Has it happened already?

[gwd]

I heard something on the radio this morning that cattle ranchers are experiencing a hay shortage in some parts of the country. One guy said that the farmers couldn't switch to corn because it has become too expensive due to the higher demand by the ethanol industry. He also said that if a good way to convert cellulose to ethanol were invented then grass and hay would also become expensive. So is the alternative fuel industry already affecting food prices? I mean are we already reallocating part of our food chain into fuel for SUVs? Maybe ethanol fuel put food prices up to the point where we stop eating like pigs and loose a few pounds. Last summer I heard some speculation that alternative fuels would make food more expensive but I didn't expect it to happen so quickly. It just rubs me the wrong way for when I have to pay more for my food so polluters can drive their cars and continue to degrade my quality of life. If this is true it will make me feel that I'm subsidizing car owners through my higher grocery bill.

[pedex]

price of corn has already doubled

your also paying 54 cents a gallon in ethanol subsidies

6 gallons of water + natural gas or coal + corn = 1 gallon ethanol which has less energy than what it took to produce it

cellulosic ethanol is a dead end unless a bug can be invented that will break the lignin and leave the carbohydrates in the plant alone(good luck), and even if that did happen, its still an extra step in a process that borders on being a net loser anyway

[Platy]

Last month I talked to a guy who breeds Black Angus cattle. He said feed prices are putting the squeeze on ranchers here in central Texas. I asked if it was helpful that dried distillers grain (DDG, an ethanol byproduct) could be used for cattle feed. He said, no, the DDG is cheap where it's made, but the cost of transporting it to this area makes it way too expensive.

[pedex]

not only that but the DDG is limited in how much they can feed them before it becomes a problem, I think Ive read its around 15% max of their diet

there's also an import tariff on ethanol which makes the domestic stuff attractive to produce

What's going to happen is more of the same just on a bigger scale, when the energy prices spiked last go round the poorer 3rd world nations found themselves unable to afford it, so demand fell off a bit, now the food prices are gonna get squeezed and some will starve, literally. The US will undoubtedly wipe out any excess food production and send that towards fuel. The US will cease to export food, and become a net importer of that too. Any poor nations depending on cheap grain from the US are gonna be out of luck unless they grow it themselves.

[Artkansas]

I don't know if you have been following Spanish language news. But the price of Tortillas is going through the roof, causing much havoc in Mexico. It's caused by corn being used for ethanol.

[derath]

Hopefully noone thought that impending oil shortages would only cause an increase in gas costs...

It is almost funny (except that it isn't) how tied together all of these issues are.

The price of corn is high due to this increased demand. Many say we can't grow enough to make a significant dent in oil consumption.

Partly this is due to how much farmland we have decimated to build McMansions and create sprawl.

The same problem that has created a lack of walkable neighborhoods etc. Which created a greater demand for cars.

Which use more oil, which brings us back to an impending oil shortage.

And we think we are the most intelligent creatures on the planet.

-D

[feba]

Food price increases wouldn't be nearly as big a problem if so many food/land sources weren't being wasted to feed livestock. The bigger concern, to me, is how chemically abused are the cheap foods going to be if this trend continues?

[lyeinyoureye]

[...]6 gallons of water + natural gas or coal + corn = 1 gallon ethanol which has less energy than what it took to produce it[...]

Eh... it depends. (http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2007/ethanol.html) What hasn't been discussed is the potential for more efficient engines via E85. The upper limit for gasoline efficiency depends on the octane of the fuel, higher octane implies that more EGR can be run, which absolutely kills pumping losses and boosts efficiency. E85 powered SI/PFI engines have greater efficiencies than their diesel counterparts, which means that vehicles tuned for E85 could nearly double current gasoline vehicle efficiency, all things being equal. So, if E85 is close to having an EROEI~=~unity, but doubles gasoline engine efficiency, the efficiency of use has roughly doubled. I'm guessing the enthusiasm for E85 is based on a 2002 (or 03?) paper done by the DOE, in which a VW TDI engine was retrofitted for SI/PFI/high EGR and showed better than diesel BTE with E85 and Methanol over the entire power band. The significance of this is low cost, greater than Prius energy efficiency, no hybrid system needed. Otoh, the US automotive industry has a history of accepting government grants for EV/AFV/efficient hybrids, using a small portion to build prototypes, and pocketing the rest while shelving the prototypes. Sure, they could make them, but they don't. Getting back on topic, I'm guessing in the short term corn prices will go up, as will any meat prices and certain foods. But, within a decade, I'm betting we'll see the normal corn prices, adjusted for inflation. Even if the current high cycle batts/ultra-caps are a load of horse %^&*, by 2015, the patent on EV size NiMH batts will have expired, and those are more than enough to build ~150-250 mile small passenger EVs that will absolutely trounce gas vehicles in cost over the life of the vehicle. These are the same batteries that SoCal Edison has "field tested" up to ~130k miles with little to no degradation in charge, and expects to approach 200k of useful life. So, EVs should have already hit, and I'm betting will hit, in a big way within the next decade.

[littledog]

Occasionally I go with some friends in their car to the new sprawl area of town. Inaccessible by bike or bus. The new subdivisions have all the grey tract houses with HUGE 3 and 1/2 car garages in the front of the house. Or maybe a two car and a 2and 1/2 car garage. All the winding streets connect to arterial roads which have no sidewalks much less a bike path. So every drives everywhere on what was the worlds best farm land a few years ago. And the old sprawl of 20 or 30 years ago is now the new ghetto.

Meanwhile in Mexico the tortilla's are getting too expensive to buy and people go hungry. Ethanol plants in the Midwest,USA,are spouting up all over the place. It makes the grain farmers and Agribusiness pretty happy though. The per capita income in the county I live in has decreased 15% in the last 10 years due to loss of manufacturing jobs. So who is buying all the new houses and new cars? Why aren't there sidewalks and bike trails in the new urban sprawl area? The huge indoor mall doesn't even have bus service and it has been there and is still growing for the last 25 years.

It is not just about the declining standard of living in the first world vs. 3rd world countries. It is about the average person being squezzed out everywhere.

[pedex]

Eh... it depends. (http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2007/ethanol.html) What hasn't been discussed is the potential for more efficient engines via E85. The upper limit for gasoline efficiency depends on the octane of the fuel, higher octane implies that more EGR can be run, which absolutely kills pumping losses and boosts efficiency. E85 powered SI/PFI engines have greater efficiencies than their diesel counterparts, which means that vehicles tuned for E85 could nearly double current gasoline vehicle efficiency, all things being equal. So, if E85 is close to having an EROEI~=~unity, but doubles gasoline engine efficiency, the efficiency of use has roughly doubled. I'm guessing the enthusiasm for E85 is based on a 2002 (or 03?) paper done by the DOE, in which a VW TDI engine was retrofitted for SI/PFI/high EGR and showed better than diesel BTE with E85 and Methanol over the entire power band. The significance of this is low cost, greater than Prius energy efficiency, no hybrid system needed. Otoh, the US automotive industry has a history of accepting government grants for EV/AFV/efficient hybrids, using a small portion to build prototypes, and pocketing the rest while shelving the prototypes. Sure, they could make them, but they don't. Getting back on topic, I'm guessing in the short term corn prices will go up, as will any meat prices and certain foods. But, within a decade, I'm betting we'll see the normal corn prices, adjusted for inflation. Even if the current high cycle batts/ultra-caps are a load of horse %^&*, by 2015, the patent on EV size NiMH batts will have expired, and those are more than enough to build ~150-250 mile small passenger EVs that will absolutely trounce gas vehicles in cost over the life of the vehicle. These are the same batteries that SoCal Edison has "field tested" up to ~130k miles with little to no degradation in charge, and expects to approach 200k of useful life. So, EVs should have already hit, and I'm betting will hit, in a big way within the next decade.


increases in compression and rpm range = less engine life all else being equal

1 gallon of ethanol has less energy than 1 gallon of gasoline

currently E85 engines based on what's happening ion places where its common, like brazil for example. E85= about 15% less mileage, not more

this is whats happening now, not futuristic possiblities which may or may not happen


I would guess the extra things needed to be done to ICE engines to handle more compression like whats done with diesels would more than likely offset any gains even done on a massive scale.

the answer is still less consumption, less miles traveled, and much more efficient vehicles, and that means smaller lighter cars and less powerful cars, and eventually, very very few cars

[noisebeam]

Related article originally from the Boston Globe:
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines07/0105-07.htm

Al

[pedex]

the other elephant in the room not being talked about is water

while the US doesnt have any super serious water issues yet, there are places where it is becoming a big problem, ethanol isnt gonna help that at all

all these things are tied together, its systemic, and must be approached as such, single "magic bullet" type knee jerk decisions wont work very well

[noisebeam]

the other elephant in the room not being talked about is water

while the US doesnt have any super serious water issues yet, there are places where it is becoming a big problem, ethanol isnt gonna help that at all

all these things are tied together, its systemic, and must be approached as such, single "magic bullet" type knee jerk decisions wont work very well
Absolutely. Maybe the US doesn't have any water issues that currently impact usage, but the usage levels have significantly impacted the environment. Most western rivers are just about dead. Only saline sludge flows into gulf of baja from the colorado river after all the usable water has been taken out and agricultural wastewater seeps back in.

A great read is a book called Cadillac Desert (http://www.amazon.com/Cadillac-Desert-American-Disappearing-Revised/dp/0140178244/sr=1-1/qid=1169656026/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-2094404-9332846?ie=UTF8&s=books).

Al

[fordfasterr]

we are so screwed now =(

[Roody]

Eh... it depends. (http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2007/ethanol.html) What hasn't been discussed is the potential for more efficient engines via E85. The upper limit for gasoline efficiency depends on the octane of the fuel, higher octane implies that more EGR can be run, which absolutely kills pumping losses and boosts efficiency. E85 powered SI/PFI engines have greater efficiencies than their diesel counterparts, which means that vehicles tuned for E85 could nearly double current gasoline vehicle efficiency, all things being equal. So, if E85 is close to having an EROEI~=~unity, but doubles gasoline engine efficiency, the efficiency of use has roughly doubled. I'm guessing the enthusiasm for E85 is based on a 2002 (or 03?) paper done by the DOE, in which a VW TDI engine was retrofitted for SI/PFI/high EGR and showed better than diesel BTE with E85 and Methanol over the entire power band. The significance of this is low cost, greater than Prius energy efficiency, no hybrid system needed. Otoh, the US automotive industry has a history of accepting government grants for EV/AFV/efficient hybrids, using a small portion to build prototypes, and pocketing the rest while shelving the prototypes. Sure, they could make them, but they don't. Getting back on topic, I'm guessing in the short term corn prices will go up, as will any meat prices and certain foods. But, within a decade, I'm betting we'll see the normal corn prices, adjusted for inflation. Even if the current high cycle batts/ultra-caps are a load of horse %^&*, by 2015, the patent on EV size NiMH batts will have expired, and those are more than enough to build ~150-250 mile small passenger EVs that will absolutely trounce gas vehicles in cost over the life of the vehicle. These are the same batteries that SoCal Edison has "field tested" up to ~130k miles with little to no degradation in charge, and expects to approach 200k of useful life. So, EVs should have already hit, and I'm betting will hit, in a big way within the next decade.
Stupid guy here. Would you please explain the POAI (plethora of acronyms and initials) in your post. I've noticed before that your posts are sometimes difficult to follow because you like to conserve those keystrokes. Obviously you're well informed on the topic and I'd like to be able to comprehend your writings. Thanks! :)

[Roody]

Another elephant is the fact that ethanol still emits greenhouse gases, both in its production and its use.

Also, George Bush likes ethanol, so there must be some fatal flaw in the logic. ;)

[HardyWeinberg]

I heard something on the radio this morning that cattle ranchers are experiencing a hay shortage in some parts of the country.

It's possibly just semantics that 'ranchers' wouldn't have as much of a feed problem as 'farmers' would. Cows turned loose to pasture/forage don't require the feed budget that (industrial) dairy cattle who are never out on their own do. I was amazed when I moved from NY (the rural part) to WA in 1994 that beef was about half the price in the PNW, 'cause they just don't have to feed the cows as much (yadda yadda grazing on federal lands yadda yadda subsidies yadda yadda).

[Artkansas]

Absolutely. Maybe the US doesn't have any water issues that currently impact usage, but the usage levels have significantly impacted the environment. Most western rivers are just about dead. Only saline sludge flows into gulf of baja from the colorado river after all the usable water has been taken out and agricultural wastewater seeps back in.

A great read is a book called Cadillac Desert (http://www.amazon.com/Cadillac-Desert-American-Disappearing-Revised/dp/0140178244/sr=1-1/qid=1169656026/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-2094404-9332846?ie=UTF8&s=books).

Al

Nope. The Colorado River no longer reaches the Gulf. It gets used before that.

Cadillac Desert is a great book. The videos are not to be missed either. They are, if anything, even more graphic. It's a must read for anyone who wants to understand Calfornia. Mulholland was a genius.

It's one reason I welcomed the chance to move to Arkansas.

[le brad]

for anyone who expects the inevitable death of an oil based world should see the documentary "The End of Suburbia" peak oil stuff, the fatal failings of alternative fuel sources, etc. Its good.

[gwd]

It's possibly just semantics that 'ranchers' wouldn't have as much of a feed problem as 'farmers' would. Cows turned loose to pasture/forage don't require the feed budget that (industrial) dairy cattle who are never out on their own do. I was amazed when I moved from NY (the rural part) to WA in 1994 that beef was about half the price in the PNW, 'cause they just don't have to feed the cows as much (yadda yadda grazing on federal lands yadda yadda subsidies yadda yadda).
The guys they talked to were putting hay out in the snow covered pastures for winter feed. It was Missouri or Montana I think.. a Northern state. When I was young I lived in a dairy farming area in the north and the farmers needed to grow hay for the winter even though the cows went out in the fields every day. One neighbor had no cattle but just grew hay to sell to the dairy farmers. I think the guys who were being interviewed couldn't grow enough hay this year because of the weather. The comments to the post have been interesting, I'm surprised it has had an effect on the food supply so quickly. In spite of our fat epidemic if it is true that the small percentage increase in ethanol fuel use has already affected the food supply then our nutrition supply system must be unstable.

[gwd]

all these things are tied together, its systemic, and must be approached as such, single "magic bullet" type knee jerk decisions wont work very well

I was thinking that returning the suburbs to field and forest and living car free would be a magic bullet since it has been so easy, profitable and fun. If not what should we as individuals do?

[Alex]

What happens if 15% of the fuel comes from ethanol, there is already a shortage of oil, and Nebraska, Kansas and Iowa go through a drought.

I don't think 15% of drivers will give up driving real quick. I could see people putting the gas on there credit cards in hopes of feeding their lifestyle that they have so much invested in.

[pedex]

The guys they talked to were putting hay out in the snow covered pastures for winter feed. It was Missouri or Montana I think.. a Northern state. When I was young I lived in a dairy farming area in the north and the farmers needed to grow hay for the winter even though the cows went out in the fields every day. One neighbor had no cattle but just grew hay to sell to the dairy farmers. I think the guys who were being interviewed couldn't grow enough hay this year because of the weather. The comments to the post have been interesting, I'm surprised it has had an effect on the food supply so quickly. In spite of our fat epidemic if it is true that the small percentage increase in ethanol fuel use has already affected the food supply then our nutrition supply system must be unstable.

we live in a "just in time delivery" world now, big stock piles of things do not exist unless its petroleum or stuff we cant get rid off, like sulfur, big yellow piles of that crap everywhere

while our advances with technology are amazing sometimes, they are also vulnerable to sudden systemic collapse because of scale and interdependence of systems

here in the city where I live, average grocery store has about 3 days of stock, less of perishables

closest fuel depot and also a pipeline hub, they keep about 2-3 weeks tops of fuel around in tanks

there are ZERO big farms locally which make food for people, its all soy and feed corn

locally the biggest producer of anything is probably Annheiser Busch, also biggest water consumer, followed right behind it by the pepsi bottling plant

next small town over builds honda cars and motorcycles, and lots of the satellite parts makers are here in town

most of the electricity for the city is from about 60 miles away, coal fired, lots of it, a trainload every day

typical US midwestern city, we store nothing, produce little, and import everything, this is not a safe or stable way to do things, couple of things break and you may be waiting weeks for some majorly important items

[pedex]

I was thinking that returning the suburbs to field and forest and living car free would be a magic bullet since it has been so easy, profitable and fun. If not what should we as individuals do?

eliminate debt

get as far into the non discretionary side of the economy as possible

and conserve

in a nutshell, the answer to your question is the question isnt it? the problems we face defy any attempt at grasping the scale really, we've built one huge spider web of a interconnected beast in our McWorld

[gerv]

What happens if 15% of the fuel comes from ethanol, there is already a shortage of oil, and Nebraska, Kansas and Iowa go through a drought.

I don't think 15% of drivers will give up driving real quick. I could see people putting the gas on there credit cards in hopes of feeding their lifestyle that they have so much invested in.

Iowa, Nebraska and Kansas couldn't produce enough corn to supply 15% of the current US demand, especially if we want to continue eating beef.

Not to mention the small detail that ethanol is no solution to the greenhouse gas issue.

[lyeinyoureye]

increases in compression and rpm range = less engine life all else being equal
Who said anything about increases in compression and rpm range? Granted, the EPA test (http://www.epa.gov/OMS/presentations/sae-2002-01-2743.pdf) used a TDI engine, but that's only because it's the only stock/cheap engine with a VNT and EGR cooler iirc. So, when running high rates of EGR, they didn't have to make many modifications to the engine, only run SAFI (Stand Alone Fuel Injection). The point of the paper was that higher octane fuels allow for more EGR, which fills up the cylinder and minimizes low load pumping losses. This can be done with lower compression engines, all that's needed is turbocharging/EGR cooling. The same system was mentioned in a Uni of Wisconsin paper. In fact, the engine would probably last longer because it's more efficient. It won't have to inject extra gas just to overcome the pressure difference between the cylinder and crankcase on the intake stroke.
I would guess the extra things needed to be done to ICE engines to handle more compression like whats done with diesels would more than likely offset any gains even done on a massive scale.
Hardly. If this were the case we wouldn't have drive by wire, VVT-whatever, or anything else. The only thing needed for this would be a turbocharger, EGR cooler, and associated hardware. I bet a reasonable approximation could be done w/o turbocharging via internal EGR.

[pedex]

Who said anything about increases in compression and rpm range? Granted, the EPA test (http://www.epa.gov/OMS/presentations/sae-2002-01-2743.pdf) used a TDI engine, but that's only because it's the only stock/cheap engine with a VNT and EGR cooler iirc. So, when running high rates of EGR, they didn't have to make many modifications to the engine, only run SAFI (Stand Alone Fuel Injection). The point of the paper was that higher octane fuels allow for more EGR, which fills up the cylinder and minimizes low load pumping losses. This can be done with lower compression engines, all that's needed is turbocharging/EGR cooling. The same system was mentioned in a Uni of Wisconsin paper. In fact, the engine would probably last longer because it's more efficient. It won't have to inject extra gas just to overcome the pressure difference between the cylinder and crankcase on the intake stroke.

Hardly. If this were the case we wouldn't have drive by wire, VVT-whatever, or anything else. The only thing needed for this would be a turbocharger, EGR cooler, and associated hardware. I bet a reasonable approximation could be done w/o turbocharging via internal EGR.

any significant gains in efficiency, and I mean real significant gains taking advantage of the octane levels of ethanol mean increases in compression, and better machining to increase the volumetric efficiency, which in trun means more power per cubic inch

there are NO MAGIC BULLETS HERE, engine tech is a very very mature well known discipline, one Im familiar with

turbocharging in effect increases the dynamic compression in the cylinders, this is also well known and understood, typically turbo'd engines run very very low compression, reason being cylinder filling with a dense charge raises the effective compression ratio, they also suffer all the things that go with it, like short lifespans

your not gonna BS your way out of this one

[lyeinyoureye]

You can't be this... :eek:

O.k. The only way you will raise the maximum effective compression ratio is if you make more power. This system is not about making more power, it's about minimizing pumping losses. If I have a NA engine that makes 100hp@6k rpm, and I turbo-charge the engine but make the same amount of peak power at the same rpm, there is no change in effective maximum compression ratio. It brings in X amount of air, to react with Y amount of fuel. The turbo just allows the system to use the energy of the exhaust, and the exhaust itself, to increase low load efficiency. Any car these days uses EGR in order to reduce NOx emissions and help out with fuel economy (http://yarchive.net/car/air_induction.html).
I looked up your reference (Internal Combustion Engine Fundamentals, Heywood, page 837,838). Very interesting. Appears from his chart that BSFC minimizes at about 25% EGR.
The limit for EGR helping out BSFC is octane, and a homogeneous intake charge to a certain extent. An auto manf can't dump more EGR in the cylinder if the fuel auto ignites on the compression stroke because of too much heat. That's why E85 allows much higher low load efficiencies... More EGR can be run without causing the fuel to autoignite, which reduces pumping losses, giving diesel like efficiency. So, if, according to the EPA, something like a diesel Jetta gets 50% better mileage than a gasoline version, this technology would allow the gasoline version to approach that level of thermal efficiency at low load. What you are referring to is high load engine efficiency, which can be increased via higher CR. But that doesn't matter for most people because they usually don't have the pedal to the metal all the time.

For instance, a Camry built a decade and a half ago has ~33% peak BTE iirc, which isn't a big difference between the peak BTE of the Prius. But on the highway, the Prius gets well over twice the mileage. Why? Because the Prius has good low load efficiency, something like a minimum of 28% BTE, but the Camry drops down to maybe 12% BTE because the Camry suffers from lots of low load pumping losses. The Prius doesn't because of the Atkinson cycle, which is another way to minimize pumping losses. The downside of the Atkinson cycle is that torque is limited because a portion of the air drawn into the cylinder has to be pushed back out... So we have an engine that isn't "suitable" for the average driver. By supplementing it with an electric motor, peak power is increased, and other fuel saving features can be used. The use of EGR/VGTs with high octane fuel allows good mixing (something that's also need for lean burn systems) and high EGR at low load, which reduces pumping losses, and can result in a more efficient engine at the same power output w/o the need for a hybrid system. Most manufacturers aren't going to roll out these systems until E85 is established, so current engines aren't designed to run on them, and won't be unless E85 sticks around, not to mention the two to four years needed for development. VVT has been around for almost half a century, but it only penetrated the market within the last decade...
Fiat was the first auto manufacturer to patent a functional variable valve timing system which included variable lift. Developed by Giovanni Torazza in the late 1960s, the system used hydraulic pressure to vary the fulcrum of the cam followers (US Patent 3,641,988). The hydraulic pressure changed according to engine speed and intake pressure. The typical opening variation was 37%.
So there are delays when bringing any new device to the market. Now, if we have consistent, sizable E85 output in a decade, then I'm guessing we'll see these engines. But going back to what I said, I don't think we will because electric tech has been pushed back for too long. The Tesla Roadster is indicative of this.

*sigh* :rolleyes:

[pedex]

classic case of reading tech and not understanding whats going on behind it

when you slide the powerband of an engine lower thru whatever means while maintaining the same max power output relative to any rpm without changing the displacement what happens? what kinds of things are you going to see with the engine....like manifold pressure, cylinder pressure, combustion chamber temperature for example? In other words, take a look at BSFC vs power vs rpm vs torque. It will bear out what Im getting at.

and on top of all this, you and your articles are avoiding one of the easier methods for increasing engine efficiency, and thats making use of all the unused heat which gets sent out the tailpipe and radiator, however, just like anything else its a tradeoff, there are no magic bullets here, never have been

smokey yunich(I think thats how his name is spelled) played with some of the combos you mentioned above about 30 years ago, also built some semi-adiabatic engines, results were good, until you get into practicality and longevity

all the technology in the world isnt going to make enough of a difference with ethanol im afraid, it has too many other problems besides what is involved with actually running it in an engine

oh ya, while im here, go ahead and post a reply, it wont be followed up on, Ive tried to have a decent discussion with you, the cute little eek smilies and sighs mean you arent interested anyway

maybe you should put your $$ where your mouth is, Ive built a few engines, ante up yourself and have at it, it isnt all that difficult, ive built two engines completely from scratch already, everything is a tradeoff

[lyeinyoureye]

The only changes in the power band happen because of reduced pumping losses. I mean, you can increase peak power/cylinder pressure, but nothing about this system makes this a requirement. The increase in torque at less than peak load happens because the pressure difference between the cylinder on the intake stroke and crankcase is minimized. So, less parasitic drag. This is because the cylinder is allowed to "fill up", like a diesel, and this translates into an efficiency gain. The advantage is an engine would operate very much like a diesel, more power at lower engine speeds per CI, better efficiency, but with emissions closer to that of a gasoline vehicle. Another approach to pumping losses is MDS, which can result in up to a 30% increase in efficiency, kill some cylinders, reduce pumping losses, increase efficiency, yadda... And sure, a few companies are developing exhaust based alternators, so there are efficiency gains to be made in plenty of areas.

You can say, or not say, what you like. But telling me that changing the peak cylinder pressure/power/engine speed is going to influence reliability, when this system doesn't change peak cylinder pressure/power/engine speed, just efficiency. Is, uh, I dunno... Odd? Pumping losses make the engine burn more fuel to make the same amount of power compared to an engine that doesn't suffer from them. More fuel usually means more wear, so, a system that minimizes pumping losses, and increases efficiency would mean that the engine doesn't have burn as much fuel to make the same amount of power, and will probably last longer, all things being equal.

[gwd]

eliminate debt

get as far into the non discretionary side of the economy as possible

and conserve

in a nutshell, the answer to your question is the question isnt it? the problems we face defy any attempt at grasping the scale really, we've built one huge spider web of a interconnected beast in our McWorld
I've never heard of "non discretionary side of the economy". What is that? Do you mean only use money when necessary? By eliminate debt and conserve I assume you mean personally since you were answering a question.

A huge interconnected beast can be very stable and robust, if the connections support each other. One of the buzz phrases I learned in an ecosystems course was "diversity breeds stability" meaning that an ecosystem with many ecological niches can remain stable and productive in the face of an disruption. If something happens to a part of the system it tends to heal itself. Maybe our ecosystem just needs a few years to adjust to some of the energy production being siphoned from nutritional needs to transportational needs.

Just in time systems work when the everything in the supply chain is predictable, the inventory should be some measure of uncertainty in the supply chain. So if uncertainty increases more quickly than inventory space can be created and filled, you get problems. I think what you're worried about is that businesses quickly dumped warehouse space when their supply chains became more reliable through information technology. But they can't build warehouses as quickly as they dumped them so if the supply chain suddenly becomew unreliable for whatever reason they'll have problems until they can recover the reliablilty or inventory space.

[JeffS]

eliminate debt

get as far into the non discretionary side of the economy as possible

and conserve

in a nutshell, the answer to your question is the question isnt it? the problems we face defy any attempt at grasping the scale really, we've built one huge spider web of a interconnected beast in our McWorld


Your first one is pretty key for the average person. At some point, the price of suburban homes is going to plummet, and large sectors of jobs - like everything housing related - is going to go away. You can imagine what happens to a person who can't make their mortgage payment and can't sell their house for enough money to cover the principal.


Anyway... I'm surprised to hear about the corn prices. I guess my head is still pretty far in the sand. From strictly an environmental standpoint my biggest concern is over some of the other agricultural crops that can be used to produce fuels - specifically the ones that grow especially well in South America. The rain forests are at a huge risk to big-agriculture. If they go, the effect on the planet could be horrific.

[wheel]

Someday we will be like the rest of the 33 nations who grow Hemp.
Then we can use it for paper, fuel, etc.

[lyeinyoureye]

I wish... That stuff is so handy. CA is cracking down on small WVO users and installers... Things don't seem to be getting more reasonable.

[Cyclepath]

Karl Marx described how capitalism would self-destruct long before it became obvious. But of course since "communism is dead" we don't think we can learn from that or could gain from reading Marx (note that communism & Stalinism have always been two entirely different things, the two marketed by our bosses as synonymous & promoted as the Evil Empire in spite of the fact that US industry [& to some extent British, with a few others] actually created the early Soviet industrial infrastructure. Sounds unbelievable based on what we've been taught by the official sources, but see the massively well-documented book WESTERN TECHNOLOGY & SOVIET ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Vol 1. by A. Sutton, probably the ultimate piece of suppressed history in our time, & judge for yourself).

[kc9eog]

A quick aside regarding the two arguing about increasing power in combustion engines; really we don't need an equivalent of the automobile we have now, we need something like an enclosed go cart with maybe five horsepower to move people around with along with bicycle's and public transit. If the future is a Tahoe with some alternative fueled engine(ethanol, hydrogen), I would be truly stunned.