More Ethanol Follies

#2
#2
Is it just me or do we seem to jump into these environmentally friendly trends before we actually study the effects on our environment and economy. It seems pretty stupid to burn a major food product for America for a gas additive that will do very little to keep the environment clean. Not even taking into account the added cost to gas it brings as well as decreased gas mileage.
 
#3
#3
Volinbham...it's not biodiesel, it's ethanol :p

Yet another reason why corn-based ethanol is stupid for large-scale deployment and another indication that the government (Congress) is misguided in thinking that corn ethanol will be any kind of real answer to energy challenges (whether it be supply, energy independence, or climate change).
 
#4
#4
KB5252 said:
Is it just me or do we seem to jump into these environmentally friendly trends before we actually study the effects on our environment and economy. It seems pretty stupid to burn a major food product for America for a gas additive that will do very little to keep the environment clean. Not even taking into account the added cost to gas it brings as well as decreased gas mileage.
Click to expand...

This is more than just an environmentally trend. The farm-lobby has been pushing hard for all things corn for quite a while and they have a very large voice. I doubt that there are any scientists at the DOE Office of Science that really think corn ethanol is a good idea for the long haul or for large production. But, that doesn't change the political reality that higher corn prices is desired by the farm-lobby...and they have always been successful at getting their subsidies.
 
#6
#6
TennTradition said:
This is more than just an environmentally friend. The farm-lobby has been pushing hard for all things corn for quite a while and they have a very large voice. I doubt that there are any scientists at the DOE Office of Science that really think corn ethanol is a good idea for the long haul or for large production. But, that doesn't change the political reality that higher corn prices is desired by the farm-lobby...and they have always been successful at getting their subsidies.
Click to expand...


Add to that the beginning of presidential campaigning taking place in Iowa each term.
 
#7
#7
volinbham said:
Add to that the beginning of presidential campaigning taking place in Iowa each term.
Click to expand...

Yep. The electoral college process surely has a bit to do with it as well. Don't get me wrong - we can't afford to lose our ability to support crops for our country...food independence, if you will. But, for the lobby to leverage food against energy supply is just stupid, even if it does make them an extra buck.
 
#8
#8
TennTradition said:
This is more than just an environmentally friend. The farm-lobby has been pushing hard for all things corn for quite a while and they have a very large voice. I doubt that there are any scientists at the DOE Office of Science that really think corn ethanol is a good idea for the long haul or for large production. But, that doesn't change the political reality that higher corn prices is desired by the farm-lobby...and they have always been successful at getting their subsidies.
Click to expand...

I understand your point. I do not blame the farm lobby here. If I had a product I would push new markets for that product too. My problem is with our government selling themselves out to the various lobbies. Our problem now is that we have diverted a valuable resource to something that is ineffective at best and imposes higher costs and actually increases fuel consumption.
 
#10
#10
KB5252 said:
I understand your point. I do not blame the farm lobby here. If I had a product I would push new markets for that product too. My problem is with our government selling themselves out to the various lobbies. Our problem now is that we have diverted a valuable resource to something that is ineffective at best and imposes higher costs and actually increases fuel consumption.
Click to expand...

Totally agree...when I say that it is stupid for the lobby to leverage energy against food supply, that isn't quite accurate. It is a stupid argument (still), but even more stupid is the fact that our government bought it. Any lobbying group can go out and argue for their cause...that's they way it works....and they are just looking our for their interests (as I noted above). Generally, you need to make a smart case to sell your idea. This just goes to show the power of their lobby - their case doesn't make sense and the government is still buying it.

As for the fuel consumption...that's not a foregone conclusion. The energy content per volume is certainly less with ethanol than gasoline. So, if that were the whole story, fuel consumption would go up. But, ethanol also acts as an "octane booster," which gets the two fuels close on an effective energy per volume standard....which ultimately should decide how far you're able to drive on a tank of gas. I would say that with current engines, gasoline still wins. But, if the engine were tweaked for ethanol use, I have read that they would be very close to equivalent. I'm not sure if that is for 90-10, 80-20 ... or pure ethanol, I can't remember.
 
#11
#11
Farmers sure are happy...

But this does add to inflation, which is really bad.

If you want to make money off this you can buy MON/MOS/POT on weakness
 
#13
#13
TennTradition said:
Totally agree...when I say that it is stupid for the lobby to leverage energy against food supply, that isn't quite accurate. It is a stupid argument (still), but even more stupid is the fact that our government bought it. Any lobbying group can go out and argue for their cause...that's they way it works....and they are just looking our for their interests (as I noted above). Generally, you need to make a smart case to sell your idea. This just goes to show the power of their lobby - their case doesn't make sense and the government is still buying it.

As for the fuel consumption...that's not a foregone conclusion. The energy content per volume is certainly less with ethanol than gasoline. So, if that were the whole story, fuel consumption would go up. But, ethanol also acts as an "octane booster," which gets the two fuels close on an effective energy per volume standard....which ultimately should decide how far you're able to drive on a tank of gas. I would say that with current engines, gasoline still wins. But, if the engine were tweaked for ethanol use, I have read that they would be very close to equivalent. I'm not sure if that is for 90-10, 80-20 ... or pure ethanol, I can't remember.
Click to expand...
Speaking about the fuel economy with ethonal. It is worse, trust me. I drive a V8 Titan and can see the difference. I get about 30 to 40 miles less per tank. That is a one way trip to work for me.
 
#15
#15
KB5252 said:
Speaking about the fuel economy with ethonal. It is worse, trust me. I drive a V8 Titan and can see the difference. I get about 30 to 40 miles less per tank. That is a one way trip to work for me.
Click to expand...

Is that E80 or what? It makes me wonder how the octane boost happens vs. typical engine cycle. I know that the numbers can be close - John Deutch wrote an op-ed piece at one time where he discussed that a bit....but I bet that the difference can be large in some cases as well. I would like to find more info on that.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top