how is adding ethanol to gas better the environment than just buring gasoline.?
492014
1. Ethanol burns cleaner, without all the pollutants associated with petroleum products.  BY adding ethanol to gasoline, the percentage of petroleum related pollutants goes down.\n\n2. Ethanol is a renewable resource. Petroleum isn't.
932916
ethanol further purifies petrol and help the burning process there is some thing known as kalorific value which will decide the purity with ethanol the petrol burns to full capacity and in turn improves kv  with less pollution and also ethanol keeps fuel tank till injector clean \nviv-a-vis less pollution improved mielage and easy start
167901
Ethanol is not the answer for raising gas prices. They produce it as a cleaner burning fuel. It all deals with the theory of global warming. I don't buy it, but that is the reasoning they use for it.
412358
You could skip the Nitrogen Oxide and use Nitrous Oxide.   :o)
416091
It will improve gas mileage but at what cost.  You might get two to three miles per gallon more.  But at 5 to 5 hundred dollars worth of stuff it isn't exactly cost efficient.  See my point.  Unless you are just looking for a little more power and a better sound.
601243
Nuclear, beyond any shadow of a doubt. \n\nThe US has appreciable Uranium reserves itself, and major Uranium producing nations such as Australia are already favored trading partners and stable western democracies.\n\nForget corn. It takes more oil to produce ethanol than the ethanol replaces. I. other words using corn for energy means we have to use MORE oil. We currently produce corn ethanol as an economic subsidy for corn growers. If we didn't make ethanol we would have to dump that corn in the ocean. But Corn ethanol is NOT a fuel source. See the first article below.\n\nHydrogen is iffy. We can only obtain hydrogen by splitting water using massive amounts of electricity. That electricity has to be obtained using normal power stations, usually coal. As a result hydrogen is like ethanol: it takes far more fossil fuel to produce than it actually replaces. That makes it a possible oil substitute but very unwise WRT greenhouse gas emissions unless coupled with lots of nuclear power stations.\n\nSolar and wind are never going to be major players. There simply isn't enough land available to make more than a minor contribution and because the supplies are erratic we would still need other power stations to make up the regular shortfalls. See the second article below.\n\nNucelar is the only real solution.
991569
Yes this is an important topic.\nthe amount is tiny really.\nwhy not try to blow up a balloon and never burst it then all th gas will be traped and not effect the environment\nx x x
1124319
Market it to intellectuals. Some student at my school (chemists, I think) proposed that we use the excess grease from the dining halls to be converted to ethanol on campus in a lab they built and now all of the facilities vehicles are running partially on ethanol (I think it's a mix of ethanol and gasoline, but I could be wrong). \n\nThe layperson isn't going to be interested in ethanol until it becomes mainstream. The best bet is to start getting Universities and Hosiptals to run their vehicles (ambulances, security vehicles, construction vehicles). \n\nAlso, it would be sweet if the government supported ethanol usage by providing tax incentives for these companies (like you get if you buy a hybrid car). It's really very frustrating because ethanol production is so inexpensive. I feel your pain.
153405
I like the idea of Bio fuel, you can make a low octane fuel from all kinds of agricultural bi-products. We happen to be really good at agriculture
395165
Thats really vague, there are millions of methods. But one that fascinates me is synthesizing natural resources. We have all thought at one time or another that gas could only come from oil but thats false. In WWII the germans got their gas using carbon monoxide, hydrogen, and some other chemicals. Since the 80's New Zealand and South Africa have been using ethanol and the zeolite (porous rock) ZSM-5 to make their gas.\n\nOther good methods involve recycling, but doing it in an energy conserving manner. Which some say ours are not. \n\nThe ultimate goal would be to "use our waste as our resouces". A good example being using the carbon monoxide that comes from car exahaust to synthesize gas. Imagine, being able to do that kind of chemistry with every one of our resources. Thats the ultimate preservation and conservation around!
230301
Hydrogen is less efficient that oil right now but if we developed a more clean way of making it (like photobiosynthesis) it would be much better for the environment, and the switch has to start somewhere.\n\nIt is my opinion that it would be better for the environment if we just ran out of fuel, because people tend to destroy the planet when they have lots of energy, regardless of how clean the energy is. It's the greed that is bad for the environment, not the fuel. Hydrocarbons could actually be made to be very environmentally friendly if car and energy companies actually cared about environmental health more than stuffing their pockets with cash.
584362
The gas shortage was because they had to completly empty out the underground storage tanks (USTs) to completly remove any water that might be in there before putting the 10% ethanol fuel in there! \nEthanol is a cleaner burning fuel and hopefully will be our new gasoline soon. Ethanol can run in all vehicles and once they figure out how to make ethanol more economically, then I believe it will be a main fuel for the U.S.A.
1095014
ethanol is not cost effective. It takes more energy to produce a gallon of ethanol than can be created from it.  The only thing supporting it is the government giveaways--your tax dollars.  Another subsidy for the campaign contributors.  If it were not for stupid greedy politicians there would be none.
670059
The attached link indicates ethanol / gasoline blend cost $2.41 per gallon and achieves 17 miles per gallon.\n\nGoogle certainly is handy for fact checking. \n\nBest wishes !
668411
I would like to Change the Clinton/Gore EPA-OBD II Law. This applies to all Gasoline Powered Vehicles in the USA from 1996 to the Present, like Yours. This Law requires that all Vehicles remain Factory Stock, in order to Pass Inspection. Specifically, the Engine Fuel System must Run at 14.7 Parts of Air to 1 Part of Fuel. I've found a way to Convert Gasoline into Propane, 100 Parts of Air to 1 Part of Fuel. My Unit is Safe, Compact, and uses Low Pressure Air to do it's thing. 50 + MPG with even the Largest SUV, and a 10 X Reduction of Emissions. And, thanks to the EPA-OBD II Law, it's Illegal! When that Gestapo-Inspired Vehicle Inspection Device is Connected, any Change at all, even for the Better, and the Vhicle will Fail, and will be Illegal to Drive! Because it's not Putting out enough Pollution to meet [O]riginal [E]quipment [M]anufacturer's Specifications! This is Insane! I'm not the First, only the Latest. I've been to the US Patent Office to Check out the "Wild Stories" about Fuel Vaporizers that have been kept off the Market. Guess What? It's True! Case in Point, the Pogue Carburetor, with a Patented Claim of 100 MPG, with a Flathead Ford Engine Powered Vehicle that was 15 MPG!This was before WW II. So, as far as Getting a Patent, forget it! See, Greed and Money have Stopped it Every Single Time! And Now the EPA-OBD II Law....... Here's what I'd really Like to do to Expose the Hypocricy of this Law. I'd like to Restore and Convert a whole Fleet of Vehicles and Donate them to Charity Starting with the Local Meals-On-Wheels Program, then, Volunteer Disabled Veterans' Services.And so Many Others. There is no Shortage of Good People that want to Volunteer to Help the less Fortunate. But with the High Cost of Fuel, it's becoming Increasingly Difficult. Even if I did manage to get the Funds to do this, someone Connected with "Big Oil" would find a way to make One of the Converted Vehicles Explode, to Discredit it. Remember the TV News Show where the Chevy Truck with the "Side-Saddle" Fuel Tank was Rigged to Explode to Discredit It? See, all Petroleum is essentially the Same, on a Molecular Level. Only the Dispersal is Altered. If That's Wrong, then how is it that Engines DO Run on Propane? To do so by Conventional Means is such a Hassle that it's just not worth it! Hybirds? At Highway Speeds, the Gas [14.7 to1] Engine Kicks-In, Plus, the Heavy, Expensive Batteries have to be Hauled. To Sum Up, I'd like to change the EPA-OBD II Law that requires Vehicles to Emit Enough Pollution to Pass Inspection, with any reduction resulting in Failure. But, "IT AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN" as long as "Big Oil" is in Control! Watch Closely the Next Time Your Car is Inspected, and ask how many have Failed,and Why! 14.7 to 1. It's the Law that must Change! For even more Insight, check out this Website. It's a Couple of Years Old, but lots of Good Info.http://energy21.freeservers.com/bookrep.html
433496
Mainly when the automotive ind. decides to earn less money and throw away part of the technology they've been using for about 90 years. But regarding alcohol it is already used in some countries like Brazil, but there is no big difference... we should go for hydrogen or solar... well actually water looks nice but I don't think it'll work.
129126
ithink your talking about E85, the 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline. there are about 600 pumps nationwide right now, but you can look up more information here http://www.e85fuel.com/index.php