|
What is wrong with ethanol as a fuel?
At the moment, quite a bit.
The problem is that most North American manufacturers are billing this fuel as
a suitable alternative to gasoline.
Additionally, many governments
(including our own) have given in to the idea that an ethanol capable
vehicle (i.e: Flex fuel vehicle) is a green option. The sad reality
and irony, is that this could not be further from the truth.
First let's address the main issues regarding ethanol:
Ethanol is a greener fuel.
Yes, when it burns it produces less pollutants and hence lower emissions.
However, ethanol contains much less energy and that means that ALL ethanol
capable vehicles will have to burn more of it to travel the same distances
traditionally afforded by gasoline. The more we burn, the more we
pollute and this is the basic underlying problem with ethanol: Energy
density is much lower than Gasoline.
Ethanol is cheaper.
In very rare exceptions it may be. But, in most cases it keeps
parity with traditional regular gasoline prices. Again, you will be
buying more of it to travel the same distance you would travel in a regular
tank of gas.
Ethanol is a renewable fuel.
Yes it is. However, much of the corn crops harvested over the last
few years were produced primarily for ethanol production at the expense of
the food market and other crops usually destined for human consumption.
This leads to price hikes on the basic food commodities due mainly to higher
demand at the consumer side (consumers and food industry) and lower supply
(farming).
Also, it takes a lot of energy to produce ethanol which makes its
production a costlier venture unless the crude oil prices are high enough to
almost justify investing in manufacturing of ethanol and arable land
re-purposing.
Still, arable land is being used to engage in the production of this
resource intensive crop (corn) and this practice is also not regarded as
sustainable over a longer period of time.
We would like to see ethanol production without using corn, however.
Until that happens, ethanol as a fuel, will remain a shameful example of
misinformation and deceit.
Ethanol is still NOT widely available.
Indeed. Why buy an ethanol based vehicle if it rarely gets filled
with 80% (or more) ethanol? Just because a vehicle is considered
flex-fuel it does not make it a wiser choice at all since ethanol filling
stations are hard (if not impossible) to find in Canada and many states in
the US.
What about E10?
Research has shown that ethanol blended gasoline is generally a good
thing. Most vehicles on the road today DO benefit from this type of
blend since it definitely helps clean the tailpipe emissions. Ethanol
acts as an oxygenating agent and that helps promote a more complete
combustion.
However, as in the case of flex fuel vehicles, folks who use 10% ethanol
blended gasoline can expect a 1% to 3% loss in driving range since it too
has a lower energy density compared to straight gasoline. Depending on
the vehicle type this loss in efficiency can be larger or smaller.
Drivers of fuel efficient hybrid vehicles (Honda and
Toyota) may want to avoid these ethanol blended gasoline since their engines
are already very clean ( the cleanest as in AT-PZEV). To make maters
worse, they would lose out on the mileage as it tends to be affected by a
greater order of magnitude than a 3% loss in driving range for traditional
gas-only vehicles.
Should Flex fuel be considered "Green" by the Government?
Absolutely not !!!
Especially is they are not going to be refueling with 80 or 100% ethanol
for most of their useful live. Why give credit to a vehicle that in
its lifetime is going to be no better than the traditional non flex-fuel
trucks? It is wrong and perpetuates the idea that large and opulent
city/urban commuting trucks and SUV's can be acceptable and green.
| ![[Company Logo Image]](images/GreenDrivingTitle2.jpg)
