10% Ethanol, Heads Up!

[dmccarty]

Ethanol has replaced MTBE to reduce pollution. MTBE was bad bad bad stuff since it is very water soluable and can/did contaminate quite a bit of ground water. There were discussions about MTBE when it was first used to reduce tailpipe emissions. I think it was only used in the triangle area of NC during the winter. At least at first. There were some subdivisions in Raleigh that had their wells contaminated from leaks in underground tanks at local gas stations. Which was the worry when MTBE was introduced.

Ethanol then replaced MTBE since a bit of alcohol in your well, errr spring, water is a good thing. We will just forget about the gas that goes with the Ethanol leaking from the underground tanks.

Later,
Dan

 

[beppington]

Government conspiracy no, but politics are at play. Ethanol producers (e.g., ADM, et al.), farm organizations (e.g., Farm Bureau, National Corn Growers), and other interest groups have lobbied various Administrations (Republican and Democrat) and Congress for ethanol mandates.

Exactly.

 

[California]

I saw an interesting article referenced from Digg this morning:

Ditching Ethanol Subsidy Will Save US $6 Billion - Won't Hurt Domestic Production Either

Two new pieces in NRDC's blog illustrate the benefits of ditching Federal support altogether. The first, from the Congressional Budget Office, details how much money eliminating the Ethanol Excise Tax Credit; the second, from Iowa State University, shows that not only would we save money but eliminating the subsidies, it wouldn't hurt production of corn ethanol.

Sasha Lyutse sums up the CBO report:

The CBO report estimated that roughly 11 billion gallons of biofuels were produced and sold in the U.S. in 2009, over 98% of which (10.8 billion gallons) came from corn ethanol. Tax expenditures (essentially foregone tax revenues) in support of this production were roughly $5.16 billion, including VEETC payments of $0.45 cents per gallon for blending ethanol (regardless of the feedstock) and the additional $0.10 cents per gallon that "small producers" receive on the first 15 million gallons they produce.

CBO finds that before they even pay at the pump, taxpayers incur a cost of $1.78 to replace a gallon of gasoline by substituting corn ethanol. continued

 

[mmurphy]

I saw an interesting article referenced from Digg this morning:

Ditching Ethanol Subsidy Will Save US $6 Billion - Won't Hurt Domestic Production Either

But we can each take 2 sides and prove each other wrong. Creative figures are around every where on this subject. I guess some people think ethanol is a fairly new invention. If ethanol industry would go down it would be a much bigger ticket then 6 billion a year.

 

[California]

But we can each take 2 sides and prove each other wrong. Creative figures are around every where on this subject. I guess some people think ethanol is a fairly new invention. If ethanol industry would go down it would be a much bigger ticket then 6 billion a year.

Ok ... I pointed to studies by Congressional Budget Office and Iowa State University. So far it appears that you just make stuff up.

 

[Duffster]

Ok ... I pointed to studies by Congressional Budget Office and Iowa State University. So far it appears that you just make stuff up.

Many anti ethanol articles including this one contradict themselves in the numbers.

Studies are skewed everyday. Anti ethanol's favorite from Cornell has been proven to be wrong many times.

 

[mmurphy]

Many anti ethanol articles including this one contradict themselves in the numbers.

Studies are skewed everyday. Anti ethanol's favorite from Cornell has been proven to be wrong many times.

Could not have said it better myself Duffster.


I will side on ethanol, although I will not say it is perfect.
Like I said in last post depends on what side you are on will be how the out come is shown in favor of that side. Last I knew we are still spending tax payers money in favor of oil and ethanol. My favorite thing is when I put fuel in my car, down the road I go with never a problem with ethanol blend, or straight gas. BTW the carbs that make the ethanol from corn passes through a cows stomache as waste and methane. So ethanol is not wasting food.

California, I was not making a statement against you.

 

[dmccarty]

I will side on ethanol, although I will not say it is perfect.
Like I said in last post depends on what side you are on will be how the out come is shown in favor of that side. Last I knew we are still spending tax payers money in favor of oil and ethanol.

The CBO study referenced earlier said that the tax payer is paying a $1.78 per gallon of ethanol. I don't know of a company that does not get some sort of tax benefit/incentive. The question is which is better for the tax payer. Does Exxon get a tax subsidy of $1.78 a gallon? I would be shocked if it did.

Why should the tax payer be paying $1.78 either for Ethanol or Gas. Both are wrong. And in the case of ethanol the increased price of Corn drives up food costs so we pay far more than just fuel costs.

Later,
Dan

 

[IslandTractor]

BTW the carbs that make the ethanol from corn passes through a cows stomache as waste and methane. So ethanol is not wasting food.
.

That is one of the weirdest statements I've ever seen on TBN.

 

[keegs]

Ethanol has replaced MTBE to reduce pollution. MTBE was bad bad bad stuff since it is very water soluable and can/did contaminate quite a bit of ground water. There were discussions about MTBE when it was first used to reduce tailpipe emissions. I think it was only used in the triangle area of NC during the winter. At least at first. There were some subdivisions in Raleigh that had their wells contaminated from leaks in underground tanks at local gas stations. Which was the worry when MTBE was introduced.

Ethanol then replaced MTBE since a bit of alcohol in your well, errr spring, water is a good thing. We will just forget about the gas that goes with the Ethanol leaking from the underground tanks.

Later,
Dan

Dan...If you couldn't sell your house because it got in your well water would you blame the government?

 

[keegs]

I don't know how much the oil companies get in subsidies...what's it cost to keep the 5th fleet in the Persian Gulf?

I'd add that oil makes up about two thirds of our trade deficit. What's that cost us?

And what about national security...What's it worth to have 10% of our motor fuels produced domestically instead of in some unstable part of the world?

 

[beppington]

Somebody better move this to "The Front Porch" quick!! :laughing:

 

[Duffster]

The CBO study referenced earlier said that the tax payer is paying a $1.78 per gallon of ethanol. I don't know of a company that does not get some sort of tax benefit/incentive. The question is which is better for the tax payer. Does Exxon get a tax subsidy of $1.78 a gallon? I would be shocked if it did.

Why should the tax payer be paying $1.78 either for Ethanol or Gas. Both are wrong. And in the case of ethanol the increased price of Corn drives up food costs so we pay far more than just fuel costs.

Later,
Dan

It is claimed by many, even here on TBN, that gasoline would be ~double if not for the gov't helping in various forms.

 

[IslandTractor]

And what about national security...What's it worth to have 10% of our motor fuels produced domestically instead of in some unstable part of the world?

Less than decreasing our energy usage by 10% and then selling that corn as food overseas.

 

[Duffster]

That is one of the weirdest statements I've ever seen on TBN.

I think I am following what he is trying to say.

When ethanol is made 67% of the corn is left as distiller grain. The cow makes better use out of the DG than straight corn to a degree. The DG is also higher in fiber and protein at this point so less of other feeds are required. So in the end not even 33% of the corn is used.

 

[keegs]

Less than decreasing our energy usage by 10% and then selling that corn as food overseas.

Let me know when you've figured out how to get from here to there.

 

[IslandTractor]

Let me know when you've figured out how to get from here to there.

A few simple ideas:
1) Trade out V8 gas for diesel V6 in trucks and SUVs pulling less than 10,000lb
2) Trade in 4 and 6 cylinder diesel or DI gas/turbo for whatever else is in passenger cars these days
3) Crank up the gas tax to encourage more efficient engines and to pay down the deficit (tied to some sort of cap on spending). Works in Europe. I know this is getting political but I'd gladly pay more taxes if it meant conserving fuel so we don't send our treasure and troops overseas to keep us moving.

How is it that our European forebearers seem to be able to travel and do business with about half the fuel per mile we do? Whatever that combo is would be a good target even if we don't cut our use by quite as much.

I just bought a new SUV that averages about 19mpg. That sucks. I'd have gladly traded a couple of seconds in 0-60 for a 25mpg average but didn't have the choice. I was disappointed that the only way I could have purchased a diesel SUV was by forking over $50-60+K to Mercedes, VW BMW or Audi. I'm not that stupid having already suffered for twelve years with my last MB SUV. The Jetta diesel is great but not quite big enough for my purposes. Why can't we get fuel efficient diesels in non luxury vehicles made outside Germany? The Germans only charge an extra grand or two or three for a modern diesel. I'd pay that no question to get 25mpg from an SUV. I would have been happy to pay a premium to buy GM or Ford or any Japanese or Korean brand if they sold one with a modern diesel.

 

[IslandTractor]

I think I am following what he is trying to say.

When ethanol is made 67% of the corn is left as distiller grain. The cow makes better use out of the DG than straight corn to a degree. The DG is also higher in fiber and protein at this point so less of other feeds are required. So in the end not even 33% of the corn is used.

Thanks for the clarification.

 

[mmurphy]

I think I am following what he is trying to say.

When ethanol is made 67% of the corn is left as distiller grain. The cow makes better use out of the DG than straight corn to a degree. The DG is also higher in fiber and protein at this point so less of other feeds are required. So in the end not even 33% of the corn is used.

Thanks again Duffster!!!!
I was just waiting for the comment about "food for fuel" that always come up in the ethanol debate. Another thing to add, subsidies have been cut on farmers because corn prices went up. I would much rather see our home land farmers buying HOPEFULLY American made machinery (or from our neighbors to the north) then ..... well I will leave that comment out.

Island tractor, I am wierd!:thumbsup:

 

[IslandTractor]

Island tractor, I am wierd!:thumbsup:

Welcome to the club. See you at the next meeting.