AutoblogGreen

Note: Honda doesn't work for the public. Honda works for Honda. As such, priority means profit.

When you consider things as such, Honda is saying that their list of profitable projects is not punctuated at the top by ethanol.

This could be, in part, to their lack of penetration into rural America.

Further, it's much easier for them to bring a hybrid or diesel to market, competitively, than it is for them to bring a flex-fuel option to market.

Reply

my $0.02, ethanol is very overrated, the poster-child of every corn belt politican.

If you're undecided in the pro/anti-ethanol see http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000039&refer=columnist_berry&sid=apMj5AiOK4Rc

maybe that will help make up your mind.

Reply

Sure then corn-based ethanol isn't the "green gold" compared to switchgrass-based ethanol or cellulose ethanol. Toyota wasn't interested in ethanol in the beginning but they plans to join the parade for 2008
http://www.leftlanenews.com/2006/04/19/toyota-gets-on-the-e85-bandwagon/
http://www.autoblog.com/2006/04/20/toyota-to-venture-into-e85/

in Sweden, Saab Biopower who use E85 with a turbocharged engine, can help to resolve partially this inconvienent.

I spotted a good one dated from May 2005 on the Car & Driver forums http://www.caranddriver.com/idealbb/view.asp?topicID=64684 posted by a guy nicknamed "Expeditioner" here the quote:
"I think it's more than that. Honda is like an annoying parent that "knows what's best for you". They seem hellbent on proving to the world that no more is needed than a V6, and that FWD is not necessarly better, but what the buyer needs....
Honda is like the corporate equivalent of the Sierra Club."

Then the Brazilian market is different there with vehicules who use flex-fuel system from GM, Ford, Fiat, Peugeot-Citroen, Renault and Volkswagen and ethanol is from sugar cane. I wonder what Honda will do in Brazil?

Reply

Score a point for Honda, for not bending to Political Correctness. Here's the sum total that anybody needs to know about ethanol:

1) It's a lousy fuel
2) Corn is a lousy source (there are many better sources, but corn is Politically Correct)
3) So much energy is used to produce it, that if ethanol was burned to produce that energy, the net production would be very close to zero. That's why dinosaur juice is used in the process.
4) Because of #3, ethanol is NOT 'green'.

Ethanol might someday have a place as a fuel -- IF you can figure out a way to produce the stuff without putting so much energy into separating it from water. That, and cut the corn farmers and ADM out of the loop.

Reply

Good for them. From their beginings with cars, they've always been good at fuel-efficient gas engines. They've done hybride, CNG, an EV, a hydrogen prototype, and designed an acclaimed diesel engine starting from scratch. Ethanol is a big wasteful scam and a political loophole and they're smart to recognize it. They don't need E85 as an easy means to boost their image, because their image is already well established.

Reply

This more MPG is kind of a misnomer isn't it? My motorcycle gets way more MPG than a pruis, but pollutes way more too. Ethanol burns cleaner than gas or diesel. MPG isn't everything. Unless you are going for a strictly economical standpoint.

Reply

Many of the above statements about ethanol are incorrect and based on old, incorrect and refuted data. Recent studies (such as Farrell, Science vol 311) show that corn ethanol has postive energy balence, a modest reduction in GHG and a major reduction in petroleum usage. Ethanol also burns very cleanly and fits well into our existing infrastructure.

If Honda plans to build a diesel that is 50-state legal and is warrantied to run on biodiesel, then good for them! But to call ethanol a "lousy fuel" is simply wrong.

Reply

5 authorities detained the officers Wednesday, prompting angry statements from Russia's defense minister, who denounced Georgia as a "bandit" state. Bilateral ties long have been strained over Georgia's bid to join NATO and Moscow's close links to Georgia's breakaway provinces.

Reply

@jiltedcitizen

I'm not completely sure I understand your claim, how can your motorcycle get more MPG than a Prius and still pollute more? If you think about it there is a finite amount of energy in a gallon of gas, not all of that energy is transferred to the wheels (or battery in the case of the prius) the rest is waste, AKA exhaust. If your motorcycle gets 80mpg(which isn't out of the ordinary) vs. a prius which gets what about 40mpg? where does the extra energy go?

Gas is mostly carbon, which means when you burn (aka oxidize it) you create a definite amount of carbon monoxide and dioxide. There are several figures floating around as to how much it actually is but lets just go with 20 lbs of CO2 per gallon of gas since it's a nice round number.

Now lets say you ride your motorcycle 10 miles, using 1/8 a gallon of gas which results in 2.5 lbs of CO2, now a prius driving 10 miles on gas power burns 1/4 of a gallon of gas resulting in 5 lbs of CO2...

I forget where I was going with this, but oh yeah motorcycles output much less polution than cars (even the precious prius) which is why they don't have to be smogged even in california.

Reply