Oil Companies/OPEC/Speculators would still cause oil prices to spike. Boom and bust cycles are really hard on small alternative fuel producers and put them out of business. The 50cents per gallon ethanol subsidy is the only thing keeping ethanol producers alive right now. I agree that we need more choice in alcohol fuels and that we should stop focusing solely on corn.

We need a slowly increasing gas tax. Increase the gas tax by 1 cent per month on fossil fuels. If you use E85 then the tax would increase by 0.15 cents per month. If you use B100 then the tax would not apply. This would help repair our roads(fed gas tax has not increased since 1993) and would make renewable liquid fuels more appealing without the subsidy. And people would know they would have to pay through the nose in the future when they decide to buy a living room sized vehicle that burns gas.

↓↑report

Carney, I see you're very fired up about alcohol based fuels. I haven't shared your enthusiasm. But your argument is sound. I run my VW tdi on biodiesel which has many similarities to running a flex-fuel vehicle on ethanol, butunol, etc.

The good thing about Biodiesel is that any diesel car or truck can run on it without modification. The bad thing is of course is gelling at colder temps.

I don't think alcohol based fuels will become a major player. Prices right now are based on abundant gasoline. As you know, if demand increases so will prices. Alcohol fuels are not poised to take on the market as a whole. Just as biodiesel cannot take on the whole diesel market.

But I think it definitely it will serve as one of the sub-markets that lead to complete oil independence of the auto industry. BEVs for passenger cars, cellulosic ethanol for Medium duty, algae biodiesel for heavy duty. Even planes and ships will eventually switch to biofuels.

Maybe even alcohol based Fuel Cells can have the power density that can run the larger trucks.

And Paul, lets not turn this into another "gas tax" debate. The last round was only 3 days ago on another article.

↓↑report

Joe, thanks for your comments. I understand your point that even if alcohol compatibility were a standard feature, alcohol would still be a niche player, since biodiesel compatibility is already a "standard" in diesel cars but has not displaced biodiesel.

But is biodiesel a commercially sold product? Is it price-competitive with petro-diesel? When mixed with 15% petro-diesel do its cold weather problems go away, as alcohol's do when mixed with 15% gasoline (hence E85 and M85)?

Look at what happened to the price of gasoline in 2007-2008, when it topped $4. At the time, methanol was selling unsubsidized for $0.80, or $1.60 in energy equivalent terms. I have a hard time believing that if we had mandated any-alcohol compatibility back in the early 1990s when the technology first emerged, and thus had nearly all cars on the road being compatible by 2003 or so, that such a price disparity would not have caused a massive shift toward methanol. Gas stations would be in a race to offer it, to undercut each other or to avoid being undercut.

↓↑report

But is biodiesel a commercially sold product?
Yes... but very few hard to find stations.

Is it price-competitive with petro-diesel?
About $0.05/gal more expensive. But since it runs smoother, fewer emissions, and smells of french fries, it is SOOO worth it.

When mixed with 15% petro-diesel do its cold weather problems go away, as alcohol's do when mixed with 15% gasoline (hence E85 and M85)?
No! Not go away, but certainly diminished. B20 in harsh winter, B50 in chilly, B99 when warm.


Okay, point taken IF alcohol compatibility was mandated that far back. Unfortunately change is harsh, and change during crisis is harsher. And nobody wants to change during good times. Hindsight would be so awesome for this. But alas.

↓↑report

What does mileage matter if the fuel is clean burning, renewable, and affordable?

↓↑report

Also, well over 2,000 filling stations in 44 states across the country offer E85, up from only 300 just a few years ago.

It's true that only a small portion of cars can use E85, but that's no fault of the fuel or a reason to reject it. If we just mandated that alcohol compatibility be a normal feature like seatbelts, that issue wouldn't exist. Even now there are dozens of flex fuel models from various automakers.

↓↑report

I think a lot of animosity comes from the hype around corn-based ethanol. The energy required, the fertilizer, the displacement of food crops, and the low energy content. Corn is probably the worst solution.

During this time Biodiesel was a better choice. It didn't really affect fuel economy and already came from a variety of sources that were not controversial such as waste oil from restaurants.

Now, with cellulosic ethanol, there is a real chance here.

↓↑report

Your thinking of the AM General Hummer (the civilian model of the HUMVEE)

↓↑report