Ethanol requirement

Ethanol is as big a scam as global warming.

Do you think the push fr ethanol has anything to do with the Presidential primary season kicking off in the Hawkeye Cauci?

Yeah. Just another coinkydink.

Ethanol would fail in the free market as does every other boondoggle left wingers dream up
 
Steelplate said:
Field corn is also used for cornmeal....think taco shells, Doritos, corn bread. Which may not be a big deal to most of us here in the US, but the grain is important overall.

Older small engines(lawnmowers, boat motors, etc..) are affected by ethanol. The plastics and rubber they used back then deteriorate quickly with ethanol infused gasoline. Newer engines have parts with plastic and rubber designed for the presence of ethanol.
Click to expand...
very little of it.....the majority of the US corn production consumed by humans is in the form of corn syrup used in the beverage industry......even with corn at its highest prices less than four cents worth of "corn" is in a can of Coke........even a box of cornflakes represents less than fifty cents worth of corn to a farmer, though it will cost you more than four dollars......

more of your grocery budget goes to buying the fuel it cost to get the things you buy to the shelf than goes to buy the corn that is in them.........
 
PostmodernProphet said:
very little of it.....the majority of the US corn production consumed by humans is in the form of corn syrup used in the beverage industry......even with corn at its highest prices less than four cents worth of "corn" is in a can of Coke........even a box of cornflakes represents less than fifty cents worth of corn to a farmer, though it will cost you more than four dollars......

more of your grocery budget goes to buying the fuel it cost to get the things you buy to the shelf than goes to buy the corn that is in them.........
Click to expand...

This very true. When you factor in the fuel needed to farm equipment, transport of finished goods etc.

This is why Ben BernanQE' money printing is having a devastating effect.
 
tinfoil said:
Ethanol takes more energy to produce than it returns. and that doesn't even include the etra energy required to produce the fertilizers required to grow the corn in the depleted soil


Adding up the energy costs of corn production and its conversion to ethanol, 131,000 Btu are needed to make 1 gallon of ethanol. One gallon of ethanol has an energy value of only 77,000 Btu. "Put another way," Pimentel said, "about 70 percent more energy is required to produce ethanol than the energy that actually is in ethanol. Every time you make 1 gallon of ethanol, there is a net energy loss of 54,000 Btu."

http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_17166.cfm
Click to expand...

sorry, but this claim was been shown to be bogus many times.....
But planting, growing and harvesting that much corn requires about 140 gallons of fossil fuels
Click to expand...

this ignores the fact that farmers themselves are the primary users of biofuels, particularly biodiesel made from soy beans.....

* The energy economics get worse at the processing plants, where the grain is crushed and fermented. As many as three distillation steps are needed to separate the 8 percent ethanol from the 92 percent water. Additional treatment and energy are required to produce the 99.8 percent pure ethanol for mixing with gasoline.
Click to expand...

it also ignores the fact that most of the energy utilized by ethanol plants is in fact plentiful American natural gas rather than imported crude oil......

Subsidized corn results in higher prices for meat, milk and eggs because about 70 percent of corn grain is fed to livestock and poultry in the United States
Click to expand...

this ignores the fact that since cattle can't digest the sugars in corn in the first place (think methane and cow farts) the byproduct of ethanol production (brewer's mash) is actually a more effective cattle feed than the corn that was used to produce it and is highly sought after.....

Most economic analyses of corn-to-ethanol production overlook the costs of environmental damages, which Pimentel says should add another 23 cents per gallon.
Click to expand...

of course, we wouldn't want to compare that with the environmental damages of producing gasoline, would we.....

The approximately $1 billion a year in current federal and state subsidies (mainly to large corporations) for ethanol production are not the only costs to consumers
Click to expand...

offset by the subsidies we used to pay farmers to grow corn as a rotation crop for the more profitable soybeans so that there would not be the soil depletion that the OP claims is the result of growing corn......

finally, the article overlooks the fact that ethanol can be produced from any cellulose and has proven successful from many products previously considered waste.....corn, before ethanol production began, was considered waste, suitable only as a green manure crop......they discovered ethanol as a fuel primarily because they were researching ways to utilize waste.....
 
Last edited:
WinterBorn said:
Adding ethanol to our gas is a bandaid fix for a bigger problem. It allows someone to feel better, since it looks like someone is addressing the problem. But the oil used to grow the corn is greater than the savings in oil used for gasoline.
Click to expand...
that's true as a primary fuel but not as an additive. Ethanol provides serious advantages as an oxygenating additive.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
very little of it.....the majority of the US corn production consumed by humans is in the form of corn syrup used in the beverage industry......even with corn at its highest prices less than four cents worth of "corn" is in a can of Coke........even a box of cornflakes represents less than fifty cents worth of corn to a farmer, though it will cost you more than four dollars......

more of your grocery budget goes to buying the fuel it cost to get the things you buy to the shelf than goes to buy the corn that is in them.........
Click to expand...
Yup. That is true.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
sorry, but this claim was been shown to be bogus many times.....


this ignores the fact that farmers themselves are the primary users of biofuels, particularly biodiesel made from soy beans.....



it also ignores the fact that most of the energy utilized by ethanol plants is in fact plentiful American natural gas rather than imported crude oil......



this ignores the fact that since cattle can't digest the sugars in corn in the first place (think methane and cow farts) the byproduct of ethanol production (brewer's mash) is actually a more effective cattle feed than the corn that was used to produce it and is highly sought after.....



of course, we wouldn't want to compare that with the environmental damages of producing gasoline, would we.....



offset by the subsidies we used to pay farmers to grow corn as a rotation crop for the more profitable soybeans so that there would not be the soil depletion that the OP claims is the result of growing corn......

finally, the article overlooks the fact that ethanol can be produced from any cellulose and has proven successful from many products previously considered waste.....corn, before ethanol production began, was considered waste, suitable only as a green manure crop......they discovered ethanol as a fuel primarily because they were researching ways to utilize waste.....
Click to expand...
Absolutely spot on.
 
sedan said:
Meanwhile, making ethanol made from corn is a grossly inefficient process that consumes nearly as much energy as it produces.
Click to expand...

your article contradicts your statement....
Cassman, a professor of agronomy at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, said in 2008 that ethanol has a substantial net positive direct energy balance—1.5 to 1.6 more units of energy are derived from ethanol than are used to produce it.
Click to expand...

also from your article, confirming part of my previous post....
Ethanol is not the only product created during production. By-products also have energy content. Corn is typically 66% starch and the remaining 33% is not fermented. This unfermented component is called distillers grain, which is high in fats and proteins, and makes a good animal feed supplement.[7]
Click to expand...
 
leaningright said:
Well Mott, as usual we'll just have to disagree for the most part. The problem with it is the loss of power, lower mileage and degradation of fuel lines. Put ethanol in fuel...sell it...just let them sell real gasoline as well...and don't tax it to the point of being ridiculous.
Click to expand...

I remember similar complaints when they started taking the lead out of gasoline.....
 
Steelplate said:
Because, unless you are willing to embrace electric vehicles...hydrogen and ethanol make the most sense. Ethanol will be a.necessary product until the conversion to alternative fuels are accepted by society at large. Heck GM cars are.capable of E85 fuels(85% ethanol), but the standard is 10% right now. As.those cars.become older and more attractive in the used car market, perhaps.we'll see a gradual increase in the amount of ethanol at the.pump

Hydrogen? I'm all for it, but most aren't.
Click to expand...

Excuse me? Do you understand that it takes more than a gallon of diesel oil to make a gallon of ethanol and that adding ethanol to gasoline lowers gas mileage thereby wasting even more oil? You don't seem to understand the equation at all.

By the way, everyone is in favor of hydrogen but the infrastructure and even the physics of fueling automobiles with hydrogen simply have not been worked out yet (except in the case where hydrogen is fractured from hydro-carbons (oil) a ridiculous dog and pony show).

Further (sorry) there is simply no doubt that electric vehicles will be the transitionatory method. It is just a matter of time.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Interesting point. I was unaware of this.
Click to expand...

I grew up in Iowa, I still go there twice a year to visit my mother (95 now).....as you cross Illinois and Iowa on I80 you are hardly ever out of site of either an ethanol or biodiesel refinery....both my sister's husband and my wife's brother are farmers in Iowa....they keep me well informed of what is going on......
 
Last edited:
Rune said:
Do you understand that it takes more than a gallon of diesel oil to make a gallon of ethanol and that adding ethanol to gasoline lowers gas mileage thereby wasting even more oil? You don't seem to understand the equation at all.
Click to expand...

that simply is not a true statement....update your information from the 1995 data that you are relying on.....look at the 2008 study referred to above....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
you mean the biodiesel used to grow corn?.......you would be hard pressed to find a farmer that still uses fossil based diesel any more....
Click to expand...

Surely you jest. You do realize that adding 10% bio- oil to fossil oil qualifies as bio-diesel? That was either an incredibly stupid or incredibly dishonest comment.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
I do too.
Click to expand...

Yes and millions of older engines required extensive re-building and continue to do so as older machines across the country are resurected from long term storage.
That is entirely different though, since eliminating lead from gasoline was beneficial whereas adding ethanol to gasoline is not.

This entire misconception is based on Brazil's success with ethanol manufacturing, where the entire plant is used for production. Corns simply doesn't produce sugar throughout the entire plant as sugarcane does. This is a political boondoggle and a gift to the rust belt farmers and oil companies paid for by consumers.

It is counter-productive on every level.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top