E85

[Toyboy]

Here is thoughts from my retired friend who was a fuel systems/injection engineer.

Over and above what this article talks about, corn-based ethanol does not reduce oil consumption, from whatever source. This is strictly a political gift to the corn farmers. It raises corn prices and production. It requires much greater use of fertilizers, most of which comes from OIL. (This from the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY??!!) It takes more energy to produce corn-based ethanol than it produces in your engine. The only positive thing about ethanol is that it raises octane in low quality gasoline.

L

 

[Copperhead]

Here is thoughts from my retired friend who was a fuel systems/injection engineer.

Over and above what this article talks about, corn-based ethanol does not reduce oil consumption, from whatever source. This is strictly a political gift to the corn farmers. It raises corn prices and production. It requires much greater use of fertilizers, most of which comes from OIL. (This from the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY??!!) It takes more energy to produce corn-based ethanol than it produces in your engine. The only positive thing about ethanol is that it raises octane in low quality gasoline.

L

Most fertilizers, specifically anhydrous ammonia, is primarily sourced from natural gas. Call you local farmer's cooperative.

More energy to produce corn based ethanol? Could be, but doubtful. Many farms have gone to low till or no till (what we do, and have not turned over or broken up the soil for over 15 years) that substantially reduces the energy usage to produce a crop. And you have to factor the fewer passes in planting and harvesting due to implements that handle more rows at a pass than implement of days gone by. And crop yields per acre are light years ahead of past yield levels. So the cost per bushel is substantially less than a decade ago. And corn prices reflect that. Even with inflation and other market forces, corn is trading at roughly the same price as during the Clinton administration. Why? Because of the high volume which has easily met the demand and more. When you factor out the lower value of the dollar, the actual trading price on corn is lower than during the Clinton administration.

Now, if ethanol costs more to produce than petroleum fuels, one is hard pressed to rationalize that with the market exchange price of the fuels. As of July 3rd, ethanol futures pricing was right at $2.09 a gallon. Regular gasoline futures pricing for the same day was $3.01. These numbers are from the Chicago Board of Trade closing prices. These are market traded prices and reflect nothing to do with subsidies, mandates, ethanol producers lobbying, or government manipulation. If ethanol costs more to produce than gasoline, then those who are doing it are really losing their shirt. at almost a dollar less per gallon on the Chicago Board of Trade. And since all government subsidies were eliminated from ethanol production a couple of years ago, then ethanol production should have ground to a halt with the lower trading prices.

And ethanol use does not reduce oil consumption? That makes no sense right out of the gate. Kinda hard to see how my pickup using E85 is not consuming less oil based fuel than if I was using regular gas. That would mean the 17 mpg average mpg from gas out of my 2013 Silverado would be about 2.5 mpg with E85. But my pickup gets 14-15 mpg on E85. So I must be using less petroleum fuel.