Ethanol on the Ropes?

[Duffster]

no corn would be bought from Va. farmers. It would all be shipped in.

Why not? Once corn leaves the farm it is just a commodity. It is not sorted by region or state so I find this really hard to believe.

Some would even come from other countries. .

I find this even harder to believe.

There isn't any money in moving corn any farther than absolutely necessary. That is part of the benefit of ethanol. Corn doesn't need to be trucked, trained or barged all over earth.

 

[mmurphy]

We can agree to disagree.

I would say that would be the best way to put it!!

I think it is good to see what people beleive on any subject. When people are informed are at least willing to debate an issue whether they agree or not helps keep things in check.

I do not believe ethanol is going to save the world or make a big change in it. On the other hand, it is not as bad as some will make it out to be. I have been involved with ethanol production in the past and I know where some of the problems are at. There is one ethanol producer or group (Poet, used to be Broin) who is very deep in research on making efficiency better, and they have came aways just in the past 5 years.

Some people think switch grass is the answer, but as of now not there yet. May be viable in the future. Other plant life that can be raised in desert areas could out perform corn, but storage becomes an issue. Industrial Hemp could be very good biofuel with more potential then alot of things grown, but that probably will never happen. There is a lot of plants that some day, with different methods will push ethanol past just corn.

 

[aczlan]

As far as fuel economy, my Ford Escort does not change on mileage from one to the other. Some cars will, but others do not.

So, running a fuel that has less energy per gallon does not cause your engine to use more fuel?
Something isn't quite logical here.

Aaron Z

 

[Don87]

I would say that would be the best way to put it!!

I think it is good to see what people beleive on any subject. When people are informed are at least willing to debate an issue whether they agree or not helps keep things in check.

I do not believe ethanol is going to save the world or make a big change in it. On the other hand, it is not as bad as some will make it out to be. I have been involved with ethanol production in the past and I know where some of the problems are at. There is one ethanol producer or group (Poet, used to be Broin) who is very deep in research on making efficiency better, and they have came aways just in the past 5 years.

Some people think switch grass is the answer, but as of now not there yet. May be viable in the future. Other plant life that can be raised in desert areas could out perform corn, but storage becomes an issue. Industrial Hemp could be very good biofuel with more potential then alot of things grown, but that probably will never happen. There is a lot of plants that some day, with different methods will push ethanol past just corn.

The newest scientific studies are telling a different story. I posted several links above, from credible sources. There are a lot more.
And even Al Gore admits it was a mistake on several levels.

 

[crazyal]

I would say that would be the best way to put it!!

I think it is good to see what people beleive on any subject. When people are informed are at least willing to debate an issue whether they agree or not helps keep things in check.

I do not believe ethanol is going to save the world or make a big change in it. On the other hand, it is not as bad as some will make it out to be. I have been involved with ethanol production in the past and I know where some of the problems are at. There is one ethanol producer or group (Poet, used to be Broin) who is very deep in research on making efficiency better, and they have came aways just in the past 5 years.

Some people think switch grass is the answer, but as of now not there yet. May be viable in the future. Other plant life that can be raised in desert areas could out perform corn, but storage becomes an issue. Industrial Hemp could be very good biofuel with more potential then alot of things grown, but that probably will never happen. There is a lot of plants that some day, with different methods will push ethanol past just corn.

I believe that if we continue to use corn we will keep replacing other crops to fill the mandate. As we do prices for all will rise, good for farmers but even better for futures traders. Our focus should be more in the direction towards non eatable sugar cane.

 

[Duffster]

So, running a fuel that has less energy per gallon does not cause your engine to use more fuel?
Something isn't quite logical here.

Aaron Z

Ethanol has less effect on some vehicles than others. Energy per gallon is really only part of the equation. Anybody that claims a 10% reduction in mileage from E10 is blowing smoke or need a tune up.

 

[Charolais]

Why not? Once corn leaves the farm it is just a commodity. It is not sorted by region or state so I find this really hard to believe.

If you know anyone that grows corn on the east coast they will tell you once corn prices went the $5 range that the east coast farmers got more for a Bu. of corn than those in the corn belt. Shipping cost perhaps was the reason.


I find this even harder to believe.

There isn't any money in moving corn any farther than absolutely necessary. That is part of the benefit of ethanol. Corn doesn't need to be trucked, trained or barged all over earth.

With free trade came lots of deals between companies (taxes/offshore). They were planning to bring corn in by ship to supply the plant right on the coast. And again east coast corn was and may still be a little higher than corn belt corn because of shipping. I remember reading a post over on NAT where a guy in Ga. posted that they were getting more money for corn than in the midwest at that time. I'm buying course cracked corn right now for a calf for freezer beef and paying $9.50 per 50 pound bag. That's through a coop too. If you want to see a ticket on that cracked corn I can scan it and send it to you. If you know what corn is going for now, do the math and tell me it doesn't cause food prices to rise. I use to sell beef for freezer for $2.60 a pound. I have to get $3 now and if corn stays up I'll have to go up again. It cost me more so I have to go up on my price. The folks that eat that beef will pay more or eat something else.

 

[mmurphy]

So, running a fuel that has less energy per gallon does not cause your engine to use more fuel?
Something isn't quite logical here.

Aaron Z

I am not going to look for studies do not have the time, gas has so much wasted energy. Some cars sensors, emission controls will not be effected like others. I have no money staked in ethanol, but use it when ever possible. You can actually use ethanol in a slightly modified diesel engine. Can not do that with gasoline. One has to ask why does the top power machines of different competition use alcohol. Another thing to add to this is when your car reaches highway speed of 55, it takes so much less energy to keep at that speed then is the energy being wasted out the exhaust.

 

[aczlan]

Ethanol has less effect on some vehicles than others. Energy per gallon is really only part of the equation. Anybody that claims a 10% reduction in mileage from E10 is blowing smoke or need a tune up.

You wont get a 10% reduction in mileage. To get that, you would have to use 10% water. But you will see a 1% to 3% reduction in mileage as was stated in the link I posted.

If you replace 10% of your fuel with something that has a lower energy content, you WILL use more fuel.
Will it be enough to notice? That depends on the car, but you WILL use more fuel IF you keep all of the other variables the same.

Aaron Z

 

[mmurphy]

Ethanol has less effect on some vehicles than others. Energy per gallon is really only part of the equation. Anybody that claims a 10% reduction in mileage from E10 is blowing smoke or need a tune up.

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup: Glad to see some one still in my camp!:laughing: