Reducing the world's fuel use - my idea

Before motor vehicles, there was horse racing...
After fuel, there will still be racing...
(albeit with bio-fuel, hydrogen, methane, alcohol, electric, or whichever future fuel source takes off in the future)

ASH,

Noble idea, but is it really workable? The Brazil experience would say yes, but the worlds largest consumer of energy (US) is burning up its grain reserves in automobiles which may ultimately lead to a crisis in both energy and basic food stuffs.
It is a path that I am opposed to. I view bio-fuels not as a long term solution but as a short term stop gap and like fossil fuels, usable land and water is a finite resource. In this hungry and ever more crowded world it makes zero long term sense to tie up even a single hectare of land where tens of thousands of kilowatt hours will fall every day to produce a few tonnes of fuel annually that will be burnt inefficiently.
For that reason and a few others I will not touch the E85 which is available locally.

[Spiderman]

Originally Posted by Alpinestarhero

There must be so much petrol used up just for going round and round in circles for fun, when it could be saved for use in road vehicles

Thoughts?

Matt

Matt old buddy, old friend.... i think you got the wording a little back to front here.

Surely you meant ... we are wasting so much good petrol in road vehicles when it should be saved for track days and racing events and not the boring drudgery of the daily commute to to work and back!

[BanannaMan]

There are thousands of vehicles on the road.
The traffic in London 1 day probably burns more petrol than all types of racing in the UK for an entire year, so nothing saved there.

And we already have ethynol mixed with petrol in the US (for road use)now. Mostly 10% but they are working towards 85%, but even the cars designed for it run like **** on E/85.

Going to all ethynol in most countries would take out a major food source not to mention ethynol is a terribly inefficient fuel.
You'll burn lots more gallons and make much less power than with petrol.
Racing is pretty much out. It's just not a performance fuel in internal combustion engines.
It also kills small engines and older carbed vehicles.

Ethynol is an oil company scam.
If you get 15 to 20 % less fuel economy on 10% Ethynol. That means you are using MORE petrol not less.
And it costs more too.

But if you want it... PLEASE come invade the US and take all the ethynol away.
Every consumer in America will thank you, and only the big oil companies will be mad.

[Bri w]

Electrickery is the way forward. The new Batt powered cars and bikes are phenomenally quick, efficient and are starting to have a good range.

It maybe a contentious subject but I feel nuclear power stations are the Best option.

Originally Posted by Bri w

Electrickery is the way forward. The new Batt powered cars and bikes are phenomenally quick, efficient and are starting to have a good range.

It maybe a contentious subject but I feel nuclear power stations are the Best option.

I agree.

Something for people to keep in mind is that electric vehicles are only as clean as the power source that charges them. If it is charged by a stinking coal fired power station then that is about as clean as an electric vehicle will ever be.
To that end, I am a keen supporter of grid tied domestic wind and solar as a primary energy source supplemented by nuclear (which don't exist in Oz) which I see as being the lesser of the many evils.

[ophic]

Nevertheless a coal fired power station is a lot more efficient than a load of individual cars - so electricity is still a way forward. But I agree, nuclear power stations could be providing enough clean energy for the next 1000 years. Apparently.

As far as I'm aware most race fuels arn't the same as what you'd get on the road.

I believe they use a lot of ethanol as it is. (I'm not sure about normal petrol but ethanol burns with the colourless flame) hence the odd scenes in the pits of some races.

Originally Posted by EssexDave

As far as I'm aware most race fuels arn't the same as what you'd get on the road.

I believe they use a lot of ethanol as it is. (I'm not sure about normal petrol but ethanol burns with the colourless flame) hence the odd scenes in the pits of some races.

That's right. When the Indy Racing League switched to "100%" Ethanol for the 2007 season and following seasons they actually still added 2% petrol to the mix so that it would burn with a visible flame. I think the US government also had some demand that it be unfit for human consumption too, which apparently adding a miniscule amount of petrol also ensures.

[yorkie_chris]

Originally Posted by BanannaMan

You'll burn lots more gallons and make much less power than with petrol.

Only less power if it is not designed for it.