seconded. It's a better alternative than ethanol and electric combined. But I thought GM was pushing the tech pretty hard too and thats why they gave up on the electric car?

    LondonBridge on
  • edited November 2007
    This content has been removed.

  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    The Cat wrote: »
    Fuck scarcity. We don't need to compromise on things, we need to stop being retarded (can you tell I support nuclear power?)

    Nuclear's not economically feasible here. Also, that sentiment in no way necessitates supporting it.

    Australia is probably one of the most viable places for large-scale solar power, what with the huge open deserts and all. :P

    DarkPrimus on
  • The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited November 2007
    We can't afford the infrastructure, especially since most of it will have to be built offshore and shipped here. Certainly not without neglecting all our other infrastructure problems. Its hard to enjoy the plentiful electricity when you're dying of thirst.

    The Cat on
    tmsig.jpg
  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    So just shock yourself. Electricity is "juice", so it probably can hydrate you, right?
    I'm sorry, that's terribly lame.

    I was speaking theoretically about the solar power.

    DarkPrimus on
  • itylusitylus Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Hydrogen isn't an energy source. You spend as much electricity to make it as you get out of it. It's best to think of it as a kind of battery. It may be that hydrogen cars will be a big thing in the future, but the fundamental problem of where the power comes from won't be answered by hydrogen.


    electricitylikesme: I think nuclear power doesn't solve the scarcity problem. Currently, nuclear power is very expensive to generate... perhaps that cost will go down with improvements in technology, but for the present, the fact of being more expensive to generate than coal means that... effectively we're still talking about scarcity.

    itylus on
Sign In or Register to comment.