I mentioned a while back, maybe not in this blog, that alternative fuels cost more per mile than conventional ones. This is one reason why they never became mainstream as a fuel for real purposes. Wind and solar power cannot generate enough torque to run a lathe, a semi-truck laden with 40000lbs of goods, or move an M1-A1 Abrams across the desert. We need fossil fuels to generate enough power to turn those motors, because very few alternatives exist that can do that, and they're not as safe (i.e. uranium).
When they came out with E85, I know I saw math from AAA showing that a gallon of E85, though cheaper, didn't give the same fuel economy as 2-2-4-trimethyl pentane (regular octane fuel). So, although you spend less per fillup, you fill up your car more frequently using flex fuel. If you don't believe me, compare your fuel economy now to that a few months ago. During winter, a lot of filling stations (at least in NV) use E10 to cut down on pollution. It's often marked on the pumps that fuel is oxygenated during the winter (OCT-JAN), and I usually see a 15% reduction in fuel performance (down to 37mpg from 41mpg this last week with no changes in driving habits). At that calculation, E85 must be SIGNIFICANTLY cheaper in order to break even, not to mention flex fuel cars cost more, because manufacturers must build them differently to accommodate a new fuel, which cost they pass on to you.
These facts make this picture all the more telling:
I shot this picture on the way to work this morning. It's really bad because it's from my cell phone, but it shows that E85 (top) and regular unleaded (bottom) BOTH COST $1.79/gal. Apparently E85 has a price floor. Sucks to be using that.
Hybrid and flex fuel cars are nothing more than vanity purchases for purpose of appearance's sake. It's like putting on Versace or Georgio Armani: it's fashionable, and it enables you to point to your peers and say, "look what I'm doing to save the country". I love passing those crappy cars that don't make a dime's worth of difference more than my 1995 Saturn SL1.
When they came out with E85, I know I saw math from AAA showing that a gallon of E85, though cheaper, didn't give the same fuel economy as 2-2-4-trimethyl pentane (regular octane fuel). So, although you spend less per fillup, you fill up your car more frequently using flex fuel. If you don't believe me, compare your fuel economy now to that a few months ago. During winter, a lot of filling stations (at least in NV) use E10 to cut down on pollution. It's often marked on the pumps that fuel is oxygenated during the winter (OCT-JAN), and I usually see a 15% reduction in fuel performance (down to 37mpg from 41mpg this last week with no changes in driving habits). At that calculation, E85 must be SIGNIFICANTLY cheaper in order to break even, not to mention flex fuel cars cost more, because manufacturers must build them differently to accommodate a new fuel, which cost they pass on to you.
These facts make this picture all the more telling:
I shot this picture on the way to work this morning. It's really bad because it's from my cell phone, but it shows that E85 (top) and regular unleaded (bottom) BOTH COST $1.79/gal. Apparently E85 has a price floor. Sucks to be using that.
Hybrid and flex fuel cars are nothing more than vanity purchases for purpose of appearance's sake. It's like putting on Versace or Georgio Armani: it's fashionable, and it enables you to point to your peers and say, "look what I'm doing to save the country". I love passing those crappy cars that don't make a dime's worth of difference more than my 1995 Saturn SL1.
No comments:
Post a Comment