Well, let's see... I don't think a bushel of corn would spread very far, so maybe you can ride a bike on it for a few feet at most, and that's only if you have poured all the corn out on the asphalt and spread it out a bit. I think I will stick with riding on asphalt or concrete...
It all boils down to thermal efficiency, if you are getting 50 MPG on gasoline @ $3.00 per gallon, and then start using E85 which gets you 35 MPG instead, at about the same price, where is the benefit? And do not forget that horsepower goes hand in hand with thermal efficiency, and the reason we love motorcycles has to do with the horsepower to weight ratio (acceleration). Also the cost of the retrofit so that your vehicle can burn the corn has to be put into the equation.
I know my bikes would not run worth a crap on the cornholio anyway.
A very good point. Corn is very fuel/fertilizer dependent. The answer is sugar cane. I live in a country that has it. The crap grows like crazy, is bug and fungus resistant and the stalks can be burned to fuel the refinery. It is also not as polluting as gasoline. One of my friends here makes rocket and jet fuels for British Aerospace. He says the "oil dependeny" line was crap 30 years ago. That gas has been an outdated fuel for a long time. Brazil gets 40% of its fuel from sugar cane. They are puttimg in 51 new refineries and say they will be free from oil dependency in 10 years. Sugar cane needs water and humid weather. So what about the Gulf states? From Texas all the way up to South Carolina we could be growing sugar cane. Very sustainable. Then start doing hemp also for clothing and other products. I have a guiar bag made from hemp. Very strong and hemp, like sugar cane, is very pest and fungus resistant. They both also grow very rapidly, unlike trees.
The only real draw back for bikes would be the retrofit, called a "flex motor" and we would have to have a larger tank. Not such a big deal.
Ethanol from corn is a thermodynamic loser. It takes more energy to produce the corn and then extract the ethanol than that ethanol yeilds. Ethanol from sugar cane is 9 times more efficient or so I have heard and so comes out on the plus side of the thrmodynamic equation.
The corn to ethanol mania is simply the product of the economic self interest of the corn producers , agri bussiness and the states where they live.
As an aside, it is a little known fact that all ag products made from tillage are thermodynamic losers. Using more energy than they produce, in calories. When agriculture first started and until the advent of steam power that equation was tipped by animal power. They converted unusable energy from grass into the power to make the crops. Still a thermodynamic loser but a winner from the human side of the equation. Then came the brief reign of steam and then of course oil.
Let's not forget that enticing farmers to grow corn or sugar cane is becoming more and more difficult. Why should they bust their butts to make a fraction of the profit, when all they have to do is sell their land for millions of dollars to greedy developers and retire in luxury!
You don't understand. The agri-business is subsidized by Govt money which is FREE MONEY. See? By shifting the paradigm and carrying out a strategy of enhanced metrics process efficiency our politicians can reverse the Laws of Thermodynamics!