Today’s Topic: The Problem With Ethanol
Not that I actually have a problem with ethanol, but rather the implications that mainstream America may surmise from the importance that is currently being placed on this alternative fuel source.
This one is pretty simple at its base. Ethanol will not stop global warming because the exhaust emissions of millions of vehicles will still be putting out pollutants. If nothing else, carbon dioxide and monoxide levels will continue to grow.
If we are going to look at one problem and we have two problems based on a particular product, then we should look at both problems simultaneously and thus kill two birds with one stone.
Ethanol, as a fuel, is a far less efficient energy producer than gasoline, thus either we come up with less powerful vehicles or we use larger amounts of ethanol. Now since ethanol IS a continuous source of energy, perhaps the lesser fuel efficiency is acceptable if you don’t look at the continued growth of atmospheric pollutants, but a more readily available fuel source is only part of the problem.
If, in fact, we are to move away from petroleum based fuels to become energy independent, then we need to understand that it is still necessary to curtail atmospheric pollutants. This idea means either coming up with new ways to use a more readily available fuel source or to come up with some means of curtailing the pollutants involved, whilst still offering the ability of a fuel source that can power the nation.
Ethanol is so inefficient of a fuel source that it is not being considered for anything but powering cars and trucks, boats and lawnmowers. If it were efficient enough in giving off enough heat to generate electricity than I might be more behind it. But in fact I am firmly behind it for the purposes of fueling electrical generation in vehicles so that most of the cost both in terms of lessening fuel costs and in using electricity in most modes of transportation would provide tremendous benefits.
In other words, it is time to redesign the automobile industry by governmental regulations.
I know, many a Republican will be concerned that their oil brethren will be sinking into the morass of their own devising, but the fact is that they can easily become partners in alternative efforts in fuel. With government regulations most times some perks come to those being regulated. Even though those will fight this regulation on the side of big oil, the fact is that minimal investment from these companies could easily reap great profits. That would be something the oil industry couldn’t complain about, since it costs up to billions of dollars to invest in research and development of new oil fields or new technology for continuing to reap benefits from older fields previously held as "tapped out".
The auto industry would do well to realize that electrical generation by small motors would reap a lot of benefits for the average American family and thus could quickly recover the costs for changing over production lines towards building more hybrid technology vehicles. They would also be helping America do its part in lessening the exhaust emissions that will continue to drive up the warmth of the planet.
Ah, but here’s the rub. Many of both the oil industry and auto industry are banking on global warming to open up new trade routes in the north and providing for exploration of new possible oil sites. While the new trade routes might indeed provide for quicker shipment of cargo, thus relieving some stress on the environment, it does nothing to promote alternative fuels.
So big oil and the auto industry have stakes in the continuation of the current situation.
Well, like I said, the concept of regulation usually also means that some type of large carrot needs to be on the stick in order to lead these industries out of their staid position.
The funny thing is that hybrid technology isn’t a new idea at all. It is exactly the same situation that has been in use in both the older "pre-nuclear" subs and in railroad locomotives for over 50 years. The idea of building oil burning engines to develop electricity that can be stored and use is nothing new. The hybrid cars of today do virtually the same thing.
The problem isn’t that the concept is new and requires a lot of research and development, but rather that most people view vehicles powered by electricity as being anemic and lacking performance. Nothing could be further from the truth.
But on to exhaust emissions. American vehicle manufacturers chose to use catalytic converter to bring down emissions, but Honda knew that emissions were the result of high revving engines rather than something that needed to be contained after generation. Chevrolet has also learned this 25 years after Honda realized it and actually offers decent gas mileage on a number of their products. Still, they lose money because they offer way too little in the way of real change in American transport.
We need both a change of the oil industry/auto industry and the habits of the people of American in order to offer real and relatively quick changes to oil/carbon production and the adverse effects. After all, if a small engine powered by either gas or ethanol can idle and produce enough electricity to power the vehicle and charge a reasonable bank of batteries, then mileage would go up exponentially.
So the perk of regulation is an investment of taxpayer’s money in order to quick-track the development of even newer systems, but also to ease the burden of transition in the energy and vehicle producing industries.
I’ll be back later to continue my four part series.
12:47:21 PM 
|
