e85: if They say it’s better it must be?
It’s the 4th of July 2008 and Corn Ethanol or E85 has arrived in Orlando. In my opinion, e85 or Ethanol is not a negative concept, but it is not the answer. Why do they feel that we should ultimately pay more for food in order to use a new fuel source that costs more money and energy to produce? Who will cover the costs to develop the infrastructure needed to refine and pump the new magic gas? Not to mention the 25% decrease in the MPG you currently get with conventional gas. This will make a fine alternative in select areas where sugar cane ethanol can be produced. They have partnered with the Colombians to produce sugar cane ethanol in Louisiana, and the Colombians know what they are doing. The entire country runs on sugar cane gas. This works because sugar cane will not drive up the price of staple foods the way corn ethanol will. They even burn the stalks to create electricity. Wow! Now that is a plan not a rushed decision that will end up prolonging this recession we are not having. I am not a conservation saint- I love my Land Rover and it only gets 16 MPG on a good day. Now with the 10% ethanol gas I am forced to use I am only getting 13 MPG…hmmm. I also have a GEM (fully electric car), it costs about .02 per mile to drive which balances out my carbon footprint. Can someone please tell me why all cars are not plugged in???
