Skip to comments.Alert: Ethanol Lobby Seeking Bailout - - At Your Expense, Of Course
Posted on 03/08/2009 8:00:30 AM PDT by jay1949
The corn-ethanol industry, which wouldn't exist without government intervention, his hired former General turned influence-peddler Wes Clark to lobby for an increase in the proportion of corn ethanol in motor fuel, from 10% to 15%. Corn ethanol is at best fuel-INefficient, raising the cost of driving needlessly, and at worst, it will damage your vehicle. And you get to pay for it!
(Excerpt) Read more at theamericansentinel.com ...
Deathanol is a crime against humanity...
“Deathanol” - - nice
Perfect name - Deathanol - because only dead civilizations use their food for fuel.
Note that the spokesperson leading the charge is none other than General Weaselly Clark. The skunk doesn’t change his stripes.
Another big waste of my tax paying money.
Deathanol is a complete fraud by any measure.
It is PERFECT for Obama to utterly waste the wealth of the US on.
Similarly, it's hard to argue against the government bailing out the ethanol producers. After all, it was the government that granted the subsidies and effected the mandates that justified their investment. Without these government-granted perks, there would be no "ethanol industry".
At bottom, all of these bailouts demonstrate the utter insanity of government intervention in the market place.
I thought that there were already heavy subsidies for ethanol.
We can’t find clear gas in Colorado anymore because E10 is so profitable for the distributors and retailers.
Ethanol is only required during Dec, Jan, and Feb. Yet, we are stuck with it year round now.
One gas station offered clear gas but the owner decided that he couldn’t compete with the gas stations who sold ethanol.
The 10/90% ethanol fuel blend was not intended to save fuel, it was meant to keep corn farmers and the government-subsidized ethanol industry happy. Ethanol can't compete with gasoline without government subsidies, so government makes us pay twice, once by giving away our tax dollars in subsidies to the ethanol makers and again by forcing us to buy a fuel blend that costs more per mile than gasoline. Then the shysters in Congress who forced that on us are rewarded by generous contributions from the farmers and the ethanol industry.
When will we ever learn that we can't trust a single solitary one of the lying, thieving, bribe-taking frauds who we send to Washington to do the right thing for THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, not for the special interests who buy politicians like we buy groceries?
“My Corolla gets 32 mpg highway on the 10/90 ethanol/gasoline blend vs 38 mpg it got on straight gasoline before the 10% ethanol 90% gas blend was mandated. Ethanol absorbs water out of the atmosphere and can damage expensive parts in a vehicle’s fuel system, as well as costing drivers more per mile than straight gasoline by reducing fuel mileage.”
That sounds about right. Every aspect of corn ethanol is a problem. Because of its water content, it is corrosive, and last time I checked it still cannot be sent through petroleum-product pipelines. So in order to mix it with gas, ethanol is transported by Diesel-burning trucks to local storage facilities. Of course, it remains corrosive in your gas tank, which is why many drivers report, e.g., that their fuel sensors don’t work properly any more (mine doesn’t).
This is political dementia!
I got the impression from a local TV news program that the 10% ethanol blend is now mandated all year round by the government. That could be just bad information, or it could be true but just true for Georgia where I live. Does anyone here know the real story on the ethanol blend crap?
My Corolla gets 32 mpg highway on the 10/90 ethanol/gasoline blend vs 38 mpg it got on straight gasoline before the 10% ethanol 90% gas blend was mandated.”
Similar experience here in all three of our Saabs.
“and at worst, it will damage your vehicle.”
Um, where do I start? A gallon of Deathanol destroys a bushel of corn (human food) and uses 1.2 gallons of oil to distill. It then causes the vehicle that burns it to get 5-10% worse economy. Now lets multiply that by billions of gallons annually. Massive waste of billions of gallons of crude oil, massive food shortages resulting in food riots and starvations, head numbing loss of effenciency. Oh wait, that’s already happening. Dems answer, more deathanol.
I would like to send the repair bills to my congress-critter but I know what I would get for my trouble, another form letter describing all the good things he's doing for me between Washington high society parties and vacation junkets paid for by beneficiaries of his generosity with my tax dollars. Isn't this kind of like the situation in the colonies just before the Revolution got started?
The Implications of Biofuel Production for United States Water Supplies
The National Academy of Sciences recently published a report titled Water Implications of Biofuel Production in the United States. The paper outlines impacts and limitations on both water availability and water quality that would follow the pursuit of a national strategy to replace liquid fossil fuels with those made from biomass. COMMITTEE ON WATER IMPLICATIONS OF BIOFUELS PRODUCTION IN THE UNITED STATES http://www.theoildrum.com/node/3285
“The Implications of Biofuel Production for United States Water Supplies” It can be purchased in book form or downloaded as a pdf here. http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12039
I am not qualified to comment upon the particulars of the technology other than to point out personal experience.
My old 1985 Saab Turbo I was going to use as a coffin upon the day I would pass to the great beyond became to onerous a load in the maintenance department specifically due the effects of Ethanol (this according to the experienced, expert opinion of my Swedish Mechanic, and friend that maintains all of our cars the past 22 years.) that I was compelled to retire it.
That car was a part of my life for almost 20 years. Irreplaceable as Saab doesn’t make those models anymore where the deck goes flat for cargo. The newer one I have isn’t capable of carrying the cargo I could in that old one, so I’m thinking seriously about buying another Pick up truck. I didn’t need a P/U for many a year with that old 900T around.
Not the same MPG—but the same % loss in mileage in my 1976 Chevy Dually and my 1979 station wagon.
Likey it was responsible.
Ethanol is a SOLVENT
ALl the gunk that accumulated in your fuel system got flushed by the use of fuel with solvent in it.
Etoh is also a oxidizer (add oxy tot he burn, which is why it cleans up your emissions) and as such it will promote rusting in your fule system. There is a reason E80 fuel systems are made of stainless steel.
In January of 1960 I bought one of the very early 3-cylinder, front wheel drive SAABS that were being imported in small numbers at that time. I was ridiculed unmercifully by friends and family alike for buying what at first appeared to be a freaky little bug of a car that burned a gas-oil mixture like outboard motors and some lawn mowers used. Even the pump jockeys at gas stations often laughed at me while they waited for me to pour a quart of oil in the tank before they filled it with 8 gallons of gas. OTOH, I never had to change oil or a filter, and IIRC there were only two grease fittings to lube once a year.
And while they were laughing I was getting up to 40 mpg on the highway in probably the strongest and safest car body ever built. The odd teardrop shape of the unibody was designed by SAAB's aviation engineers for strength and resistance to crushing and/or rollover rather than for style, and the Swedish steel sheet metal was noticeably thicker than the metal of other car bodies. Tapping on a fender or the roof with a hard object sounded like tapping on cast iron instead of a tin can like other cars sound.
My family soon outgrew the little 4 passenger car and in 1963 I had to give it up and buy a Chevy station wagon that was equipped with 3 seats, Powerglide tranny, and A/C. But my Dad bought the SAAB from me and drove it as his 2nd car until I took it back in 1971 for my go-to-work transportation. Sadly I had to give it up to the salvage yard when it failed the safety inspection a year or two later and parts were not available to repair the worn out brakes. I don't know how well today's SAABs are built, but I know they are now quite expensive and very much upscale from the little 93B I bought almost 50 years ago.
That is what I thought, too. Until I found the clear gas station.
The owner posted a huge sign in front of his station — “ethanol free” — and was very proud until he couldn’t sustain is business and compete.
An old article... less than a year.
Don’t want to bailout people who use more energy to create less energy. It’s silly.
Great Story epow. We’ve had nothing but Saabs for 22 years now, and they are still great cars in our opinion.
Our friend I mentioned in the previous post owns a shop in Harbor City, California near Carson, Calif. where my wife and myself worked until 1995. We still take our cars there for service annually, or when something happens which is rare. It’s 140 mile round trip for us to go there, but it’s like an outing as he has Saabs all over the place for sale. It’s fun to see what he has whenever we are there.
A couple of years ago I remember he had one of the old Saabs as you describe in the shop for some reason. I didn’t ask. I see some really old ones go in there for service as my friend is from Sweden and has developed quite a supply source for hard to find parts.
Unfortunately with the elixer, corn whiskey we are forced to put in our cars anymore, we’re going to find older technology vehicles consigned to museums, and if not needed at the museums, the scrap yards.
The percentage loss of MPG may run in a fairly narrow range for most vehicles - - because they burn 87-octane fuel. Corn ethanol is 100-plus octane, so it simply doesn’t burn in the power cycle. In terms of MPG, it’s like the corn ethanol isn’t even there. You’re actually getting the same MPG per gallon of gasoline; it’s simply diluted by 10%. My sedan burns 91 octane fuel, so the MPG loss is consistent with the lower BTU content of the ethanol. I suppose I should be happy that it burns the stuff in the power burn. But I’m not.