Nitromater
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Ethanol Sucks
- Thread starter Bobby
- Start date
Nitrohaulic
Nitro Member
Well, yeah. If you have to burn almost twice as much by volume in a bracket engine? It attracts moisture (which dries out rubber and plastic--ask anyone racing with it how brittle their fuel jugs become over time) and corrodes aluminum. Any that gets past your rings contaminates oil and hurts how well it lubricates.
We started our bracket dragster right off with alcohol in 2000 so I can't compare but, Ron's used to advertise how much you'd gain by switching over to their fuel injection. I have to wonder how much of that is due to atomization of the fuel and how little of it is due to the alcohol, itself. Like many, we just liked it because the extra volume displaces air, so the engine changes less when the air changes.
We started our bracket dragster right off with alcohol in 2000 so I can't compare but, Ron's used to advertise how much you'd gain by switching over to their fuel injection. I have to wonder how much of that is due to atomization of the fuel and how little of it is due to the alcohol, itself. Like many, we just liked it because the extra volume displaces air, so the engine changes less when the air changes.
Last edited:
"Dr. Dirt"
Nitro Member
Yankster Yankster Yankster it's your very own Al Gore and his minions who are pushing so hard that we are forced by government mandate to now produce a certain percentage of these ethanol vehicles. Now we have corn being used for fuel instead of food which drove the price of corn through the roof. Farmers then produce the more expensive corn instead of their regular wheat crop and for the first time in history we are importing wheat more than we are exporting it. Oh, by the way, the price of wheat is also shooting through the roof and third world countries have human beings now beginning to starve from a lack of affordable grains.
So let's summarize:
* Food now costs way too much
* Some can no longer afford to purchase it
* Our brothers and sisters are now going to starve
* We've got a crisis on our hands for everybody
but
Al Gore's global "climate change" will continue to be more important than human beings. Can you say "Carbon Credits?" Now, just wait until what future legislation will come from this and what it will cost you in $ and ultimately in people's lives.
I say it's time to take care of people first and then care about the planet thereafter. That's because I know there's a God who will guide us as we do and keep us from thwarting His work.
So let's summarize:
* Food now costs way too much
* Some can no longer afford to purchase it
* Our brothers and sisters are now going to starve
* We've got a crisis on our hands for everybody
but
Al Gore's global "climate change" will continue to be more important than human beings. Can you say "Carbon Credits?" Now, just wait until what future legislation will come from this and what it will cost you in $ and ultimately in people's lives.
I say it's time to take care of people first and then care about the planet thereafter. That's because I know there's a God who will guide us as we do and keep us from thwarting His work.
Nitrohaulic
Nitro Member
Take it easy, Bobby. I was seeing this as Bob's coming around to endorsing petroleum fuels! 
I think it's easy to see that he's not a 100% toe the line liberal.
I think it's easy to see that he's not a 100% toe the line liberal.
clwill
Nitro Member
The push for Ethanol fuel is not and never was a climate change thing. It's an "energy independence" scam by Bush et. al. cynically pushing it so they can pretend to care about making the US less dependent on foreign oil but all the while pushing something they know will never work (scratching the back of his oil buddies) and simultaneously keeping all the farmer lobbyists off his back.
FABMAN
Nitro Member
Chris,the Bush administration and Republican's have sent several bills through congress to allow for drilling in Alaska, and Gulf and each time the Liberals killed it. Clinton, killed it when he was President. Today, the Democrats were drilling CEO'S of oil companies, the liberals thinking is that if we insult them and create pressure on them that they will eventually give and drop oil prises. The true fact is if we start drilling oil for ourselves it will drop prices because it will reduce our demand on foreign oil. Democrats get lots of money from green peace so they are not going to pass bill. People need to get out and vote so republicans can get control back with republican president or we're in trouble for quite some time.
"Dr. Dirt"
Nitro Member
Dave
Nitro Member
I'm surprised by the price of ethanol. I went past a station that sells E85 and it was $3.81. I saw regular unleaded for $3.92. If ethanol is supposed to reduce our oil dependency, why is it almost as expensive as normal gas? To me, the ethanol idea sounds like a step in the right direction. I just wonder if all those who believe in it are headed in same direction.
Dave
Dave
FABMAN
Nitro Member
Chris, the point of your comments was to bash Bush for trying to find alternatives such as ethanol and i added his efforts to start drilling for oil in our country which is why we're using ethanol. Like the Doctor said , you just can't handle the truth.
Eddie
Nitro Member
Hey Christopher: Pull your head out of your err...the sand, and check your facts. AL GORE is the whacko that's pushing the ethanol idea.
Buy Carbon Debits:
CarbonDeductions.com - Offsetting the Dangers of Carbon Credits
Stroker
Nitro Member
This was his only reason for getting into this thread.
Any discussion that comes along that isn't in agreement with his views.
Well then, he calls for it to be moved to the politics room.
With that line of thought, a discussion about "Team Orders" should then also be moved to the politics room.
clwill
Nitro Member
Wrong, I agree with the thread's entire premise -- ethanol sucks. It uses more energy than it creates, and it burns food for god's sake. People are starving, but here in the US, we have so much food we burn it.
But the whole thing is a political discussion, and it doesn't belong here. That's why they created the "politics" forum.
Oh, and BTW, I think team orders are fine -- that's why they have teams, no?
The big deal for E85 is because when you buy a gallon its 85% less oil, BUT to make enough to even come close to what this nation would need right now you would have to wipeout texas and a few other states to grow enough grain to supply the US. Oh but wait now where are you going to get the water to grow it and lets not forget that we'll need fertilizer that now goes back into our ground water.
Stroker
Nitro Member
G'ginna
Nitro Member
In Bush's VERY FIRST state of the union address as President, he said that Congress needs to come up with a viable energy bill. He said that dependence on other countries for fuel would cause problems in the future. I know, I watched it & immediately afterward he was trashed by dems such as the lovely Tom Harkin. Can't blame this on him.
Actually, I think he said "sound" and not "viable."
Nitrohaulic
Nitro Member
Bob's topic starter seemed innocent enough but, how do you discuss this one WITHOUT it turning political? I've said before, I could go through the lounge and turn just about any thread political that I wanted to. Should they all then be moved?
After Katrina, I posted a new thread about a woman's legal battle to get her own dogs back. That was moved to the politics room.
http://www.nitromater.com/politics-room/5132-post-katrina-pet-saga.html
I can see that a thread should be in the politics room if it starts out as being obviously political in nature. What about topics that aren't political but, also can't really be discussed without politics being brought up? Should those threads automatically go to the politics dumping ground?
When should it be done? The first time one person injects politics?
When I first joined the old mater, politics and the lounge were the same thing. I don't see what was so wrong with that. The moderators didn't have to worry about which threads to move over. I was one of the ones asking for a politics room on the new mater because one of the terms of use was that politics NOT be discussed at all and, I correctly predicted that wouldn't last long.
I think politics are as much a part of our lives as any other "lounge" topic, maybe even more so. What I don't understand are the people who are offended if they have to see anything that's politics related. What's THAT about? "I don't even want to SEE discussion about the people who make the laws that effect all of our lives?" I think that voting on people to vote on laws for us stopped working a long time ago. If people thought it worked, maybe the majority in this country would go out and vote, which they don't.
After Katrina, I posted a new thread about a woman's legal battle to get her own dogs back. That was moved to the politics room.
http://www.nitromater.com/politics-room/5132-post-katrina-pet-saga.html
I can see that a thread should be in the politics room if it starts out as being obviously political in nature. What about topics that aren't political but, also can't really be discussed without politics being brought up? Should those threads automatically go to the politics dumping ground?
When should it be done? The first time one person injects politics?
When I first joined the old mater, politics and the lounge were the same thing. I don't see what was so wrong with that. The moderators didn't have to worry about which threads to move over. I was one of the ones asking for a politics room on the new mater because one of the terms of use was that politics NOT be discussed at all and, I correctly predicted that wouldn't last long.
I think politics are as much a part of our lives as any other "lounge" topic, maybe even more so. What I don't understand are the people who are offended if they have to see anything that's politics related. What's THAT about? "I don't even want to SEE discussion about the people who make the laws that effect all of our lives?" I think that voting on people to vote on laws for us stopped working a long time ago. If people thought it worked, maybe the majority in this country would go out and vote, which they don't.
Last edited:
clwill
Nitro Member
If you want to know why there is a politics forum, just spend 10 mins browsing the CompPlus forums. The disgusting name calling, vitriol, demagoguery, and thread hijacking there makes it impossible to see the drag racing for the politics.
I applaud the Mater's parents for trying to keep a lid on it -- right or left wing. Drag racing is NOT an innately political activity and there are a half-million other forums on the internet where you can argue this pooh until your eyes bleed.
I applaud the Mater's parents for trying to keep a lid on it -- right or left wing. Drag racing is NOT an innately political activity and there are a half-million other forums on the internet where you can argue this pooh until your eyes bleed.
Nitrohaulic
Nitro Member
That's why we have a lounge so non drag racing talk is kept away from the drag racing forums. I don't understand why politics has to be kept away from the lounge. It's kinda like the link I just posted on the "p*ssed" NHRA thread. Someone has to decide what gets censored out of this section.
Bobby
Nitro Member
well, everything is political. But that isn't the point of this thread. I don't like having ethanol in my fuel. I don't have a choice. It pisses me off. I don't see what it's gaining us. I 'm a big Indycar fan too but the fact they are running ethanol instead of methanol now just makes me roll my eyes. They had to make their fuel tanks bigger and make more pit stops. Plus methanol smelled like racing fuel. Ethanol smells like Orville Redenbacher took a dump.
I don't see how this is a political subject. I suppose if you want to figure out who to blame for it happening - but I don't think either side of the aisle is innocent of exploiting this issue. Bush talked specifically about ethanol a couple of state of the union addresses ago. It's a joke. It's not going to get the job done.
As far as Gore , I never even watched his movie. He's a crashing bore and an egomaniac. I 'm registered D always have been but don't think for a minute I believe half of what either party says.
I look for charisma and intelligence in my leaders. Not ideology.
Now please someone tell me why 10 % ethanol and 90% petrol in my RX-8 is a good thing?
I don't see how this is a political subject. I suppose if you want to figure out who to blame for it happening - but I don't think either side of the aisle is innocent of exploiting this issue. Bush talked specifically about ethanol a couple of state of the union addresses ago. It's a joke. It's not going to get the job done.
As far as Gore , I never even watched his movie. He's a crashing bore and an egomaniac. I 'm registered D always have been but don't think for a minute I believe half of what either party says.
I look for charisma and intelligence in my leaders. Not ideology.
Now please someone tell me why 10 % ethanol and 90% petrol in my RX-8 is a good thing?
