Turtle n Peeps wrote:
Lynnmor wrote:
westend wrote:
We should have listened to Henry Ford back in 1925. "There's enough alcohol in one year's yield of an acre of potatoes to drive the machinery necessary to cultivate the fields for a hundred years."
He was a big advocate of alcohol as a primary fuel.
Which begs the question; Why don't the farmers and ethanol producers use the stuff they produce? It seems to me that those making the money should set the example before pushing a product on the masses.
I wish RV.net had a thumbs up! I would put about 5 of them on your reply! :B
Always consider the framing of the comments, such as that of Henry Ford. He was basing his ideas on a 20hp, top speed of 45mph, Model T.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Model_T_engineFarmer (commercial) use larger and larger equipment to stay competitive in production costs. Consider how much $$ is siphoned off at every step as taxes, income tax, sales tax, property tax, regulation agencies, etc for every part of production to consumption- including equipment needed.
Now also consider what portion of that parasitic cost is simply burnt up within the policing and processing of those same funds. Something like 80%?
So...
Reducing the burdens and unnecessary inflation of costs on production would permit more smaller scale farming, lower cost production while farmers thrive.
Allowing smaller equipment that uses less energy, which is more likely to benefit from lower energy sources like CNG, ethanol, woodgas, etc. Equipment that can be feasibly powered by small scale self-production systems on farms and other privately owned endeavors.
Maybe not quite Henry Ford's 20hp version, but quite a bit closer is definitely in reach once the artificial burdens ("loading" in accounting parlance) are relaxed to a more reasonable level.
THAT is where I see alcohol's better role where it can provide more benefit than pollutant. :C