Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Ford to Deliver Demonstration Fleet of Ethanol-Fueled Hybrids to Six States

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
jpak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-25-07 12:14 PM
Original message
Ford to Deliver Demonstration Fleet of Ethanol-Fueled Hybrids to Six States
http://www.autospectator.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=7638

WASHINGTON, D.C., Jan. 23, 2007 – Ford Motor Company announced today 20 new hybrid research vehicles will be delivered later this year to demonstrate a dual mission; help reduce U.S. dependence on imported oil and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

At the 2007 Washington Auto Show, Ford displayed the first Ford Escape Hybrid E85 scheduled for delivery this spring. It is a demonstration vehicle marrying two petroleum-saving technologies – hybrid electric power and flexible-fuel capability. Escape Hybrid E85 is the world’s first hybrid vehicle capable of operating on blends of fuel containing as much as 85 percent ethanol, a renewable fuel that can be produced from American-grown corn or sugar beets. And ethanol use releases no fossil-based CO2, so its use as a fuel in place of gasoline reduces the release of greenhouse gases.

Ford is producing 20 demonstration Ford Escape Hybrid E85 vehicles for use in fleets in six different states. Deliveries will begin this spring.

“As a leader in both hybrid vehicles and in vehicles capable of operating on ethanol-based fuels, Ford is the ideal company to bring both technologies together for the first time,” said Nancy Gioia, Ford Motor Company Director of Sustainable Mobility Technology Lab and Hybrid Vehicle Programs.

<more>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Boxturtle Donating Member (34 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-25-07 12:24 PM
Response to Original message
1. This is very misleading.
While it is true that the actual burning of ethanol does not contribute to global warming, the production of ethanol is extremely energy intensive and does contribute to global warming.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-25-07 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. Not if it's from one of the new solar/wind/biogas-powered
ethanol plants.

It's doable without use of fossil fuels.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU9598 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-25-07 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Correct
The initial ways of creating and transporting ethanol required fossil fuels ... now that is not at all the case. The development period certainly required fossil fuels because that was our base fuel in production and transportation infrastructures. We have moved on and that is why ethanol and soy diesels are so exciting. It would help if people didn't throw around old oil lobby spin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NickB79 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-25-07 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. You still use fossil fuels on the farm to grow the crops
Diesel fuel for trucks and tractors and natural gas-based fertilizers are an integral part of the factory farm mode of operation. While using wind, solar and biogas to make the processing plants themselves carbon-neutral, the farms themselves still use fossil fuels and release some CO2.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-25-07 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. and why cant fossil fuels on farms be eliminated???
Its not like we didnt grow food 100 or 200 years ago...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NickB79 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-26-07 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. True, but there weren't 6.5 billion mouths to feed 200 yrs ago
Before fossil fuels became widely available, the world population was under 2 billion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Javaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-26-07 05:45 PM
Response to Reply #8
12. Food is grown? you mean some multinational doesn't produce it in a factory?
LOL :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-26-07 11:50 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. The farms can easily be run on biodiesel, and fertilizer is abundant
in farm country. In fact there is currently a disposal problem with it.

Furthermore, any decrease in use of fossil fuels is better than no decrease at all. No need to pooh-pooh the whole idea just because it doesn't solve 100% of our problem. Makes you sound like a certain fan of nukes around these parts..........
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NickB79 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-26-07 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. Disposal problem of fertilizer? You mean factory farm manure?
I see this as a self-correcting problem. The massive amounts of manure fertilizers are only possible because we use massive amounts of fossil fuels to get unheard-of yields per acre. This makes grains cheap, and hence meat from livestock fed these grains is also cheap. Once the fossil fuel inputs start declining, the number of factory farms will decline as well, and with it goes the abundant fertilizer you speak of.

I'm not pooh-poohing the entire idea. I grew up on a farm, and know that as they currently operate, they use a lot of fossil fuels. This needs to be stopped. My dad actually does use some locally produced biodiesel in his tractors; I've even made small amounts of it myself from soybeans and wood ash in a 55-gal. drum. However, I look at it as a problem of scale. I'm an admitted Peak Oil pessimist, and I don't see the moves we need to wean ourselves off of fossil fuels happening fast enough to avert a castatrophe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Benhurst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-25-07 12:43 PM
Response to Original message
2. Wow! Cutting edge Twentieth Century technology. NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-25-07 12:48 PM
Response to Original message
3. dam if ya do and dam if ya don`t.
if it ain`t one thing it`s another....i guess i`ll just walk
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnWxy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-25-07 02:15 PM
Response to Original message
6. Great! Something concrete being done. Ford is way out ahead of GM on this issue. Good for them!
Ford is also working with the MIT researchers on the Ethanol Direct Injection engine they designed to try and have it ready for mass production by 2011. It gets 30% better mileage than a gasoline only engine of comparable power.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 27th 2024, 06:58 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC