Articles
Writers

Flexible Fuel Vehicles

Alternative Fuel Autos Designed to Run on Ethanol Gasoline Mixture

© Laurence O'Sullivan

Jun 19, 2008
2009 Ford Flex, Ford Motor Company
Despite problems,Flexible Fuel Vehicles can combat the rising cost of gasoline, cut down on dependence on imported fossil fuels and help curb greenhouse gas emissions.

According to the U.S Department of Energy’s fact sheet “Clean Cities” of June 2008, a flexible fuel vehicle (FFV) “as its name implies, has the flexibility of running on more than one type of fuel. FFVs can be fueled with unleaded gasoline, E85, or any combination of the two.” Flexible fuel vehicles are not hybrid vehicles in that they have only one engine which is designed to run on either gasoline alone or on a mixture of gasoline and usually ethanol.

Advantages of Flexible Fuel Vehicles

  • Flexible fuel vehicles are identical to everyday vehicles used all over the country. The U.S. Department of Energy, in its Alternative Fuel and Advanced Vehicle Data Center estimates that up to seven million FFVs are in use in America in 2008.

  • Under the “Energy Policy Act (EPAct) of 2005” and the “Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007” there are tax incentive available to both manufacturers and consumers of FFVs

  • The use of an ethanol gasoline mixture as a fuel, especially E85, drastically cuts down on the dependence on foreign fossil fuels. Brian Jennings, Executive Vice President of American Coalition for Ethanol (ACE) states “For the first time in 30 years the United States has reduced its imports of foreign oil. Ethanol is helping build positive momentum in this country toward shaking off the weight of shockingly expensive oil.”

  • With gasoline prices now at $4 per gallon or more, flexible fuel vehicles can help cut the cost of motoring. "Ethanol is saving motorists almost $35 million dollars a day right now. Without ethanol, Americans would pay a billion dollars more each month for gas," said Ron Lamberty, Vice President / Market Development of the American Coalition for Ethanol (ACE).

  • Flexible fuel vehicles help to reduce CO2 emissions in the battle against global warming. Although ethanol does produce carbon dioxide, since it has been manufactured from plants, the CO2 it produces has already been taken from the atmosphere. In the “Flexible Fuel Vehicles:Providing a Renewable Fuel Choice” fact sheet produced by the U.S Department of Energy in June 2008 it says “Using E85 also reduces CO2 emissions and provides significant reductions in emissions of many harmful toxics, including benzene, a known human carcinogen.”

  • Although most modern autos can accept ethanol gasoline mixtures of up to 20% without modification, all major automakers now produce flexible fuel vehicles which will accept E85. Many consumers may be driving in a FFV without knowing it. Since September 2006, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 requires auto manufacturers to place a label inside the FFV fuel compartment that states the vehicle can run on either E85 or gasoline. If in doubt drivers should consult their local car dealer.
Disadvantages of Flexible Fuel Vehicles

  • The main disadvantage is lack of availability of E85 filling stations. According to the Alternative Fuel and Advanced Vehicle Data Center (AFDC) as of June 2008 there are only 1474 E85 filling stations throughout the United States.

  • The Clean Cities Fact Sheet of June 2008 states “One difference between E85 and gasoline, however, is fuel economy. Ethanol contains less energy per gallon, which translates into a reduction in fuel economy compared to gasoline.”

  • Producing ethanol from plants has disadvantages. Critics point out that the rise in the price of basic foodstuffs world wide is due in part to the switch from growing plants for food to growing plants for fuel. In April, 2008, The German Development Minister Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul said in Washington at a World Bank meeting that “Increasing production of biofuels was 30 to 70 per cent responsible for the rapid rise in food prices.”

Irrespective of the disadvantages, Flexible Fuel Vehicles provide the best solution to the problems of diminishing fossil fuel, rising cost of such fuel and the dangers of increasing greenhouse gas emissions. FFVs are widely available and likely to be more so in the future, but to take advantage of such automobiles then the problems of E85 as an alternate fuel and its distribution network must be tackled.


The copyright of the article Flexible Fuel Vehicles in Green Fuels/Vehicles is owned by Laurence O'Sullivan. Permission to republish Flexible Fuel Vehicles in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.


2009 Ford Flex, Ford Motor Company
Brazillian Flex Cars, Widimedia Commons
Volkswagen Fox Flex, Antonio Saraiva
    


Post this Article to facebook Add this Article to del.icio.us! Digg this Article furl this Article Add this Article to Reddit Add this Article to Technorati Add this Article to Newsvine Add this Article to Windows Live Add this Article to Yahoo Add this Article to StumbleUpon Add this Article to BlinkLists Add this Article to Spurl Add this Article to Google Add this Article to Ask Add this Article to Squidoo

Comments
Dec 8, 2008 7:52 AM
Guest :
Maverick Biofuels has a patent pending process to convert biomass/landfill waste to a mixture of alcohols, including ethanol, propanol, and butanol. Because of the higher alcohols, the blend will have higher energy than ethanol alone.
Range Fuels has a patent-pending process to convert biomass to ethanol.
Power Ecalene Fuels, Inc. has a patent-pending process to convert biomass to a mixture of methanol, ethanol, propanol, and butanol, with an average energy content of ethanol.
The capital cost of these approaches is around $5/gallon.
The U.S. uses 140 billion gallons of gasoline.
The recent bailout of the banks cost $750 billion.
The proposed bailout of Ford/Chrysler/GMC will be $75-125 billion.
For $500 billion, the U.S. could fully implement the Maverick Biofuels/Range Fuels/Power Ecalene Fuels technologies and be free of imported oil. At the same time, the U.S. would have 100 billion gallons of alcohols to blend with gasoline.
The alcohol could be produced anywhere where there is biomass available, or landfill waste available, or, for that matter, where there is coal available (coal also forms the same syngas intermediate used to prepare the alcohols).
To the extent the Maverick/Range Fuels/Power Ecalene Fuels technologies aren't proven at the billion gallon scale, the government could fund traditional Fischer-Tropsch (gas-to-liquid) chemistry, and convert coal and/or natural gas to "syncrude." The existing oil companies could easily convert the syncrude to gasoline, or, for that matter, diesel, and lessen our dependence on foreign oil.
If Obama wants green jobs, to save Ford/Chrysler/GMC, to prop up the economy, and provide energy security, he could approach these companies to implement these technologies.
The result? Green jobs, billions of gallons of flexible fuel, energy independence, and a cleaner environment.
If the government put its ownership interest in the fuel production facilities on the line as a security interest for bad/underwater mortgages, it could prop up the value of the homes with this security interest, thus saving families from foreclosure. Thus, this approach could also help save banks from disaster.
Can anyone find a flaw with this approach? If not, why isn't congress looking at this?
1 Comment:
about us • Limelight Blog • freelance writing jobs • careers • press room • Site Map • Terms & Conditions • Privacy Policy