Jump to content

Greenies Duped By "bio Fuel" Lies


Incommando
 Share

Recommended Posts

Another lie from the leftists and tree huggers: making fuel from corn would reduce costs and emissions. Thinking people saw through it from the beginning but the greenie sprout eaters bought it hook, line, and sinker. The truth? It both costs more ( much more when you include government subsidies) and pollutes more. Left-leaning outlets use the headline "fuels from corn no better than gas" while honest places are using the correct headline, that it is worse than gas,  listed below: 

 


 

Now add the billions of government dollars lost on Tesla's failures, the hundreds of millions lost by investor's in Tesla's failures, and the ridiculous per-car tax subsidies given to both the producer and purchasers of an electric car and you see that this is the next big "green" scam...if the media will ever report it. I should not be paying Tesla or Nissan tax money to lower the selling cost of an electric car and we should not be giving $7,500 tax credits ( not just a reduction off of reported income, a credit for tax paid) to wealthy people who can afford a Tesla toy whose  average selling price is $122,000

 

:soap box:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sucks

it takes more than a gallon of gas worth of energy to plant, fertilized, grow & harvast the corn,

Nevermind the energy it takes to turn that corn  into ethanol.

Nevermind also that the gallon of ethanol then REDUCES the mpg of the engine that consumes it,

while reducing the shelf life of the gas,

AND destroying parts of the fuel system it runs in.

 

Fail Fail Fail Fail Fail all the way around.

 

Ethanol is so corrosive they can't even ship it via pipelines like every other fuel,

further adding to its transportation cost.

 

So make that fail fail fail fail fail fail. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh,

and one more fail,

 

since not everyone goes to bed with a full belly,

the circlejxrk of turning corn + energy + diesel + more energy into MPG killing Ethanol also  consumes water, fertilizer, equipment & farmland that could better have been used to make

FOOD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ethanol is made from corn that isn't considered food-grade. I guess you're taking away animal feed, though, and more importantly crop land. In other climates, ethanol is made from sugar cane, and you can get a much better return on the fuel invested that way. Brazil has been using sugar-cane based ethanol in their fuel since the oil crisis in the 70's and is at the point where it's considered sustainable. But yes, it's still much harder on just about anything it's put in than straight gasoline. Either way, corn-based ethanol sucks, and was put forward by the corn lobby who somehow managed to convince the greenies that it was better for the environment. Capitalism at work, right there. 

Does ethanol make a decent fuel? Ask a top-fuel dragster. But in my opinion, bio-diesels are a much better option. If we could find a decent (inexpensive and light-weight) way to store large quantities of electricity, electric vehicles would be an even better option, but currently the only vehicles that do a half-way decent job of using electricity to power them need on-board generation systems to keep them going. As much as I like my dino juice, if you've ever driven an electric performance vehicle, you'd also be converted.

 

While most of the environmental types are a little nuts and believe just about everything the media tells them, their cause is a good one. This planet is for all intents and purposes a closed system, and it's not going to be able to take care of all the $#!& we throw at it. There's also a finite quantity of oil in the ground — It's not going to run out for a while, but it's better to have something in place for when it does, and bio-fuels are a start.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, um, these are the same types who told us thirty five years ago that we would die in an ice age by now. Then came the totally made up scare tactic of global warming and the biggest lie: that it is man made. The correct term is climate change and it has always occurred. The current warming cycle began at least ten thousands years ago and had nothing to do with humanity. I certainly am not under a mile-thick ice sheet although such was here during that time. The cavemen did it!!!

 

The feed shortage is upping OUR food prices. Especially for beef. It has long been a greenie goal here to limit or eliminate cattle production. Coincidence? Hardly.

 

Then the cause switched to auto emissions. It may have had some validity 40 years ago but the law of diminishing returns has rendered it a moot point and yet they still keep harping on it. One volcanic eruption such as the Iceland one last year more than surpasses any human created sources yet such truths are ignored in favor of propaganda.

 

I could go on and on but basically this is a political issue, not an environmental one, and the "scientists" are no more than activists with dubious science or more accurately out-right lies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I top off on zero ethanol at the only semi local place every other fill up, then fill at the closest station at exactly 1/2 tank. For long trips, I fill from empty at zero ethanol. A little more expensive, but even mixed, I see 1-2 mpg increase, and better power. Straight ethanol, I get 16mpg best with mixed on the KJ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How would they know? They don't run ethanol. They run a mixture of nitromethane and methanol.

 

Correct. Drag racing isn't really my thing... my bad.

 

Many other fields of motorsports have adopted ethanol to a certain degree, with reasonable success, in particular Indy and TUSC in the US. I'm not convinced it's much more than a marketing ploy, making it look cool to run ethanol blends. Whatever it is, though, fossil fuels are a finite resource. No one really knows when we're going to run out (but it won't be for a while) and it's not a bad idea to have something in place for when we do... and we've been distilling ethanol for over 1000 years. That's not to say it's the best option out there. Definitely not when it's corn based.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another lie from the leftists and tree huggers: making fuel from corn would reduce costs and emissions. Thinking people saw through it from the beginning but the greenie sprout eaters bought it hook, line, and sinker. The truth? It both costs more ( much more when you include government subsidies) and pollutes more. Left-leaning outlets use the headline "fuels from corn no better than gas" while honest places are using the correct headline, that it is worse than gas,  listed below: 

 

http://www.cbs2iowa.com/news/features/top-stories/stories/study-fuels-corn-waste-worse-than-gas-26196.shtml

 

Now add the billions of government dollars lost on Tesla's failures, the hundreds of millions lost by investor's in Tesla's failures, and the ridiculous per-car tax subsidies given to both the producer and purchasers of an electric car and you see that this is the next big "green" scam...if the media will ever report it. I should not be paying Tesla or Nissan tax money to lower the selling cost of an electric car and we should not be giving $7,500 tax credits ( not just a reduction off of reported income, a credit for tax paid) to wealthy people who can afford a Tesla toy whose  average selling price is $122,000

 

:soap box:

I see people did not read the article. This is fuel from corn waste(stalks, leaves, etcetera) and not corn kernels itself. Distilling corn kernels to ethanol is much easier.

 

Also, Tesla is not failing. Their sedan is one of the most popular high end luxury cars right now and their stock is doing well having jumped nearly $200 in the past year. Also, $87,070 is the base price of the high end P85 Model S which is $34,930 less than your quoted average selling price. Even with some options added to make a P85+ it still only comes to $110,000.

 

Clearly you have not read or done any research.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where on earth do you come up with the words "only $110k"

 

 

 

The point is it costs *more* for the negligable gains of e cars or corn based fuel. It Is NOT affordable. Not in the slightest.

Try it for yourself: http://www.teslamotors.com/models/design

The early adopters are paying the up front costs of research and development. Tesla's current goal is to introduce a model in the $30,000 to $40,000 range in 2015.(The cheapest right now being $63,570.) Tesla Motors planning to facilitate that by building a battery factory in the USA to avoid having to ship chemicals around then ship heavy batteries back to the USA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Idk how you guys get your electricity produced, but here in Anchorage, Alaska our plant runs off of gas. So, you burn gas to make electricity to charge your car so you don't burn gas... Judging from a chart compiled in 2009, between natural gas and petroleum, 25% of the USA's electricity is gas powered. So unless that's changed significantly, these cars are pretty pointless for 1 in 4 of us. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Natural gas is more efficiently consumed by a generating station than in a car, and electricity is more efficiently distributed as well. It's a small benefit, but still a benefit.

Also, corn was always a poor source of biofuels no matter how you hash it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Another lie from the leftists and tree huggers: making fuel from corn would reduce costs and emissions. Thinking people saw through it from the beginning but the greenie sprout eaters bought it hook, line, and sinker. The truth? It both costs more ( much more when you include government subsidies) and pollutes more. Left-leaning outlets use the headline "fuels from corn no better than gas" while honest places are using the correct headline, that it is worse than gas,  listed below:  http://www.cbs2iowa.com/news/features/top-stories/stories/study-fuels-corn-waste-worse-than-gas-26196.shtml Now add the billions of government dollars lost on Tesla's failures, the hundreds of millions lost by investor's in Tesla's failures, and the ridiculous per-car tax subsidies given to both the producer and purchasers of an electric car and you see that this is the next big "green" scam...if the media will ever report it. I should not be paying Tesla or Nissan tax money to lower the selling cost of an electric car and we should not be giving $7,500 tax credits ( not just a reduction off of reported income, a credit for tax paid) to wealthy people who can afford a Tesla toy whose  average selling price is $122,000  :soap box:

I see people did not read the article. This is fuel from corn waste(stalks, leaves, etcetera) and not corn kernels itself. Distilling corn kernels to ethanol is much easier.Also, Tesla is not failing. Their sedan is one of the most popular high end luxury cars right now and their stock is doing well having jumped nearly $200 in the past year. Also, $87,070 is the base price of the high end P85 Model S which is $34,930 less than your quoted average selling price. Even with some options added to make a P85+ it still only comes to $110,000.Clearly you have not read or done any research.
clearly you have not researched Tesla's past and are drinking their PR kool aid. I was referring to their *past* failures and defaults. If you would do some research regarding the average selling price of the S you would see that few if any base models have been made or sold. As greenie dweebs,techies who have to have the latest, and narcissists are willing to pay a premium to be first Tesla is building loaded models almost exclusively. These sell above list for a stripper. Your chosen "some" options bloats the base price by $22k to $110k. Your research appears to be nothing more then repeating the Tesla website with no consideration to a little thing called bias. Will Tesla succeed in the future? Probably but only if politicians keep the welfare that lowers the prices going and they can bring a viable mass market car to the table at a competitive price. Biofuel is still a boondoggle that may similarly succeed in the future but for now is a waste
Link to comment
Share on other sites

clearly you have not researched Tesla's past and are drinking their PR kool aid. I was referring to their *past* failures and defaults. If you would do some research regarding the average selling price of the S you would see that few if any base models have been made or sold. As greenie dweebs,techies who have to have the latest, and narcissists are willing to pay a premium to be first Tesla is building loaded models almost exclusively. These sell above list for a stripper. Your chosen "some" options bloats the base price by $22k to $110k. Your research appears to be nothing more then repeating the Tesla website with no consideration to a little thing called bias. Will Tesla succeed in the future? Probably but only if politicians keep the welfare that lowers the prices going and they can bring a viable mass market car to the table at a competitive price. Biofuel is still a boondoggle that may similarly succeed in the future but for now is a waste

Please post your sources for this information and cite it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

clearly you have not researched Tesla's past and are drinking their PR kool aid. I was referring to their *past* failures and defaults. If you would do some research regarding the average selling price of the S you would see that few if any base models have been made or sold. As greenie dweebs,techies who have to have the latest, and narcissists are willing to pay a premium to be first Tesla is building loaded models almost exclusively. These sell above list for a stripper. Your chosen "some" options bloats the base price by $22k to $110k. Your research appears to be nothing more then repeating the Tesla website with no consideration to a little thing called bias. Will Tesla succeed in the future? Probably but only if politicians keep the welfare that lowers the prices going and they can bring a viable mass market car to the table at a competitive price. Biofuel is still a boondoggle that may similarly succeed in the future but for now is a waste

Please post your sources for this information and cite it.

 

Many of us remember a day before google and, shocking as it seems, we remembered stuff for ourselves. Maybe a  Wechsler of 167 helps me here but this type of discussion without needing to google is still the norm among my circle of friends. If you don't know your stuff you don't enter the conversation. It is the difference between knowledge and parroting. Apparently knowing things has fallen even further out of favor than I feared. 

 

Although you are not at all clear whether you are referring to the actual topic,biofuel .....

 

http://www.polywellnuclearfusion.com/AltCantDoIt/Biofuel.html

http://www.biofuelwatch.org.uk/files/Big-Green-Lies-leaflet.pdf

http://books.google.com/books?id=UHqh16GO-pgC&pg=PA149&lpg=PA149&dq=biofuel+lies&source=bl&ots=0rqnugwn6e&sig=Eyko6K0zhW35wlV79dr8Vjyfhe0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=tOpXU9D7OeHN2QWqwoHABg&ved=0CFoQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=biofuel%20lies&f=false

 

Or maybe you mean the sub-subject,.... Tesla? ....

http://www.forbes.com/sites/louiswoodhill/2013/05/01/both-fiskers-collapse-and-teslas-profits-show-the-folly-of-government-venture-capital/

There can be no doubt that, at this point, Tesla is a success.  However, it still represents a failure for the federal government’s “green energy” loan program.  Simply put, the purpose of the DOE loans was to save the earth, and Tesla used them to produce toys to amuse the rich.

 

Here are about 22 pages of background including the money that was lost. \

http://www.businessinsider.com/teslas-financial-problems-and-recovery-2013-2#that-same-year-martin-eberhard-filed-a-lawsuit-against-elon-musk-and-tesla-motors-it-was-later-resolved-7

 

Here is some more about how Tesla is a toy basically aimed at those who want the "new" and who prefer form over function

http://www.businessinsider.com/teslas-financial-problems-and-recovery-2013-2#that-same-year-martin-eberhard-filed-a-lawsuit-against-elon-musk-and-tesla-motors-it-was-later-resolved-7

 

http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/article/20140419/BUSINESS/304190048/Tesla-s-US-sales-slow-analysts-question-growth-prospects

 

 

There are thousands of articles, books, posts, etc on both biofuel and Tesla... Feel free to educate yourself to your hearts desire.

 

Sorry, but I didn't basically cut and paste the Tesla sales brochure and buy into it. The info is out there if you want it. This has been discussed many times on many forums and in multiple sources of media. However it is not always easy to re-locate as Musk has a history of paying to push down negative info about him and his firms in search engines. That he does so is even mentioned in the lawsuit against Musk by by Tesla's founder Martin Eberhard. .... You will note that just about any search you run will direct you to company sites or shill sites, such as the Tesla-run TeslaRumors.com, that tries to hide as a fan site no matter the actual topic on Tesla. Companies pay for this service. This would explain why company propaganda is apparently your only source of info on Tesla. That is all that they want you to see. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...