On Mar 2, 9:40 pm, Joe Kappus wrote:
On Sun, 02 Mar 2008 09:59:17 -0800, MooseFET wrote:
[....]
For a great many drivers highway milage doesn't matter. Stop and go
driving milage matters a lot for them since that is how the car is
operated nearly 100% of the time.

For many people a plugin hybrid would be the best answer.

People who live in cities will benefit. But why have a car in the first
place if you live in a major city? Why not use mass transit? I can tell
you most of my driving is not constant stop and go, and I still live in
the most densely populated state.

In many places, it is quicker to walk than take transit. If you need
to carry packages etc, transit may not be an option at all.



2. Biodiesel is shown to produce cleaner emissions, with the exception
of more NOx production (which by the way can be controlled due to the
lack of sulfur in BD).

You can control NOx in with sulfur in the fuel. It isn't easy and it
isn't cheap.

Yeah, which is why the government went hellbent on mandating ULSD so
cheaper systems could be implemented.

The sulfur is its own problem. That rotten egg smell isn't just
umpleasant.


Unlike ULSD diesel, BD protects the engine better. It
also benefits farmers in the country and slows the the bleed that
continues (and will continue) in the US economy due to its reliance on
foreign exports. The only real downside with BD is that it does not
have a high tolerance for extreme cold, but most of the country could
still be shifted to it (the rest could have smaller amounts blended
in).

As soon as you start planting crops just to make biodiesel, its
advantage is lost. Biodiesel from waste products adds value to the
economy. Biodiesel from crops doesn't because it is all from seed oils
which takes a lot of energy inputs to make.

It keeps the money in the country and benefits farmers,

Maybe not. If there is a free market in such things some countries
nearer the tropics will have an advantage. Farmers rarely benefit
from such things anyway. Folk like ADM get most of the benefit.


the negative side
is it increases some crop prices. I don't see how planting more crops
for biodiesel spells a loss,

If it takes more energy to product the biodiesel than you can get out
of it, you certainly have a loss. Short of that you can end up
forcing crops into land that is less suited to its growth and where
more inputs are needed to produce the same food. The result can be
more total energy.


I think if anything it would create a new
industry in the US. The country has plenty of farmland, it might even be
able to export if it can build the facilities.

If you look at the really good farm land vs just the farm land, you
will see that the US doesn't really have a huge amount. A lot of the
farm land in the US requires significant inputs to produce a crop.




3. Ethanol on the other hand has been shown to have a short shelf life,
is extremely corrosive to many materials,

Biodiesel also attacks many materials.

True about that, I forgot it myself :P