I'm a member of a small non-profit organisation here in Sweden that modifies ordinary cars to run on ethanol. Usually the owners modifies their own cars, the org serves as a knowledgebase. We call ourselves etanol.nu (etanol is swedish for ethanol) and have a small homepage at that adress. Swedish ofcourse, but there is an international section in our forum: http://etanol.nu/forumrecover/viewforum.php?f=42

Now to my point after my shamless plug ;)

We have found that an ordinary gasoline powered car can pretty easily be converted to E85. It is possible to do it at home with inexpensive tools and inexpensive parts. With more home experimenting we have found that a properly modified car does not consume much more E85 than it dit gasoline prior to the modification. Increasing the compression ratio of the engine seems to be the key here. Admittedly, not so easy to do at home, but not that expensive at an engine shop either. A properly modifed mid sized car have a consumption well below a litre per ten kilometers, or about 33 mpg. Not too bad on a fuel that has less energy per unit. The key seems to be the higher octane number and the cooling effect. Gear heads that want performance and power have successfully used E85 as fuel to improve their engines well beyond what was possible with gasoline.

I would say that it is very much possible for ethanol to replace gasoline on an almost one to one ratio. Despite the lower energy content due to other adwantages.

I do agree that conservation is important, but I do think that we miss a large part oif the picture if we dissmiss ethanol on the lower energy content alone. There is distict adwantages that can be used for much higer efficiency.

Here in Sweden it is easy to find E85 filling station, over a thosand in the country now. Cheaper than ordinary gasoline too. In the city next to mine there is a wheat based ethanol plant. No goverment subsidies, it makes money on its own. In tandem is a biogas plant built, it runs on the waste from the ethanol plant. They get high efficiency that way. Most ethanol that is sold here is imported form Brazil, though. Many hopes on cellulosic ethanol and biodiesel.

I would say that it is very much possible for ethanol to replace gasoline on an almost one to one ratio. Despite the lower energy content due to other adwantages.

I do agree that conservation is important, but I do think that we miss a large part oif the picture if we dissmiss ethanol on the lower energy content alone.

Yes, it's very important to feed cars not people. It helps with the overpopulation program.

I know that cars can be "tuned" to use E85, but with the tiny amount available, this doesn't make sense. Most of the ethanol we have is used as a substitute for MTBE. Even if a person could find a local station selling E85, they would never be able to find E85 stations while on a trip.

Right now, scaling up ethanol doesn't make sense because of the food issue. Even if we could do cellulosic ethanol on a fairly wide scale basis, I wonder whether we would have enough to provide E85 everywhere. Some numbers I saw yesterday said that one group was hoping that technology would allow Georgia to eventually get 22% of its transportation fuel from cellulosic ethanol, using pine trees as a source. I suppose if this level of cellulosic ethanol were available, it might make sense to tune some cars to use E85.

Another question is how much arable land do we intend to sacrifice to fuel, and what are the unintended or intended consequences if we do.

If we used all the arable land we have (US), it still wouldn't make enough alcohol (or diesel) to do what we do now with FF.

Myths of Biofuels

Corn based ethanol does not make sense. You would be hard pressed to find anyone around here who think it is a good idea. Most people just shakes their heads.

Food production and biofuel production do not really compete here in Sweden. Most ethanol sold is sucarcane, from Brazil. Waste from the forest industry have the biggest potential for liquid fuels (or solid fuel) produced here in Sweden. The forest industry here is good at conservation. There never has been more forest available for lumbering and the like than it is today here in Sweden. There are critics going on about how we are losing money by too much conservation...

I do understand that it is quite a diffrent picture for you people over in the USA than it is here in Sweden. And I don't think we will make it without conservation either.

And speaking about food, we have more arable land lying fallow than we use for biofuels. Biofuels does not compete with food production in any sense. Biogas production uses waste primarily, not stuff grown on land that could be used for food production. So it is essentially a non issue here in Sweden.

Later today I will go on a longer trip, about 600 km (~370 miles). I will find filling stations on the way, there are plenty of them.

Food production and biofuel production do not really compete here in Sweden. Most ethanol sold is sucarcane, from Brazil.

Well, I suppose it's good for you that any problems associated with it are exported to another country. Consider that Brazilian ethanol production doesn't directly, though definitely indirectly, forces cutting down of more rain forest lands for their other food production as the demand for sugar cane grows in order to fuel the demand for ethanol.

And speaking about food, we have more arable land lying fallow than we use for biofuels. Biofuels does not compete with food production in any sense.

No, because that competition is exported to other countries and your climate may not grow any crops that would make economic sense to use for ethanol (I don't know this, am just posturing, uh, postulating).

Use oil as a metaphor. What if Brazil is forced to raise prices dramatically on ethanol, or chose to, in order to "profit."

Would Sweden then need to create a large standing army to invade Brazil to guarantee their supply of ethanol?

Or would the EU need an army to go to Indonesia and Malaysia, if biodiesel supplies produced "efficiently" from what used to be rainforest, now used to grow palm, were to be interrupted?

This is not a local "solution" in any sense of the word. It is just another way to make sure automobile culture continues as long as is humanly, not naturally, possible.

That's why we want to make fuels form our forests, waste from the paper industry and so on. We allready have plants that produces fuels from wood, albeit mostly expreminetal ones. Full producion plants are planned though. Biodiesel form the waste of the paper industry have a very large potential, it could replace all fossil diesel we use today.

Importing ethanol from Brazil is a stop gap measure. Soon we will have our own fuels. Ethanol will probably be one of many. Transportation will probably mostly be powered by electric (we have plenty of hydro power and nuclear), biodisels, biogas, alcohols and solid fuels.

Most of the ethanol produced in Sweden today is made from wheat grown localy. The plant in Norrköping produces about 55000 cubic meters of ehtanol. An expansion is in process of expanding the output to 210000 cubic meters per year. Not mutch yet, but it's getting there. Wheat based ethanol production is a positive EROEI process. Corn based ethanol is not.

A recent problem is that our right wing goverment have abolished the import duties on Brazillian ethanol. This is stupid, it does not motivate local production.

And I don't think cellulosic ethanol is a dream only.
http://www.ethanolstatistics.com/Industry_News/Exclusive/Novozymes_Expec...

And I'm back from my weekend trip. 1100 km (~683 miles) on E85 in total.