Are you ready for 15 to 20% Ethanol and fuel System damage ?

Wow I am astounded at all the assumptions you make! I am ignorant, negative and have no solutions of my own. Doesn't really make people want to have a discussion with you.

You have studies and I have studies and they contradict, what makes mine wrong and yours right? Who funds yours but people who are pro-ethanol. Every argument you use on mine can be used on yours.

As for negative no, I am not I am realistic. If we go the biofuel route then let's use something less damaging to the environment and something that my tax dollars don't subsidise as part of the food/farm bill like switchgrass. It doesn't require all the nitrogen that is destroying our waterways and the Gulf nor all the other things high maintenance corn needs. Turning a blind eye to the problems isn't being postive it's just wrong.

As for solutions well let's start at the top. Use less fuel would be number one. Promote ways to conserve energy, make more fuel efficient cars, raise gas prices so people are forced to conserve if necessary. But don't use my money through my taxes to subsidise other people's over consumption and stupidity. Feeding the greed is not a solution.

Switchgrass does not work today. It is a theory. Today, it takes more energy to grow & harvest & process than it returns.

With many many govt dollars being spent today, they hope in 5 to 15 years they can make it a net energy producer.

Switchgrass is a stemmy plant which produces large volumes of plant material with a very low sugar content. It requires us to move much more volumes of material, and it requires an extra step of processing to turn the low-level sugars into a higher grade of sugar.

Studies show stitchgrass doesn't need much N added because it currently is not being harvested - it simeply dies back in fall, refertilizes itself, and grows again the next year.

Once you start haresting it & removing a crop from the acres, _then_ it needs just as much fertilizer as anything else. There will be no free lunch.


So, your data on switchgrass, just like corn ethanol, is really flawed. It's wrong on all counts, really. I do not blame you nor do I think you are stupid. You have just been led down the wrong path by some folks with agendas and some simple, unatatainable goals.

It appears you don't wish to study this, or look into the beliefs you have come to, so perhaps I consider you stubborn. I'm writing for other people, with open minds I guess. I welcome your input, but it is following the very classic route, of true believers & no facts or data or different thinking will ever change what I believe....

Minnesota has very cold winters, 1/3 of the population will go on lakes this weekend for fishing opener so we have lots of boats, the top 1/3 of the state is forest & lumber, we have a lot of old tractors still used in farming - and somehow we get along with ethanol just fine. As I say ethanol isn't _perfect_ but it does work - howcome you claim so many problems with it?

This stuff is like a religious belief. You believe, and that's that.

Doesn't matter what others say, do, or prove. It's wasted time on the True Believers.

Just doesn't seem to be worth the time to work out any details with you? Don't mean to be short with you ro nothin., but seems there is little choice - you aren't open to new ideas.

Me, I hope the gobs and gobs of money the govt is spending on switchgrass (and corn cob, ricestalk & cornstalk waste, and algea) research to make these things work does pan out, and they start working soon. I'm all for it.

Do you have any concept of how many millions of tons of switchgrass need to be collected & hauled around to make ethanol???? Do you understand it needs to be grown somewhere, either on marginal sensitive wildlife habitat or on regular crop ground? You do realize they need to improve the enzymes a bunch before it produces a positive energy return? This is no simple thing, to start using switchgrass. Many millions have been spent to get it to a possible working theory.....

It's a great theory - I really hope it works out. Corn will continue to do better in the northern climates, but switchgrass will help give you southern folk a good option to use as well. Switchgrass will produice a bit more sugar in a southern location.

It's difficult to sit by when you (unintentionally I'm sure) put out so very many wrongs on a thread. A forum like this really isn't set up to get into the intensive detail research to go point by point, and show just how wrong your beliefs are. I'm sorry that comes out as negative personally; I do not intend that.

But for those interested in the subject, there is a lot better info and research and facts out there. For those who wish to look, it becomes pretty clear pretty quickly. Someday we will need a different type of mobile fuel entirely, but for today ethanol works pretty good to help the air a little, help stretch fuel supplies a little bit, and makes a transition from old gasoline to whatever the next thing will be. We have a whole lot of $$$ tied up in internal combustion transportation and ethanol is compatable with that; many radical new ideas cost more & require us to quickly throw away our current cars, which just isn't something our ecconomy can handle. So, we are stuck with something that helps a bit for now. Ethanol from corn, and hopefully soon ethanol from some sort of woody crop residue. For the interm.

For those just browsing the thread, at least you can see there are 2 sides to this debate, and ya don't have to go off of just one-sided info.

For those that thing corn ethanol is the only possible answer ever; and for those who think ethanol is spawned by the devil - well there probably isn't much that will shake those ingrained beliefs. You seem to fall into this group?

I'm not suck on ethanol as _the_ solution, but it helps for now and provides more good than bad, so let's roll with it unil science & good old tinkering comes up with something even better.

What I don't like is when people are just downright wrong, but continue to promote their wrong beliefs and harm the rest of the world in so doing.....

I hope folks can see more sides of this issue, and find middle ground on it. It's kinda important, as we get more people and less room and more social issues across the globe. We don't have time for blind beliefs any more.

--->Paul

Good lord are you writing a book on the subject or are you a pitchman for ethanol or what?

Like I said you are so busy with your assumptions about me you aren't even listening so I find this pointless. A whole lot of time and energy could be saved on forums if people actually read and discussed what what being said rather than arguing their assumptions.

Just for the record I do not think that ethanol is evil nor do I think oil is evil. Over consumption and greed on the part of humanity is the only evil. I just happen to think that ethanol is not a good solution to the problem either in the short term or the long term. It's downsides outweigh it's benefits. You are welcome to your opinion of course but if anyone is a "true believer" here or total zealot for their beliefs it would be you not me. The world will continue to over consume until it runs out and then it will pay the price your opinion and mine really don't matter in the grand scheme of things.

He's a pitchman for the corn industry.

I have read the studies and talked with people who have had access to both ethanol blended gas and ethanol free gas. I have done my own studies. Once all is said and done ethanol (which does not perfom equally in lab tests where water absorbtion is strictly regulated compared to actual use studies) performs differently in different climates and altitudes. Here is does not give you the same milage as straight gasoline. And I have read many studies showing that you get less return from ethanol than what it takes to produce it. True, technology has improved but it still takes lots of fuel to produce a bushel of corn. BTW, that field corn could be used to produce food for human consumption, corn oil, corn syrup, corn meal, feed for animals which people eat, etc.

I do have solutions to the current oil consumption issue, but those solutions are moot points when the govt rides in the pocket of the fuel industry. And no, I will not post those solutions here or anywhere else. I know what happens to people who are on the verge of technological breakthroughs which would free us from the need to use fossil fuels to power transportation.

Many ethanol plants have installed corn oil seperators. It is either used to add to dieesel fuel or if kept clean added to the human food supply.

Likewise the protien portion & fiber portion of the corn is used as distillers dried grains - animal feed. While not a very tasty greul, if kept clean to USDA standards, it could be used directly as human food.

The only thing removed is the starch, which is convered to sugar & then to ethanol.

So of your list, the only thing we lose with ethanol is the corn meal, of which very little corn is ever used for that.

Corn ethanol already does what you want - you should be the spokesman for it if you belive your owm words! .

--->Paul

I'm not important on this, doesn't matter what you say about me. You're not important either, no reason to attack each other. The issue is if ethanol from corn - and other sources - can play a part in the national energy supply, as we eventually, someday, will switch from petrolium to 'something else' whatever that is.

I kinda sorta directly replied to every point you have made, so I pretty much have addressed every point. Yea that takes a lot of writing, but I feel it is important and worthwhile.

I run one of the smallest farms in my county, I produce some cattle & I have no direct intrest in any ethanol plant anywhere. Corn ethanol has raised my corn prices slightly; has slightly lowered my returns from cattle; and slightly lowered my fuel & fertilizer bills. All in all the eeffect on me personally is very small & rather distant. Not much personal gain for me in this show.

I agree conservation of energy is a good thing, and I do my part. However, an expanding population & ecconomy will always use more energy - you can't conserve yourself to zero use. So while that would sure help, it will not solve the problem. I like your idea, but it will not solve the problem either.

When we end up using different energy sources some day - whatever they are, ethanol from corn will look as goofy as lighting our houses with whale blubber oil! Sheez what a silly idea!

But at one time in history, that is what people did, and it was the best, cheapest, most logical option for the times.

Right now, corn ethanol in many parts of the North American continent is about as good as it gets to extend our fuel supplies, until something else is stumbled upon. While that is my opinion, it is shared by many people in industry, universities, and regular folk who have given it some unbiased thought & consideration.

Raising the level of ethanol in our gas supplies from 10% to 15% isn't perfect nor does it magicly solve all the world's problems, but it would be a good thing for the country as a whole. Those points are pretty clear, and I'll continue to point that out when the subject comes up.

I thank you for the time.

--->Paul

Ok again here is my findings with real cars on real roads and under real conditions. First in 1978-1980 in Fla. !969 Ford Fairlane with 302 engine. When running the 10% mix I got about 2 miles per gallon more in town driving and about the same on the open road. This car had a carb and no o2 exhash detectors. I was very pleased with it cranking easier but I did have to change the fuel filter a couple times in the first couple months.
Next is a 1984 dodge Daytona with torbo charger in NC about 1987 to 1990. Again a little better mileage in town and about the same on open roads. When run on pure gas after a couple weeks it would have to be cranked several times in the morning after sitting all night. Then a trip to the gas station that sold the 10% blend was in order. About a 1/4 tank later you only had to crank it once and it stayed running. I could tell no difference in power with either fuel.
Next a 1975 Datsun 280ZX. This was my Daughters car. She took it to have it inspected and it failed the emissions test and she came home in tears. She would only run BP's best grade in it. This was also in NC. I told her to run the gas down to a 1/4 tank and then I would take it for reinspection which she did. I took it to my station that sold the blend and filled it with it. From there I went to the inspection station that failed it and it passed by several points. When I told the guy, who I knew, what I did he was amazed. Since then I haven't paid much attention to what gas I have used.
That is my personal dealings with our blended gases.
I hope all has a good day and we get good fuel. Sam

I've been paying attention to this thread and don't feel like you've addressed any of the points other then to type out an opinion.

Do you have any links to these "legitimate" studies you speak of?

I could live without it personally, but ethanol does help keep the family fed.

The Company I work for reprocesses contaminated motor fuels. Once ethanol - based gasoline, gets excessive water contamination, it is unusable until it's re-refined.

Never-ending supply on the cheap.

But, in Brazil, huge country, IIRC, they have gone over almost completely to
Ethanol, generated from SugarCane. I don't think the Oil even enters into their system.
They have essentially ended their Dependence on Oil as a Motor Fuel......
It looks like they are Good, Ready for the Future.....of Peak Oil.
Check it out, Guys.
Like I said, I don't care either way. I'm just interjecting some Facts.
Y'all have fun

__________________
Be Intense, always. But always take the time to
Smell the Roses, give a Hug, Really Listen, or
Jump to Defend your Friends & What you Believe in.
'Til later, Have Fun,
Old John

Sugarcane would be great too far better than corn on every level except farmers in Wisconsin can't grow it.....

Those studies are flawed.
With all the bad you seem to feel about ethanol Im surprized you want to convert.

Um, you're saying our experience (and the experience of all our neighbors since we lost our only non-ethanol gas supply) is flawed? Every one of us has noticed a significant drop in mileage. As for the '69, it needs the higher octane provided by E-85. It won't run on the lower octane blends. And it's not going to be a daily driver. My beef with ethanol is the reduced mpg we have expericed causing us to spend more money on gas.

As for the uses of corn after the starch is extracted, I did quite a bit of googling after reading ramblers post and in that part he/she is correct. Provided the corn and facility are both food grade compliant. No reason you couldn't get a decent beer flavored corn meal from the by-products. What I found does say there is a big difference in the flavor which some people don't like.

But the big drawback is the false panacea ethanol gives people. Ethanol is NOT the answer. I can't say that enough. Reducing use, better utilization of what we have, the realization it won't last forever, restrictions on big corporations, and a million other things would not only reduce air polution but the consumption of fossil fuels. It still takes a lot of fossil fuel to produce corn to make ethanol. And the popularity of ethanol shifts the stranglehold over our economy from the oil companies to Monsanto. But that's a whole 'nother discussion.

I like corn with a little butter. mm mm good.

Thsnk you - I appreciate the effort to follow up.

I agree that ethanol typically gets less mpg than old regular gasoline. There are less BTU per gallon.

Ethanol is cheaper priced than gasoline, so while it has lower BTU, it ends up equal or cheaper than gasoline on a cost per mile. 'Here' anyhow.

I'm sure you see that cheaper price as just govt subsidy, but that can be another discussion.

Ethanol might not make sense in Texas or New York; but in the upper midwest, where corn is cheap - 50 cents less than CBOT prices - and we raise 2x as much as we consume locally, it actually makes pretty good ecconomic sense. According to many people, anyhow. I'm just a simple dirt farmer, I don't know it all, for sure. My comments are on using the stuff locally, where it is cheap & simple to make and comes from cheap corn & doesn't need to be transported very far. Trying to get crude oil or refined gasoline shipped in from the coasts to here is actually kinda expensive & not very efficent either.

Kinda got to look at the situation one is in.

--->Paul

Your #1 suggestion is the common sense logical place to start. Unfortunately that's not going to happen. We are a country that believes man was only placed on this planet to foster and grow and economy. We also believe it's our right to use any and all natural resources like they are never ending to fuel this need. Your solution doesn't work for that philosophy. Also no matter what energy we have used or will use it will most likely be subsidized with your and my tax dollars just like oil has been for years keeping the prices falsely low so we could expand our economy baseing it on cheap transportation and energy.

How much is rural land and a house worth 30 miles from town if transportation isn't cheap?

__________________
"Education is the ability to listen to almost anything without losing your temper or your self confidence"
Robert Frost

In some ways rural land 30 miles from town would go up in value if fuel was expensive because food trucked in from 1,500 miles away would go through the roof in cost and small farms would suddenly be viable and profitable again. Course they are starting to be now with people becoming more aware of where their food really comes from and how it is grown and as they want better choices.

It sure would be nice though if the virtues of self control and simplicity and aversion to materialism would come back into vogue!

There was never an aversion to materialism. There was always the want just not the means. Once the money started flowing it was Katie bar the door.

__________________
"Education is the ability to listen to almost anything without losing your temper or your self confidence"
Robert Frost

Why do people complain about the mileage they get in cars optimised for gasoline when they start running alcohol in it?
Besides its not mileage that most people care about anyway it's the cost per mile.
You wouldn't put Diesel in it and complain about performance would you? You wouldn't try to run coal in it.
A car optimized for the alcohol content will get better ECONOMY.
My 60's era IH 340 tractor would run just fine on pure alcohol the econmy was GREAT since the alcohol was free!

................IF , there are less BTu's per gallon in Ethanol , than gas , This energy deficit means it takes MORE fuel too produce an Equivalent amount of work(milage) ! Where , in the numbers , is "better" economy ? This is assuming you're comparing the same fuel in the same vehicle , as efficiency will vary with engines and year model . , fordy