Replies

Isn't it true that more BTUs of energy are required to make ethanol than are gained in burning ethanol? And isn't it true that engines with computer controlled fuel mixture (all those manufactured since about 1987)are no cleaner when burning gasolines with MTBE or ethanol?

And we know it is true that when CAFEs go up, more gasoline is burned because driving is more economical than other means of transportation.

We must try to remember that it makes no difference how fast we are going if we are going down the wrong road.

Since ethanol produces far less power than gasoline when burned, horsepower (and gas mileage) will be adversely affected. Also, in very cold climates (like Alaska, where I live) adding ethanol to the gas increases the possibility of water condensing in the tank and freezing in the fuel line.

But it's good for the big agribusiness interests, so in it goes!

What kind of solution is increased ethanol?

Depends on the problem. As far as a solution for pollution, or increasing energy supplies, it is no solution at all.

If you are a Senator or Congressional Representative from a corn-growing state, it is a great solution to get more campaign contributions.

For Archer-Daniels-Midland, the company which is reaping hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars in profits from this scam, it is a great solution to a potential cash flow or income problem.

You may have made the mistake of logically concluding ethanol is worse than a waste of time and resources, and therefore wondered what kind of solution this was. The idea that gasoline needs some kind of "oxygenator" to clean up emissions is bogus.

Now that you know what the real "problem" was, the "solution" is obvious.

Reminds me of the joke about Sherlock Holmes and Watson on a camping trip. In the middle of the night, Holmes wakes up Watson and asks him to look up at the brilliant starry sky and tell him what he thinks. Watson waxes eloquently about the vastness of the universe and unknown, uncounted worlds out there possibly with intelligent life.

Holmes interrupts him and says "No, Watson, you idiot. Someone stole our tent."

The arguements that ethanol is better for the environment or that it is a better fuel are absolute bunk. Ethanol is absolutely and inferior source of energy compared to oil.

The only advantage that I see is that a fuel that comes from a combination of sources would have a more stable market price. The gasoline at the service pump should be a mixture of several different sources, regardless if one of those sources is more economical than the others.

A certain percentage of our gasoline should be from:

1)the middle east
2)non middle east import
3)domestic
4)bio-fuel.
These 4 sources should be represented in every gallon of gasoline pumped from every filling station pumped in america. This would lessen the risk of a fuel shortage or price spikes.

The REAL point here is the one about phasing out MTBE's. MTBE is a known carcinagen. As we drive more and more the emisions from MTBE laced fuels settle onto the ground and eventually find their way to the water supply.

I find it especially interesting that Californians are not concerned about their water if it means increased fuel prices. Ethanol can be produced from any sugar based substance,,, corn is readily available in the midwest and there are many small refineries cropping up there. Blemished fruit could just as easiliy be used to produce Ethanol in California.