Increased Ethanol %

[patrick_g]

Here in Oklahoma some fuel has ethanol in it but more and more stations proudly display signs and have stickers on the pumps declaring NO ETHANOL ADDED 100% gasoline.

Ethanol is a boondoggle disguised as a save the planet effort.

There is little net energy savings with respect to fossil fuel and it does little or nothing to reduce dependence on foreign oil imports.

You can choose to not accept the reports available on the topic because they don't agree with you but the preponderance of the available evidence is overwhelmingly in line with the idea that ethanol is essentially a hoax brought to you by politicians buying votes while pretending to do something for the environment.

Even Consumers Reports featured an "Exposé" of ethanol.

I know people who are waiting for color TV to be perfected before they put the B&W set aside. This is approximately the same mentality of those who think ethanol is a good deal.

Pat

 

[Egon]

I know people who are waiting for color TV to be perfected before they put the B&W set aside.

Hmm, I was thinking of getting a colour TV but then they's come out with those skinny ones. Maybe I'll wait a while on the skinny type till I know they been perfected!

 

[FlaDon]

Hmm, I was thinking of getting a colour TV but then they's come out with those skinny ones. Maybe I'll wait a while on the skinny type till I know they been perfected!

I've heard they are coming out with digital ones. Hope they don't go above the number 20 as most people can't count higher than that as they run out of fingers and toes.

 

[PA hayseed]

I'll throw some politics around.

They had a giant ponzi scheme on ethanol plants. They were sticking those things all over, most of the ones I have looked at have never ran. The people building them were making a mint. The real shame in the whole energy scam is that biodiesel that was made from animal renderings was cost effective to produce. Then those who have the power, and those who are deep into oil, made sure that it never took off. They have practically decimated the entire industry. Funny, seeing as how the initial fear was Food for Fuel, then fuel prices plummeted, then a recession, and now a recovery with relatively stable oil market. Meanwhile large ag producers, many owned by people in NYC, get incentives and tax credits for green fuels and building plants.

I know, I am a conspiracy theorist. Funny how companies like ADM Exxon etc, sit on Board's all over the globe, and dictate what gets a tariff and what doesn't.

Ethanol is not cost effective. take a look at how much it costs to produce a gallon without the incentives.

My .02 and feel free to call me a crackpot. I lost a bunch of money due to these people destroying an industry. Not millions, but alot to me.

 

[patrick_g]

I'll throw some politics around.

Ethanol is not cost effective.

My .02 and feel free to call me a crackpot.

hayseed, there you go again letting your reality intrude on the preconceived notions and erroneous mythology of GREEN ETHANOL.

Ethanol from corn is cloaked in lots of noise and motion but provides little or no benefit to the taxpaying fuel consumer.

Worse yet, it diverts attention from processes with real promise of reduction of foreign oil imports through a domestic sustainable green energy supply.

Pat

 

[Wineslob]

Worse yet, it diverts attention from processes with real promise of reduction of foreign oil imports through a domestic sustainable green energy supply.

Like, "drill here, drill now!"? Or "How about we build some NEW refineries?"


Oh, wait, the envirowackos took care of that.

 

[Duffster]

Here in Oklahoma some fuel has ethanol in it but more and more stations proudly display signs and have stickers on the pumps declaring NO ETHANOL ADDED 100% gasoline.

Ethanol is a boondoggle disguised as a save the planet effort.

There is little net energy savings with respect to fossil fuel and it does little or nothing to reduce dependence on foreign oil imports.

You can choose to not accept the reports available on the topic because they don't agree with you but the preponderance of the available evidence is overwhelmingly in line with the idea that ethanol is essentially a hoax brought to you by politicians buying votes while pretending to do something for the environment.

Even Consumers Reports featured an "Exposé" of ethanol.

I know people who are waiting for color TV to be perfected before they put the B&W set aside. This is approximately the same mentality of those who think ethanol is a good deal.

Pat

Most studies that calculate the amount of energy required to make ethanol don't count the feed that is left over, and the fact that it is higher protein than the corn the process started with.

I have yet to see a credible study done.

But I guess if "Consumer Reports" said it bad then I will have to take their word for it.

 

[patrick_g]

Most studies that calculate the amount of energy required to make ethanol don't count the feed that is left over, and the fact that it is higher protein than the corn the process started with.

Most unbiased studies do count the petrochemicals (including fertilizer, farm, and over the road diesel) used in the total process and find little or no savings in $ or oil.

Lets understand our numbers and not be thought innumerate.

There certainly is NOT more protein and or fat in the byproduct of corn to ethanol. After part of the corn (carbs) is removed in the processing and distilling the PERCENTAGE of the fat and protein is higher. However much fat and protein were in a ton of the distiller's feedstock (raw materials) is still there. The percentage went up on protein by removing carbs not increasing the pounds of protein per ton of corn.

Together with a friend we buy about 24-28 tons (18 wheeler load) of the byproducts of corn to ethanol (corn gluten mixed with soy hulls) every year and are about to do it again) I'd be happy as punch to not have it available and see less foreign oil imported.

Pat

 

[Duffster]

Most unbiased studies do count the petrochemicals (including fertilizer, farm, and over the road diesel) used in the total process and find little or no savings in $ or oil.

But if you don't count the feed that is left then it is not "unbiased".

That is the problem with any study. They are typically biased.

 

[patrick_g]

But if you don't count the feed that is left then it is not "unbiased".

That is the problem with any study. They are typically biased.

I see, all the reports that disagree with your preferred view are biased and wrong.

OK, post a link to an unbiased report that was made by a credible source, not biased by affiliation. I'd love to see all the others proven wrong. I have read extensively on the topic, seen pros and cons of various ilk but never a credible study showing a significant gain, even accounting for the value of the animal feed. Maybe there is one that somehow has remained elusive and not well known. Just post a link and all us naysayers will be set straight. I promise not to put down the study or its source out of hand with no credible counter evidence and will not tack on any ROLL EYES ROLL EYES ROLL EYES.

Pat

 

[Duffster]

I see, all the reports that disagree with your preferred view are biased and wrong.

OK, post a link to an unbiased report that was made by a credible source, not biased by affiliation. I'd love to see all the others proven wrong. I have read extensively on the topic, seen pros and cons of various ilk but never a credible study showing a significant gain, even accounting for the value of the animal feed. Maybe there is one that somehow has remained elusive and not well known. Just post a link and all us naysayers will be set straight. I promise not to put down the study or its source out of hand with no credible counter evidence and will not tack on any ROLL EYES ROLL EYES ROLL EYES.

Pat

Kinda touchy eh?

You claim to have all the info. You post one of these many "credible" studies.

I never said that there was an "unbiased" study, that was kind of my point, they are all biased in one direction or the other.

I will not right off an entire industry because I read some study that contains fuzzy math.

 

[KennyV]

I will not right off an entire industry because I read some study that contains fuzzy math.

I (and a lot of folks I know), are with you there. KennyV

 

[Ken45101]

Reading this discussion, it's pretty obvious that the issue will never be settled. That's the way it goes with political discussions, they are never settled because they are based on feelings, not fact. And that's the bottom line, ethanol is political, not scientific or economic.

 

[KennyV]

ethanol is political, not scientific or economic.

ethanol is a chemical, it has no politics... I do know there are those that would like to make all things political, but that only works if you choose to follow along and become part of the 'political problem'. Exact same thing with biodiesel.
...ethanol IS scientific AND economic. KennyV

 

[KennyV]

Just over a century ago this same discussion was had over whale oil for lamps, vs petroleum oil... the problem is no one in control of distributing ever wants to do anything differently until they are forced to change. KennyV

 

[patrick_g]

Reading this discussion, it's pretty obvious that the issue will never be settled. That's the way it goes with political discussions, they are never settled because they are based on feelings, not fact. And that's the bottom line, ethanol is political, not scientific or economic.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion and so far here in the USA the right to express it. Equal right to expression, however, does not lend equal validity to ideas expressed.

When the overwhelming scientific and economic evidence supports a given premise then we have to ask ourselves... Who is out of step, little Johnny or the Army.

I truly wish that corn to ethanol was saving the planet, was really GREEN, and was the best deal available since man began to walk upright. However I have no horse in the race. I have very little income from the oil industry (about a hundred $ a year), no income from raising corn, and no large direct effect on my income due to the current operations of the ethanol cabal.

We do suffer indirect effects due to the ethanol cabal. We pay for the myth through taxes. The planet (our only currently viable home) suffers more than if truly green processes (cellulosic butanol or ...) were funded such that the processes were commercialized and brought on-line.

I'm not generally a conspiracy theorist but it is fairly obvious that there is a de facto conspiracy in place and operating in corn to ethanol. It does not serve the best interests of the planet or its inhabitants.

Being anti-ethanol does not make one a Ludite, but on the contrary, if you want to replace corn to ethanol with a better more Earth friendly process that places you on the leading edge of change and modernization and not a reasonable target for comparisons to those of the whale oil persuasion decrying the new fangled petroleum based lamp oils. Quite the reverse is the actual case.

Pat

 

[Duffster]

When the overwhelming scientific and economic evidence supports a given premise then we have to ask ourselves... Who is out of step, little Johnny or the Army.

Please bring some of this "overwhelming scientific and economic evidence" to light.

I truly wish that corn to ethanol was saving the planet, was really GREEN, and was the best deal available since man began to walk upright. However I have no horse in the race. I have very little income from the oil industry (about a hundred $ a year), no income from raising corn, and no large direct effect on my income due to the current operations of the ethanol cabal.

I think you do have a horse in this race.

We do suffer indirect effects due to the ethanol cabal. We pay for the myth through taxes. The planet (our only currently viable home) suffers more than if truly green processes (cellulosic butanol or ...) were funded such that the processes were commercialized and brought on-line.

If cellulosic butanol is so great start making it. If it could be done profitably wouldn't it already be done?

There is nothing stopping a competing source of ethanol or other fuel.

I'm not generally a conspiracy theorist but it is fairly obvious that there is a de facto conspiracy in place and operating in corn to ethanol. It does not serve the best interests of the planet or its inhabitants.

Prove it.

Being anti-ethanol does not make one a Ludite, but on the contrary, if you want to replace corn to ethanol with a better more Earth friendly process that places you on the leading edge of change and modernization and not a reasonable target for comparisons to those of the whale oil persuasion decrying the new fangled petroleum based lamp oils. Quite the reverse is the actual case.

Pat

If you have information that proves your theories I would love to read it.

 

[patrick_g]

Please bring some of this "overwhelming scientific and economic evidence" to light.



I think you do have a horse in this race.



If cellulosic butanol is so great start making it. If it could be done profitably wouldn't it already be done?

There is nothing stopping a competing source of ethanol or other fuel.



Prove it.



If you have information that proves your theories I would love to read it.

Just one word and it isn't plastic. Google.

I have no corner on the information market. Also I am not motivated to PROVE anything to anyone who isn't interested sufficiently to read the available information from reasonably reliable sources.

Anyone can be a naysayer and demand that everyone bring them evidence so they can claim it to be biased, or flawed or whatever, anything except convincing to them. I'm done. If you chose to believe whatever, then good for you. I'm happy for you. Apparently your mind is made up and you don't want to be confused by any contrary facts. Fine by me if you are happy but under informed. It isn't as if I will be effected one way or the other. Google isn't all that hard to use if you have a change of heart.

Have a blissful day.

Pat

 

[PA hayseed]

Just one word and it isn't plastic. Google.

I have no corner on the information market. Also I am not motivated to PROVE anything to anyone who isn't interested sufficiently to read the available information from reasonably reliable sources.

Anyone can be a naysayer and demand that everyone bring them evidence so they can claim it to be biased, or flawed or whatever, anything except convincing to them. I'm done. If you chose to believe whatever, then good for you. I'm happy for you. Apparently your mind is made up and you don't want to be confused by any contrary facts. Fine by me if you are happy but under informed. It isn't as if I will be effected one way or the other. Google isn't all that hard to use if you have a change of heart.

Have a blissful day.

Pat

I agree. I no longer post links to websites or copy studies, because it takes me an hour or so to generate the information for someone to dismiss it in a half a second. I have read alot on "alternate fuels" and after doing so, I sunk my own money into a specific form of biodiesel production (not soy). It is funny how one "preferred" alternate fuel was given a windfall of incentives and another was not. When you follow the bills and legislation it became all to clear why. I can vividly remember George W. giving a little speech to the ag community (not to be read real farmers) and they clapped for some time when he said he backed ethanol over other forms. Oh well.

For those of you who really want to learn what has recently transpired in america and overseas, read biodiesel magazine, renderer magazine, and the ethanol websites/magazines. read the subisidies in the legislation (us), and read about the inacted tariffs through the EU and other countries. Someone definetly backed one horse over another, and it wasn't based on cost efficiency. Once again, I am a crackpot conspiracy theorist.

 

[PA hayseed]

Sorry, can't resist putting this one up.

RFA - The Industry - Biorefinery Locations

Hmmm...some corn producing states seem to have a plethora of refineries.

Note, they do not indicate what refineries are actually "producing" ethanol, just which ones are completed.