The future of Kansas agriculture may be E-85 biofuel, as GOP gubernatorial hopeful Robin Jennison recently told The Eagle editorial board. But E-85 proponents got ahead of themselves in trying to demonstrate that an adapted E-85-fueled Ford Taurus could make it from Washington, D.C., to Los Angeles without stopping at a gas station. Sponsored by the liberal Center for American Progress and the Natural Resources Defense Council, the project recently stalled in Wyoming when the car’s tank and reserve gas cans in the trunk ran dry. And, as The Washington Post noted, so far only 600 of the country’s 176,000 gasoline stations carry E-85.
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- DavidB on Health care reform would save state money
- DavidB on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
- American_Way on Open thread 11/22
11 Comments
One can only hope E-85 goes the way of the dinasaur. It is NOT the answer by a long shot. It doesn’t even make a bump in the road towards alternative fuels, other than slowing down progress. It wastes water, uses agricultural land that could be growing crops to feed people and cuts down on gas milage. Wrong on all counts, in my book.
Increase the energy cost to also reflect the environmental cost, thus forcing consumer to adopt more sustainable way of life, e.g., less mansions in the exurbs, that require much heating/cooling and long commutes. Ultimately, it’s what you plan to pass on to the next generation. A responsible habit, or a lack of natural resources.
I’ve read somewhere that E-85 actually decreases your miles per gallon efficiency than using straight gasoline. How does that help the enviroment?
You need to do quite a bit more reading, Joe. On a great many subjects. Stop expecting everybody else to do your homework for you.
Todd! It’s a known fact. I guess you’re deprived of them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E85
http://e85vehicles.com/converting-e85.htm
http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=action13&id=4248390
and on and on and on and on. I could post hundreds of sources. I guess you just shot yourself in the foot.
JMW is correct.
As an op-ed article pointed out the other week in the Eagle (from the Land Institute), there is not enough vegetation in the entire country to run our vehicles, even if they all ran on E-85.
We should be developing an all-electric car. The cost for the electricity to run it would be the equivalent of 35 cents a gallon gas.
Generate the electricity with out abundant coal using strict pollution controls in the short term. Develop safe nuclear power in the long term. Develop FUSION nuclear technology in the longer term.
But it means get people like Dick Cheney out of the White House and putting in people who care about America instead of big oil.
There’s also the question of why a car going from Washington DC to Los Angeles would be in WYOMING?
Also, I hope whoever calculated the route and the gas mileage didn’t go to public school:
MPG of car x number of gallons you have = distance you can go
Jeez, it’s not rocket science . . .
Redrad! I agree with you completely. The best way to go is electric vechiles.
Actually, higher energy efficiency is the key solution. It reduces the amount of biofuel (farmland), hydrogen, etc. needed. It increases the range of all-electric vehicles.
Nuclear is NOT cost-competitive against the combination of higher efficiency and renewablesInfo athttp://oilendgame.comhttp://www.rmi.org/sitepages/pid306.phphttp://www.greencarcongress.com/
Doesn’t Kansas Governor Sebelius support E85?
The author of the blog that criticized e-85 failed to mention that these vehicles can also burn gasoline. That is why they are called flex fuel engines. So, you need not worry about being stranded in the Wyoming countryside if you buy a flex fuel (e-85) vehicle. It simply gives drivers a choice where the choice exists.As everyone who has ever studied economics knows one of the best ways to drive down prices of a product is to introduce a competitive substitutable product. Admittedly, E-85 is only one piece of a much larger puzzle that must be planned strategically and executed if we are to become energy independent. There is no silver bullet, but a strategic plan for utilization of key promising alternatives (wind, solar, ethanol, methanol, soy bean oils that replace crude lubricants, etc) can be combined into a strategic plan that can decrease our demand for oil.