Comments on: The Wonder of Ethanol: Lower Gas Mileage, Higher Food Prices, and Now Bonus Car Death! http://www.punny.org/money/the-wonder-of-ethanol-lower-gas-mileage-higher-food-prices-and-now-bonus-car-death/ Adding a punchline to your bottom line Fri, 21 Nov 2008 14:12:43 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: Civil Drafting Consultant http://www.punny.org/money/the-wonder-of-ethanol-lower-gas-mileage-higher-food-prices-and-now-bonus-car-death/#comment-204426 Civil Drafting Consultant Wed, 20 Aug 2008 16:11:44 +0000 http://www.punny.org/?p=603#comment-204426 Hey, I thought electric cars were making a come back and heard from some folks out in CA that loved their electric cars before GM recalled and destroyed them all. How about that little number I saw on TV that runs on compressed air? Hey, I thought electric cars were making a come back and heard from some folks out in CA that loved their electric cars before GM recalled and destroyed them all. How about that little number I saw on TV that runs on compressed air?

]]> By: Scott http://www.punny.org/money/the-wonder-of-ethanol-lower-gas-mileage-higher-food-prices-and-now-bonus-car-death/#comment-195430 Scott Mon, 07 Jul 2008 17:59:44 +0000 http://www.punny.org/?p=603#comment-195430 I think there are definitely better options out there other then using Ethanol. There were talks of putting an Ethanol Plant in my city, but that ended up getting turned down which I think is good. -Scott I think there are definitely better options out there other then using Ethanol. There were talks of putting an Ethanol Plant in my city, but that ended up getting turned down which I think is good.

-Scott

]]> By: Maria @ Frugal Homesteading http://www.punny.org/money/the-wonder-of-ethanol-lower-gas-mileage-higher-food-prices-and-now-bonus-car-death/#comment-192040 Maria @ Frugal Homesteading Thu, 19 Jun 2008 14:58:02 +0000 http://www.punny.org/?p=603#comment-192040 Most of the gas stations I stop at are 10% ethanol, but you don't see anything posted until you get to the pump. So aggravating. Most of the gas stations I stop at are 10% ethanol, but you don’t see anything posted until you get to the pump. So aggravating.

]]> By: rocketc http://www.punny.org/money/the-wonder-of-ethanol-lower-gas-mileage-higher-food-prices-and-now-bonus-car-death/#comment-189376 rocketc Mon, 09 Jun 2008 05:06:28 +0000 http://www.punny.org/?p=603#comment-189376 I see a significant power loss in my minivan when I use 10% ethanol, the engine works harder and revs higher. I don't need your pointy headed professor types to tell me that. Even my wife notices at difference. If ethanol is do great, why does the gov't have to subsidize it to such a degree? I see a significant power loss in my minivan when I use 10% ethanol, the engine works harder and revs higher.

I don’t need your pointy headed professor types to tell me that. Even my wife notices at difference.

If ethanol is do great, why does the gov’t have to subsidize it to such a degree?

]]> By: Bill http://www.punny.org/money/the-wonder-of-ethanol-lower-gas-mileage-higher-food-prices-and-now-bonus-car-death/#comment-189291 Bill Sun, 08 Jun 2008 20:12:09 +0000 http://www.punny.org/?p=603#comment-189291 If you are seeing a significant drop in fuel economy with no change in weather or driving patters, look to getting your car serviced. It is physically impossible for 10% ethanol to cause a 10% or higher fuel economy change. Anybody telling you otherwise is probably telling you what they heard form someone else. There are those that believe that ethanol mixes *must* get you less mileage due to a lower "energy value", and that it is a 1 to 1 relationship. This is the assumption the EPA uses. However, even under this "worst case belief" you would see a maximum of 10%. However, many studies have shown that 10,20, even 30% ethanol can in certain vehicles cause an increase in fuel economy. Primarily underpowered cars (that's my observation from looking at all the studies, not conclusions of the studies individually.). Indeed, check out this link: http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/factors.shtml Note that many of these factors far exceed the theoretical effect of 10% ethanol mix. For example: Running the A/C can be a 5-25% reduction in fuel economy. The smaller the engine the greater the difference. Tire pressure can make a difference of up to 8%. Snow or rain can be up to 20%. Further note that the EPA claims oxygenated fuels (such as ethanol blends of 10%) can cause a reduction of 1-3% MPG. I submit that you won't notice that small of a difference as virtually every other factor can easily exceed that. Even your right or left foot usage can change more than that with the same tank of fuel from day to day. During my tests I found that shutting my engine off at stoplights and drive-thru windows increased my MPG by about 2-4%. This also means that a slight variance in how you catch stoplights or how much you go through drive-thru windows can also affect your MPG by a few points. SaaB makes a car in Europe that runs anything from 100% gasoline to 100% ethanol. In freeway travel the car gets *better* gas mileage on 100% ethanol than it does on 100% gasoline. This is proof positive that the notion that ethanol is inherently less efficient in terms of fuel economy is false. Further, I offer my own experience. I drive a 1999 Corvette. I run 10% ethanol, and I get 20-23 in town only driving. On the highways I get mid thirties, upper thirties when not in the hills. I sincerely doubt that Slow Food Waltz would claim I would be getting upper twenties in town and in the 40s on the freeway in my 1999 Corvette if I ran gasoline only. In fact, I have kept very detailed records when running tests and found no consistent difference between gas and E90. Sometimes it would be a bit better and sometimes it would not - and that went for both gas and 10% ethanol mixed gas. I also note that my in town driving is "frequent short trips", i.e. the worst kind for good fuel economy. The fact of the matter is that the single greatest influence on how much MPG a vehicle gets is the driver. Your driving patterns have more impact than any other single factor. Second to that comes weather. Now as to "record oil company profits" yes and no. They are making more overall but not more per-barrel. They made, in the famous case of Exxon that everyone likes to talks about, 10% profit. A "measly" 10% is what everyone is up in arms over. Meanwhile the big good companies are also showing record profits. In fact the ones that we've been able to look into records and reports for show a higher margin. That means they are making more money on each can of SPAM, for example. In Hormel's case pork prices went down, while their pork product prices went up. The *only* group (other than lobbyists and media pundits) who are making more money through the sale of oil at higher prices are those that pump the oil in the first place. When you see oil prices reported, that isn't what we the consumer pay, we don't buy crude oil. That is the price Exxon, Chevron, et al. are paying. Why are they making more money then? Because they are selling more oil. Unlike the agribusiness sector, oil has been the good bet because the world consumes more and more of it every year. And it isn't the US consumption driving the market any more. It's the Asia-Pacific nations that are experiencing massive growth. it used to be that when the US decreased it's consumption of oil, prices went with it. However, the last few years has seen the US drop it's demand for oil as prices still continue to rise. But it's more politically correct to slam the oil companies for making a record profit in total amount than it is to talk about agribusiness making more per-unit. For example: http://www.gravmag.com/oil.html#dollar Note that these figures are from 2005. For those paying not attention that means that Exxon made a *smaller* margin while making more profit overall - they made less per barrel but sold many more barrels. Despite this alleged news sources such as ABC will "estimate" that Exxon-Mobile makes some 29% profit per barrel of oil. Why estimate when the records are made public? Again, it's what sells and what is PC. Another source, the state of California breakdown on gasoline prices found at http://www.energy.ca.gov/gasoline/margins/index.html . And finally, the more ethanol in your fuel the cleaner your engine burns. This has positive effects oil longevity and engine longevity. It also burns cooler. However as with most claims anytime you see dramatic claims, they are likely to be false - on either side. Anyone claiming ethanol is "the savior" is dead wrong and anyone claiming it is "the devil" is equally wrong. 10% ethanol will not be noticeable in nearly every use automotive, and will always be trumped by any of the other factors. Why do people associate ethanol with lower MPG? Much the same reason why a cop pulls you over for 5MPH over the limit but you *know* when you looked at the speedometer that you were doing the limit. The reality is you were in fact doing more than the posted limit and that when you saw the cop you pulled your foot back a bit resulting in a drop of speed by the time you looked down. It's awareness. People hear their gasoline got 10% added and they suddenly pay attention to their usage. That alone affects how you drive which affects your economy. S far as ethanol ruining your engine by gunk, that's a misnomer as well. First ethanol burns more thoroughly. Yes it burns cooler - and that is a good thing. The "gunk" is stuff left over from gasoline additives and gasoline gunk. Most racers prefer ethanol. It provides more power and runs cleaner. If you take an engine run on 100% ethanol, one on 50%, one on 10% and one on 100% gasoline and open them up you can put them in a line from cleanest to dirtiest and it will follow the listing I just gave. I've seen it. However, if you take an engine that has been running on gasoline and start adding ethanol you will start cleaning out the tank and the lines. The older the car, the longer it has been running gasoline, the more buildup you have. It isn't the ethanol that is the source, it is the gasoline gunk buildup the ethanol is just clearing it out. Go to google and look at all the "news reports" on the "gunk problem". Notice how none of them are by actual experts - people who know the physics and chemistry involved. It's always a "local mechanic" the reporter was able to dredge up. Indeed I've seen several of these where the "reporting mechanic" said the problems were because ethanol "runs hotter because it is a leaner fuel". Again, a matter of physical impossibility. http://www.ethanolrfa.org/resource/facts/engine/ http://www.ncga.com/Ethanol/main/your_car.htm There are also many university studies but the papers that result from them tend to not be available w/o a fee so I am not posting the links to them here in order to avoid frustrating those who don't want to pay for them (I don't blame you either, they should be freely available to all IMO). But if you happen to be interested it will not be hard to find them. Just don't expect news "reporters" to know about them or talk about them. If you are seeing a significant drop in fuel economy with no change in weather or driving patters, look to getting your car serviced. It is physically impossible for 10% ethanol to cause a 10% or higher fuel economy change. Anybody telling you otherwise is probably telling you what they heard form someone else.

There are those that believe that ethanol mixes *must* get you less mileage due to a lower “energy value”, and that it is a 1 to 1 relationship. This is the assumption the EPA uses. However, even under this “worst case belief” you would see a maximum of 10%.

However, many studies have shown that 10,20, even 30% ethanol can in certain vehicles cause an increase in fuel economy. Primarily underpowered cars (that’s my observation from looking at all the studies, not conclusions of the studies individually.).

Indeed, check out this link: http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/factors.shtml

Note that many of these factors far exceed the theoretical effect of 10% ethanol mix.

For example: Running the A/C can be a 5-25% reduction in fuel economy. The smaller the engine the greater the difference. Tire pressure can make a difference of up to 8%. Snow or rain can be up to 20%. Further note that the EPA claims oxygenated fuels (such as ethanol blends of 10%) can cause a reduction of 1-3% MPG.

I submit that you won’t notice that small of a difference as virtually every other factor can easily exceed that. Even your right or left foot usage can change more than that with the same tank of fuel from day to day. During my tests I found that shutting my engine off at stoplights and drive-thru windows increased my MPG by about 2-4%. This also means that a slight variance in how you catch stoplights or how much you go through drive-thru windows can also affect your MPG by a few points.

SaaB makes a car in Europe that runs anything from 100% gasoline to 100% ethanol. In freeway travel the car gets *better* gas mileage on 100% ethanol than it does on 100% gasoline. This is proof positive that the notion that ethanol is inherently less efficient in terms of fuel economy is false.

Further, I offer my own experience. I drive a 1999 Corvette. I run 10% ethanol, and I get 20-23 in town only driving. On the highways I get mid thirties, upper thirties when not in the hills. I sincerely doubt that Slow Food Waltz would claim I would be getting upper twenties in town and in the 40s on the freeway in my 1999 Corvette if I ran gasoline only. In fact, I have kept very detailed records when running tests and found no consistent difference between gas and E90. Sometimes it would be a bit better and sometimes it would not - and that went for both gas and 10% ethanol mixed gas.

I also note that my in town driving is “frequent short trips”, i.e. the worst kind for good fuel economy.

The fact of the matter is that the single greatest influence on how much MPG a vehicle gets is the driver. Your driving patterns have more impact than any other single factor. Second to that comes weather.

Now as to “record oil company profits” yes and no. They are making more overall but not more per-barrel. They made, in the famous case of Exxon that everyone likes to talks about, 10% profit. A “measly” 10% is what everyone is up in arms over.

Meanwhile the big good companies are also showing record profits. In fact the ones that we’ve been able to look into records and reports for show a higher margin. That means they are making more money on each can of SPAM, for example. In Hormel’s case pork prices went down, while their pork product prices went up.

The *only* group (other than lobbyists and media pundits) who are making more money through the sale of oil at higher prices are those that pump the oil in the first place.

When you see oil prices reported, that isn’t what we the consumer pay, we don’t buy crude oil. That is the price Exxon, Chevron, et al. are paying. Why are they making more money then? Because they are selling more oil. Unlike the agribusiness sector, oil has been the good bet because the world consumes more and more of it every year. And it isn’t the US consumption driving the market any more. It’s the Asia-Pacific nations that are experiencing massive growth.

it used to be that when the US decreased it’s consumption of oil, prices went with it. However, the last few years has seen the US drop it’s demand for oil as prices still continue to rise.

But it’s more politically correct to slam the oil companies for making a record profit in total amount than it is to talk about agribusiness making more per-unit.

For example:
http://www.gravmag.com/oil.html#dollar

Note that these figures are from 2005. For those paying not attention that means that Exxon made a *smaller* margin while making more profit overall - they made less per barrel but sold many more barrels.

Despite this alleged news sources such as ABC will “estimate” that Exxon-Mobile makes some 29% profit per barrel of oil. Why estimate when the records are made public? Again, it’s what sells and what is PC.

Another source, the state of California breakdown on gasoline prices found at http://www.energy.ca.gov/gasoline/margins/index.html
.

And finally, the more ethanol in your fuel the cleaner your engine burns. This has positive effects oil longevity and engine longevity. It also burns cooler.

However as with most claims anytime you see dramatic claims, they are likely to be false - on either side. Anyone claiming ethanol is “the savior” is dead wrong and anyone claiming it is “the devil” is equally wrong. 10% ethanol will not be noticeable in nearly every use automotive, and will always be trumped by any of the other factors.

Why do people associate ethanol with lower MPG? Much the same reason why a cop pulls you over for 5MPH over the limit but you *know* when you looked at the speedometer that you were doing the limit. The reality is you were in fact doing more than the posted limit and that when you saw the cop you pulled your foot back a bit resulting in a drop of speed by the time you looked down. It’s awareness. People hear their gasoline got 10% added and they suddenly pay attention to their usage. That alone affects how you drive which affects your economy.

S far as ethanol ruining your engine by gunk, that’s a misnomer as well. First ethanol burns more thoroughly. Yes it burns cooler - and that is a good thing. The “gunk” is stuff left over from gasoline additives and gasoline gunk.

Most racers prefer ethanol. It provides more power and runs cleaner. If you take an engine run on 100% ethanol, one on 50%, one on 10% and one on 100% gasoline and open them up you can put them in a line from cleanest to dirtiest and it will follow the listing I just gave. I’ve seen it.

However, if you take an engine that has been running on gasoline and start adding ethanol you will start cleaning out the tank and the lines. The older the car, the longer it has been running gasoline, the more buildup you have. It isn’t the ethanol that is the source, it is the gasoline gunk buildup the ethanol is just clearing it out.

Go to google and look at all the “news reports” on the “gunk problem”. Notice how none of them are by actual experts - people who know the physics and chemistry involved. It’s always a “local mechanic” the reporter was able to dredge up. Indeed I’ve seen several of these where the “reporting mechanic” said the problems were because ethanol “runs hotter because it is a leaner fuel”. Again, a matter of physical impossibility.

http://www.ethanolrfa.org/resource/facts/engine/
http://www.ncga.com/Ethanol/main/your_car.htm
There are also many university studies but the papers that result from them tend to not be available w/o a fee so I am not posting the links to them here in order to avoid frustrating those who don’t want to pay for them (I don’t blame you either, they should be freely available to all IMO). But if you happen to be interested it will not be hard to find them.

Just don’t expect news “reporters” to know about them or talk about them.

]]> By: Chris http://www.punny.org/money/the-wonder-of-ethanol-lower-gas-mileage-higher-food-prices-and-now-bonus-car-death/#comment-189070 Chris Sat, 07 Jun 2008 14:32:36 +0000 http://www.punny.org/?p=603#comment-189070 How about letting the market decide for itself? How about letting the market decide for itself?

]]> By: Highlights from the week | rocket finance http://www.punny.org/money/the-wonder-of-ethanol-lower-gas-mileage-higher-food-prices-and-now-bonus-car-death/#comment-188807 Highlights from the week | rocket finance Fri, 06 Jun 2008 14:07:28 +0000 http://www.punny.org/?p=603#comment-188807 [...] to top things off, I left one of the longest, most sarcastic comment ever on Punny Money. Why do many of the mainstream solutions to our energy crisis sound like they [...] [...] to top things off, I left one of the longest, most sarcastic comment ever on Punny Money. Why do many of the mainstream solutions to our energy crisis sound like they [...]

]]> By: The Shark Investor http://www.punny.org/money/the-wonder-of-ethanol-lower-gas-mileage-higher-food-prices-and-now-bonus-car-death/#comment-188092 The Shark Investor Tue, 03 Jun 2008 19:02:33 +0000 http://www.punny.org/?p=603#comment-188092 This will surely shock you *grin*, but the alternatives to driving cars have been invented: - ride a bike or bicycle - use public transportation - walk Each of them is better than ethanol. This will surely shock you *grin*, but the alternatives to driving cars have been invented:
- ride a bike or bicycle
- use public transportation
- walk
Each of them is better than ethanol.

]]> By: Having a Second Child May Be the Worst Thing You Can Do For Your First | Punny Money http://www.punny.org/money/the-wonder-of-ethanol-lower-gas-mileage-higher-food-prices-and-now-bonus-car-death/#comment-187903 Having a Second Child May Be the Worst Thing You Can Do For Your First | Punny Money Tue, 03 Jun 2008 03:28:12 +0000 http://www.punny.org/?p=603#comment-187903 [...] a mile long, and that list would certainly include things like currency devaluation, oil prices, food being converted to fuel, and obese Americans who like to eat anything that isn’t nailed down. And each of those [...] [...] a mile long, and that list would certainly include things like currency devaluation, oil prices, food being converted to fuel, and obese Americans who like to eat anything that isn’t nailed down. And each of those [...]

]]> By: rocketc http://www.punny.org/money/the-wonder-of-ethanol-lower-gas-mileage-higher-food-prices-and-now-bonus-car-death/#comment-187769 rocketc Mon, 02 Jun 2008 16:25:18 +0000 http://www.punny.org/?p=603#comment-187769 obbop, You win the prize for the most incredibly bad comment of the day. Time to re-create how we live. according to who? recreation of how we live is taking place all the time - it's called the free market Look to the past and emulate but omit the horses. what in the world does that mean? what if I like my horse? Live close to work and spread out retailing so there’s more smaller stores covering more area. yes, and how will we transport the goods to those stores that are now more spread out? Slow the pace of living…. likely be forced to. Once again, what does this mean? My pace of living is pretty slow right now. Who is deciding this for me? When bad weather hits such as a severe snow… well, just have to stay home. This will work well for emergency workers, power grid operators and the people who run your little stores. You are probably in favor of the gov't deciding who and who cannot go to work when the weather is "bad". Mass transit is a must. Unfortunately, if mass transit does not get me within one mile of my house. . . I might still have to own a car on top of paying mass transit prices. Population control must be implemented. If there were one-billion clamoring for resources rather than six-billion we likely wouldn’t be discussing the current and upcoming predictaments. Boy, this is one of the cruelest, most inhumane things I have ever heard. Can we start with you? I mean, seriously, Hitler would be proud. He started with Jews, mentally handicapped, the aged and homosexuals. What other inconvenient people do you want to add to the list who need to be "controlled". Hopefully, the free-market will assist us. If everybody and their brother and aunt and cousin and mistress would start driving itty bitty vehicles getting 40+ mpg it sure couldn’t hurt anything. Yes, but how can we carry all the goods to those itty-bitty stores all over the place? What do you drive? I road my bike to work this morning. Maybe we should make a law that everyone has to ride a bike everywhere. And while we are at it, why don't we just mandate that every car get 100,000 MPG. I'm sure it couldn't hurt anything. And, curtail all the pleasure boats and ATVs and all non-essential gas-burning equipment. It adds up. Let's put you in charge of determining what is non-essential. You'd like that. Loss of jobs in recreation fields would hopefully be covered by more local delivery jobs that use bicycles and carts, etc. Hopefully. Gotta’ be creative!!!!! True, but let me be creative for myself - you keep your nose out of my business. It would be boring but cut freeway speeds to 55, even 45 in metro areas. Why not just make every one drive 10 MPH? Maybe we could put a governor on every car. That would solve a lot of problems. Including highspeed chases People are too impatient nowadays. The pioneers trudged across the praries at 3 mph. 45 is livable and would be part of slowing the pace of life. Livable for whom? I might be too impatient, but at least I don't advocate the killing. . er, I mean, controlling of inconvenient people. A couple decades ago I read an article by a civil engineer who wrote that a couple lanes from each Interstate highway would make a wonderful bed for tracks to create a nation-wide mass transit system. Yes, wonderful. That won't cost a dime. And, we need to push hard to perfect nuclear FUSION as an electrical power source. The problem is that people like you killed all chance of nuclear power advancements in the 70's and 80's. Thanks. Wouldn’t it be nice if we could tell foreign countries to kiss our buttocks in regards to their oil? Wow, finally some sense. Too bad people like you won't let us drill in the Arctic, Wyoming, Utah, Pacific, or anywhere else. Too bad our politicians and elite class is more concerned about their personal wealth and power rather than what is good for the country as a whole. No comment. We, the people, may have to revolt to initiate the many societal changes that will be needed to prevent the US of A from devolving into a 2nd-world country for the masses with an ultra-rich elite at the top of the socio-economic pyramid. Fantastic idea. Then we can put people like you in charge of deciding our gas mileage, recreational choices, number of children, size of stores, and pace of life. Worked well in the USSR and the People's Republic of China and Cuba and Myanmar and a whole lot of other places that I would just love to live. obbop,

You win the prize for the most incredibly bad comment of the day.

Time to re-create how we live.
according to who? recreation of how we live is taking place all the time - it’s called the free market

Look to the past and emulate but omit the horses.
what in the world does that mean? what if I like my horse?

Live close to work and spread out retailing so there’s more smaller stores covering more area.
yes, and how will we transport the goods to those stores that are now more spread out?

Slow the pace of living…. likely be forced to.
Once again, what does this mean? My pace of living is pretty slow right now. Who is deciding this for me?

When bad weather hits such as a severe snow… well, just have to stay home.
This will work well for emergency workers, power grid operators and the people who run your little stores. You are probably in favor of the gov’t deciding who and who cannot go to work when the weather is “bad”.

Mass transit is a must.
Unfortunately, if mass transit does not get me within one mile of my house. . . I might still have to own a car on top of paying mass transit prices.

Population control must be implemented. If there were one-billion clamoring for resources rather than six-billion we likely wouldn’t be discussing the current and upcoming predictaments.
Boy, this is one of the cruelest, most inhumane things I have ever heard. Can we start with you? I mean, seriously, Hitler would be proud. He started with Jews, mentally handicapped, the aged and homosexuals. What other inconvenient people do you want to add to the list who need to be “controlled”.

Hopefully, the free-market will assist us. If everybody and their brother and aunt and cousin and mistress would start driving itty bitty vehicles getting 40+ mpg it sure couldn’t hurt anything.
Yes, but how can we carry all the goods to those itty-bitty stores all over the place? What do you drive? I road my bike to work this morning. Maybe we should make a law that everyone has to ride a bike everywhere. And while we are at it, why don’t we just mandate that every car get 100,000 MPG. I’m sure it couldn’t hurt anything.

And, curtail all the pleasure boats and ATVs and all non-essential gas-burning equipment. It adds up.
Let’s put you in charge of determining what is non-essential. You’d like that.

Loss of jobs in recreation fields would hopefully be covered by more local delivery jobs that use bicycles and carts, etc.
Hopefully.

Gotta’ be creative!!!!!
True, but let me be creative for myself - you keep your nose out of my business.

It would be boring but cut freeway speeds to 55, even 45 in metro areas.
Why not just make every one drive 10 MPH? Maybe we could put a governor on every car. That would solve a lot of problems. Including highspeed chases

People are too impatient nowadays. The pioneers trudged across the praries at 3 mph. 45 is livable and would be part of slowing the pace of life.
Livable for whom? I might be too impatient, but at least I don’t advocate the killing. . er, I mean, controlling of inconvenient people.

A couple decades ago I read an article by a civil engineer who wrote that a couple lanes from each Interstate highway would make a wonderful bed for tracks to create a nation-wide mass transit system.
Yes, wonderful. That won’t cost a dime.

And, we need to push hard to perfect nuclear FUSION as an electrical power source.
The problem is that people like you killed all chance of nuclear power advancements in the 70’s and 80’s. Thanks.

Wouldn’t it be nice if we could tell foreign countries to kiss our buttocks in regards to their oil?
Wow, finally some sense. Too bad people like you won’t let us drill in the Arctic, Wyoming, Utah, Pacific, or anywhere else.

Too bad our politicians and elite class is more concerned about their personal wealth and power rather than what is good for the country as a whole.
No comment.

We, the people, may have to revolt to initiate the many societal changes that will be needed to prevent the US of A from devolving into a 2nd-world country for the masses with an ultra-rich elite at the top of the socio-economic pyramid.
Fantastic idea. Then we can put people like you in charge of deciding our gas mileage, recreational choices, number of children, size of stores, and pace of life. Worked well in the USSR and the People’s Republic of China and Cuba and Myanmar and a whole lot of other places that I would just love to live.

]]> By: obbop http://www.punny.org/money/the-wonder-of-ethanol-lower-gas-mileage-higher-food-prices-and-now-bonus-car-death/#comment-187675 obbop Mon, 02 Jun 2008 02:56:11 +0000 http://www.punny.org/?p=603#comment-187675 Time to re-create how we live. Look to the past and emulate but omit the horses. Live close to work and spread out retailing so there's more smaller stores covering more area. Slow the pace of living.... likely be forced to. When bad weather hits such as a severe snow... well, just have to stay home. Mass transit is a must. Population control must be implemented. If there were one-billion clamoring for resources rather than six-billion we likely wouldn't be discussing the current and upcoming predictaments. Hopefully, the free-market will assist us. If everybody and their brother and aunt and cousin and mistress would start driving itty bitty vehicles getting 40+ mpg it sure couldn't hurt anything. And, curtail all the pleasure boats and ATVs and all non-essential gas-burning equipment. It adds up. Loss of jobs in recreation fields would hopefully be covered by more local delivery jobs that use bicycles and carts, etc. Gotta' be creative!!!!! It would be boring but cut freeway speeds to 55, even 45 in metro areas. People are too impatient nowadays. The pioneers trudged across the praries at 3 mph. 45 is livable and would be part of slowing the pace of life. A couple decades ago I read an article by a civil engineer who wrote that a couple lanes from each Interstate highway would make a wonderful bed for tracks to create a nation-wide mass transit system. And, we need to push hard to perfect nuclear FUSION as an electrical power source. Wouldn't it be nice if we could tell foreign countries to kiss our buttocks in regards to their oil? Too bad our politicians and elite class is more concerned about their personal wealth and power rather than what is good for the country as a whole. We, the people, may have to revolt to initiate the many societal changes that will be needed to prevent the US of A from devolving into a 2nd-world country for the masses with an ultra-rich elite at the top of the socio-economic pyramid. Time to re-create how we live.

Look to the past and emulate but omit the horses.

Live close to work and spread out retailing so there’s more smaller stores covering more area.

Slow the pace of living…. likely be forced to.

When bad weather hits such as a severe snow… well, just have to stay home.

Mass transit is a must.

Population control must be implemented. If there were one-billion clamoring for resources rather than six-billion we likely wouldn’t be discussing the current and upcoming predictaments.

Hopefully, the free-market will assist us. If everybody and their brother and aunt and cousin and mistress would start driving itty bitty vehicles getting 40+ mpg it sure couldn’t hurt anything.

And, curtail all the pleasure boats and ATVs and all non-essential gas-burning equipment. It adds up.

Loss of jobs in recreation fields would hopefully be covered by more local delivery jobs that use bicycles and carts, etc.

Gotta’ be creative!!!!!

It would be boring but cut freeway speeds to 55, even 45 in metro areas.

People are too impatient nowadays. The pioneers trudged across the praries at 3 mph. 45 is livable and would be part of slowing the pace of life.

A couple decades ago I read an article by a civil engineer who wrote that a couple lanes from each Interstate highway would make a wonderful bed for tracks to create a nation-wide mass transit system.

And, we need to push hard to perfect nuclear FUSION as an electrical power source.

Wouldn’t it be nice if we could tell foreign countries to kiss our buttocks in regards to their oil?

Too bad our politicians and elite class is more concerned about their personal wealth and power rather than what is good for the country as a whole.

We, the people, may have to revolt to initiate the many societal changes that will be needed to prevent the US of A from devolving into a 2nd-world country for the masses with an ultra-rich elite at the top of the socio-economic pyramid.

]]> By: Kyle http://www.punny.org/money/the-wonder-of-ethanol-lower-gas-mileage-higher-food-prices-and-now-bonus-car-death/#comment-187542 Kyle Sun, 01 Jun 2008 16:43:40 +0000 http://www.punny.org/?p=603#comment-187542 Well, it's hot the rest of the year too. If I could take a shower at the office I wouldn't mind. Well, it’s hot the rest of the year too. If I could take a shower at the office I wouldn’t mind.

]]> By: Monty Loree http://www.punny.org/money/the-wonder-of-ethanol-lower-gas-mileage-higher-food-prices-and-now-bonus-car-death/#comment-187537 Monty Loree Sun, 01 Jun 2008 16:03:07 +0000 http://www.punny.org/?p=603#comment-187537 The main thing is that everybody is talking about alternative energies at this point. It's all the buzz on the internet etc etc. That means that the change is just beginning. It's finally getting into people's subconscious. It will probably take a few more years to get any drastic movements in the alternative energy business. The main thing is that everybody is talking about alternative energies at this point. It’s all the buzz on the internet etc etc.

That means that the change is just beginning. It’s finally getting into people’s subconscious.

It will probably take a few more years to get any drastic movements in the alternative energy business.

]]> By: Yinna http://www.punny.org/money/the-wonder-of-ethanol-lower-gas-mileage-higher-food-prices-and-now-bonus-car-death/#comment-187083 Yinna Fri, 30 May 2008 20:03:45 +0000 http://www.punny.org/?p=603#comment-187083 Kyle - that should keep you only from biking in August. That's still 11 months of the year you could save on car expenses! Kyle - that should keep you only from biking in August. That’s still 11 months of the year you could save on car expenses!

]]> By: Grant http://www.punny.org/money/the-wonder-of-ethanol-lower-gas-mileage-higher-food-prices-and-now-bonus-car-death/#comment-187072 Grant Fri, 30 May 2008 17:46:22 +0000 http://www.punny.org/?p=603#comment-187072 A year ago, I would have never even considered carpooling with my wife to work. There were too many reasons not to in my opinion. We are now carpooling at least 3 days a week to work... A year ago, I would have never even considered carpooling with my wife to work. There were too many reasons not to in my opinion.

We are now carpooling at least 3 days a week to work…

]]>