Posted on 03/19/2008 10:16:36 PM PDT by neverdem
One of the many mandates of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 calls for oil companies to increase the amount of ethanol mixed with gasoline. During his 2006 State of the Union Address, President Bush said, “America is addicted to oil, which is often imported from unstable parts of the world.” Let’s look at some of the “wonders” of ethanol as a replacement for gasoline.
Ethanol contains water that distillation cannot remove. As such, it can cause major damage to automobile engines not specifically designed to burn ethanol. The water content of ethanol also risks pipeline corrosion and thus must be shipped by truck, rail car or barge. These shipping methods are far more expensive than pipelines.
Ethanol is 20-30% less efficient than gasoline, making it more expensive per highway mile. It takes 450 pounds of corn to produce the ethanol to fill one SUV tank. That’s enough corn to feed one person for a year. Plus, it takes more than one gallon of fossil fuel—oil and natural gas—to produce one gallon of ethanol. After all, corn must be grown, fertilized, harvested and trucked to ethanol producers—all of which are fuel-using activities. And, it takes 1,700 gallons of water to produce one gallon of ethanol. On top of all this, if our total annual corn output were put to ethanol production, it would reduce gasoline consumption by 10-12%.
Ethanol is so costly that it wouldn’t make it in a free market. That’s why Congress has enacted major ethanol subsidies, about $1.05 to $1.38 a gallon, which is no less than a tax on consumers. In fact, there’s a double tax—one in the form of ethanol subsidies and another in the form of handouts to corn farmers to the tune of $9.5 billion in 2005.
There’s something else wrong with this picture. If Congress and President Bush say we need less reliance on oil and greater use of renewable fuels, then why would Congress impose a stiff tariff, 54 cents a gallon, on ethanol from Brazil? Brazilian ethanol, by the way, is produced from sugar cane and is far more energy efficient, cleaner and cheaper to produce.
Ethanol production has driven up the prices of corn-fed livestock, chicken and dairy products, and products made from corn. As a result of higher demand for corn, other grain prices, such as soybean and wheat, have risen dramatically. The fact that the U.S. is the world’s largest grain producer and exporter means that the ethanol-induced higher grain prices will have a worldwide impact on food prices.
It’s easy to understand how the public, looking for cheaper gasoline, can be taken in by the call for increased ethanol usage. But politicians, corn farmers and ethanol producers know they are running a cruel hoax on the American consumer. They are in it for the money. Ethanol producers and the farm lobby have pressured farm-state congressmen into believing that it would be political suicide if they didn’t support subsidized ethanol production. That’s the stick. Campaign contributions are the carrot.
The ethanol hoax is a good example of a problem economists refer to as narrow, well-defined benefits versus widely dispersed costs. It pays the ethanol lobby to organize and collect money to grease the palms of politicians willing to do their bidding because there’s a large benefit for them. The millions of gasoline consumers, who fund the benefits through higher fuel and food prices, as well as taxes, are relatively uninformed and have little clout. After all, who do you think a politician will invite into his office to have a heart-to-heart—you or an ethanol executive?
Yes, I am pro-coal and I think it better to control the emissions in one large area than to have 1000’s with which to deal. This is primarily a car for urban areas and a technology that is in it’s infancy with respect to transportation. The Australian engine was very interesting, would love to see how it would perform on a larger scale.
I figure if the French can do that much we can come up with something even better. That is, if we weren’t wasting time and resources on fuels like ethanol and worrying about AGW. My main concern with the ZPM car is safety. An SUV Vs. The Air Car, well, let’s just say the air car should come equipped with a very good squeegee. If not for that, I would be cool with puttin’ around town all week at 35mph for $2. I was just making the point that we can be independent and self-reliant in the area of transportation without the ethanol boondoggle, and better yet, without the ME and Chia-Heads crude.
We have enough energy in coal alone to use FT and be independent. It is a matter of getting the production plants built and online. But, while the government is subsidizing ethanol that is where the investment capital will go in large part. I was just thinking the Australian engine would be great for lawn mowers. We better get on that. :)
Cattle, poultry and hogs can still eat the corn after it has been used as ethanol feedstock. Depending upon the milling process, the principal by-product of distillation is either Distillers Grain with Soluables or Gluten Meal, both of which are highly digestible protein feeds.
What in hell does what is spent in the field
got to do with net energy. It is going to be spent
anyway raising something. Or are you a green that doesn’t
want nothing done with farm land. And the energy production
figures are based using oil to power the ethanol plants.
Nobody does that. They use the fiber and or other
wastes like wood. There is no corn subsidy to farmers.
And your bias is showing in badmouthing corporate farms
as most corporate farms are family farms that are set
up that way for business reasons.And at no time have I suggested using ethanol to replace all the gas, only that we augment with a 10%. The Crp 31 million acres and
and about the same amount of unused land will easily
do the job. And still give a little extra to import.
We do need refineries but anti ethanol people at the
throats of farmers won’t help. We need them badly but
all this stupid crap blaming corn won’t help.
What would help is congress changing the amounts investors
have to out up to play the futures. It is now a small
fraction that they have to risk. Corn futures dropped today
on the rumor of leveraging money may get a little
short. The subsidy that is paid to get big oil
to add oxygen carriers, should be gone I agree, but that is the fault of oil companies no corn or farmers.
If gov can force so many rules on big oil that they won’t
build refineries because of the rules, they can force
the use of ethanol. Don’t blame the subsidy on the
corn or farmer. And the extra paid at the pump is
oil companie greed.The ones you know making 300 billion a year after expenses...Ed
In fact, I remember adding little bottles of ethanol to my gas tank in super cold IL to remove water from the gas.
Excellent idea on Kudzu....also switchgrass, grass clipping, leaves etc. We don’t need to be making ethenol from our food. It is all about the money. Congress knows they are screwing us.
What are your thoughts on this---
We have huge deposits of clean Western coal in Wyoming and surrounding states. But all these states are arid. Fischer-Topf needs immense amounts of water.
I love the idea of diesel jet fuel and home heating oil from coal
Only probem is greenies through Clinton
and other tricks have put our best coal off limits.
The amount given for ethanol subsidy to get big oil to
blend is small fraction of the tax breaks oil gets,
in other areas under tax laws.
It should be done away with as they make enough to
do it and still make profits. The smog in cities has
beem reduced a huge amount using ethanol to get
cleaner burning and less pollution. Congress can force
them to do it. The stations with 10% around here are
little less than others. The amounts spent on CRP, and
other crap in farm bill is many times that sudsidy.
Answer to other poster. Suppose we stop ethanol, and the
huge influx of dollars speculating on corn goes away,
and both have to happen for price to drop. What then.
Well 2 dollar corn. We’ve had ethanol for years and still only had less than 2 dollar corn, up until last 18 months
when the money from speculators increased a huge amount,
then driving up prices. We get back to 2 buck corn but now
cost to raise is $3.50 not $2.50 due to energy increases,
and fertilzer, equipment driven up by energy.
So we gonna give farmers price supports to keep them from being driven out, not able to raise anything.And you can
bet that corn goes back to 2 bucks all other stuff will be
below production costs also. And the speculators will
leave corn due to the lack of a huge volumne of product
compared to oil. Like 12-15 billion bushels of corn in
a whole year, where oil we use we use that many
gallons to refine every 5 days. I really wish congress would change FTC laws, so more money percentagewise had to be put up for commodities trading. Help everything including oil. Think of it folks, 2 buck corn gets
our farmers 30 Billion..Bill Gates makes that
every year. Oil companies cleared 10 times that much.
The 4 buck average for corn last year got farms 60B.
Whoppee spread among all farms won’t pay their taxes.
About 2 million fulltime farms. We have more lawyers
than that, getting about 400 Billion of our GNP.
Folks it is the money people who are causing the problem
and not ethanol, and you do away with it, you are
just adding to shortages in energy....Ed
Here is more proog that food commodities are
being manly driven by speculators.Some commodities
have went down this last week.So who benefits, and why.
The powers that be at the ultimate top level(the
Federal Reserve) has swung the axe against a sacrificial “bear” and have told all the others in the
investment business that they had better shore up their cash reserves, as we can get more axes. And you will do
it by selling some of your commodity positions so as we and you get some public goodwill, with little lower
prices on farm comodities..... Think about it....
And keep the axes sharp.......Ed
Yeah, “dry gas” we used to call it. The alcohol mixes with both water and gasoline.
I think the ratio is 4 or 5 barrels of water for one barrel of fuel. The companies are making obligations to treat and clean the water before returning it. It appears the process they are going to use in Wyoming is MTG. In Medicine Bow, they (Exxon-Mobile) are going to gasify the coal, convert the synthetic gas to methane and then convert the methane to gasoline using MTG. I am thinking they can perhaps recycle the waste water and use it each time for the process. Here is a link to a lot of good info on CtG if you're interested:
http://www.greencarcongress.com/coaltoliquids_ctl/index.html
Some say burn coal to electric to power battery automobiles and this guy says about the water factor——>>>
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2007/09/house-hearing-e.html#more
The water usage question is a red herring, if the CTL plants use ‘dry’ (non-evaporative) cooling systems. The water consumed in syngas production itself (minus the water then returned from the FT reactor) is sufficiently little that it could be provided by water in the coalbeds themselves.
Posted by: Paul Dietz | Sep 6, 2007 2:19:32 PM
Some say burn coal to electric to power battery automobiles and this guy says about the water factor——>>>
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2007/09/house-hearing-e.html#more
The water usage question is a red herring, if the CTL plants use ‘dry’ (non-evaporative) cooling systems. The water consumed in syngas production itself (minus the water then returned from the FT reactor) is sufficiently little that it could be provided by water in the coalbeds themselves.
Posted by: Paul Dietz | Sep 6, 2007 2:19:32 PM
LOL! Looks like it would be great in 6" of snow too......... Oh, and watch out for vehicle/bicycle collisions, they'll kill you.
God gave us a great, practical energy source, oil. Many are simply too ingrateful to appreciate this.
Hey! All of us Anericans are not gluttonous fatties! Instead of food prices going through the roof how about some people either not be gluttons or bear the consequences.
I hate when people say prices raising could be a good thing because it will alter behaviour, sounds a lot like taxing to control behaviour.
When you get t-boned, rear ended, or roll you will be dead in that golf cart, for sure, no doubt. Then your money spending days will truly be over.
Romm is an AGW moonbat and I think you are spot on concerning water usage. They are right, technically, about coal to electric to battery getting the best of the coals potential yield. Yet, we cannot meet the countries energy needs with what we wish we had, we have have to work with what we have and try to see the “big picture” on this.
Fuel cell/battery technology is just not there yet. They do not have the longevity needed to be practical and then there is the question of what to do with all those useless batteries. I think the best info is that around 3 years is the life cycle of the Tesla Li Pack. Transportation is a big investment for the consumer and that will be an added expense to make it unattractive to the average consumer. I think there is definite potential there, but we are just not there yet and we need feasible solutions now.
* I like some of the comments on that site, always good for a laugh. One commenter said, “We have to solve this because we have 6 years left to save the planet”. Such ignorance is scary, yet amusing. :)
I’m a big fan of clean coal. Burn it to make electric. Convert it to methanol and diesel.... We should be exploiting our coal to the hilt but the enviro-wackos are sabotaging every coal project over CO2
I don’t buy global warming but I do believe in scrubbing and cleaning up coal plant emissions. We have the technology but the greenies are killing everything
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.