Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    6:51 PM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: All Things Ethanol > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: Ethanol is American made, so why the huge effort to destroy it? Back to Topics
JonnyEnergyE85

Rookie Author
Illinois

Posts:32
Points:720
Joined:Mar 2012
Message Posted: Apr 3, 2012 9:44:11 AM

Few things that should be known about ethanol...
1)No wars or young lives lost from Ethanol
2)Ethanol is 100% American made
3)The Food V Fuel myth has been debunked.
4)Ethanol is 105 octane, cleaner, and Burns cooler

Oil....
1)Almost 1 billion dollars a day flows overseas because our addiction to Foreign oil
2)We are producing more oil in years
3)everybody wants it yet there is only so much
4)The damage it does to our planet is irreversible

So why the constant attack.....
The oil companies are taken a hit on profits now but know that Ethanol is a real deal alternative.

So instead of reading talking points on how bad ethanol is, consider the source and do some investigstive research on your own for the truth.
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
goldseeker
Champion Author West Virginia

Posts:23,006
Points:3,323,235
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 18, 2013 3:22:26 AM

The EPA!!! No one mentioned that they are part of our wonderful government that never gets anything right.
Profile Pic
tdioiler
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:1,014
Points:725,500
Joined:Jul 2011
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 10:10:53 PM

Remember that SA published papers on the cause of global warming. Just before the study was found to be bogus; not because of the actual facts of warming but the BS contribution to the cause.
Profile Pic
tropicalmn
Veteran Author Minnesota

Posts:276
Points:254,120
Joined:Mar 2011
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 12:06:15 PM

SoylentGrain wrote“Lots of meaningless factoids are floating around and grabbed up by authors and published in magazines, like SA and assumed to be reasonable conclusions.”
I think that sentence really summarizes one of the primary reasons why so much of the same misinformation continues to circulate through this forum on a daily basis.
Factoid meaning-"an item of unreliable information that is repeated so often that it becomes accepted as fact”


[Edited by: tropicalmn at 1/17/2013 12:07:01 PM EST]
Profile Pic
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,185
Points:21,680
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 9:18:43 AM

That's the problem, mandrake. No one has published a decent double blind trial using using ethanol and gasoline. The auto companies have done tests. But, they do not release this type of information. Other than the EPA sticker, you will never see a US automaker make specific claims on fuel economy.

The issue with the EPA test is it's not done with ethanol or conventional gasoline. They use a reference fuel called indolene clear and calculate fuel economy based on btu and carbon emissions.

Lots of meaningless factoids are floating around and grabbed up by authors and published in magazines, like SA and assumed to be reasonable conclusions. There's lots of misinformation out there, mostly skewed against ethanol. My opinion is oil production, chemistry, agriculture, and engine physics are more involved than most people have time to or want to understand. It's just easier to put things in simple terms and come up with a reasonable assumption. Assumptions are sometimes wrong.
Profile Pic
Mandrake
All-Star Author Alabama

Posts:702
Points:2,749,435
Joined:Apr 2004
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 8:57:00 AM

I would very much like to read any double-blind crossover studies.

Have you any links?
Profile Pic
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,185
Points:21,680
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 8:45:56 AM

'If even Scientific American isn't a trusted source, then what is?"

Organic chemistry text books, physics text books, double blind crossover studies, data from the major car manufacturers coupled with common sense.

The author of your SA article has a history of publishing articles with tilted inn one particular direction.
Profile Pic
Mandrake
All-Star Author Alabama

Posts:702
Points:2,749,435
Joined:Apr 2004
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 8:14:31 AM

As an example...

I rest my case.

If even Scientific American isn't a trusted source, then what is?
Profile Pic
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,185
Points:21,680
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 8:07:44 AM

"Most people aren't going to research on their own and is there a source of information that everyone on these forums will agree is unbiased?"

Why did you then go on to post a biased article?
Profile Pic
Mandrake
All-Star Author Alabama

Posts:702
Points:2,749,435
Joined:Apr 2004
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2013 6:36:17 AM

The argument that because something is American-made and is therefore good, is flawed logic.

Regarding the statement that reading talking points about how bad ethanol may be is counter-productive; that we should consider the source/take with a grain of salt, etc.
Well, the same can be said for websites that only cheerlead for ethanol.

Most people aren't going to research on their own and is there a source of information that everyone on these forums will agree is unbiased?

Probably not.

Is Domestically Produced Ethanol Worth the Cost?
Profile Pic
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,185
Points:21,680
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Jan 14, 2013 9:20:38 AM

"And efficiency is only optimal when used in the right engine. And where do you get those engines? Not around here."

Most carmakers sell cars designed for and optimized for E85. And no, high compression engines are not the only way to optimize an engine for alcohol fuels.

" So you lose 15 - 20% MPG. That's the facts if you really look and stop being so narrow minded."

That's a "narrow minded" statement. I've used E10 since the spring of 1979. In the hundreds of thousands of miles using E10 and conventional gasoline, I have not seen a difference in fuel economy. Since 2002 I have driven over 100,000 miles with E85. The difference in fuel economy and power is too close to measure or detect.
Profile Pic
rumbleseat
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:25,306
Points:3,831,180
Joined:Oct 2002
Message Posted: Jan 14, 2013 4:04:31 AM

"So you lose 15 - 20% MPG. That's the facts if you really look and stop being so narrow minded."

No, that's the BS that some expect us to accept as gospel without doing any research.
We have E10 in EVERY regular pump in Manitoba, and E5 in every mid-grade pump. I have met nobody who claims losses like that. As a matter of fact, with my present car, my mileage went DOWN when we were on a highway trip travelling in other jurisdictions. With my previous car, when it settled on a steady diet of E10, my day-to-day mileage stabilized slightly higher than it was on E10 sometimes, E0 sometimes. My wife's car stabilized at the same mileage she had before.
I have been using E10 in various vehicles since 1981. There is no longer a need for gas line anti-freeze in our cars, and we have NEVER had any of the problems anti-ethanol ranters insist are happening.
Bottom line, if you are losing 15% using E10, either you are driving differently to maximize fuel usage, or your car is a poorly maintained heap.
Profile Pic
SilverStreaker
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:14,132
Points:2,796,495
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Jan 13, 2013 11:37:34 PM

tdioiler, why do you want rugby2 (the one who brought up Brazil) to change his/her name?

I recall talking to a family friend from Brazil about ethanol around 30 years ago. She mentioned that they use it as a fuel, but didn't have anything bad to say about it, other than people getting drunk off of it, since they sell it pure.
Profile Pic
tdioiler
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:1,014
Points:725,500
Joined:Jul 2011
Message Posted: Jan 13, 2013 7:36:46 PM

Stop using Brazil as an example. Did you ever talk with a Brazilian to see if they use ethanol?

And efficiency is only optimal when used in the right engine. And where do you get those engines? Not around here. So you lose 15 - 20% MPG. That's the facts if you really look and stop being so narrow minded.

PS change your name. We all know you agenda. Mine - blow hole into yours.

Go Bio!!!!
Profile Pic
Daurel
Veteran Author Indiana

Posts:341
Points:37,310
Joined:Jul 2011
Message Posted: Jan 9, 2013 11:51:01 AM

rugby2
This post you claim as truth has been posted before and has been proven wrong so many times I am surprised you even quoted it. You Goggled it to prove what point?
Why don't you try looking for facts?

Jeff1226
Brilliant statement proves you know nothing about the topic you are commenting on.

[Edited by: Daurel at 1/9/2013 11:52:41 AM EST]
Profile Pic
Jeff1226
Sophomore Author Flint

Posts:127
Points:8,100
Joined:Feb 2012
Message Posted: Jan 6, 2013 5:51:23 PM

Not energy efficient
Profile Pic
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,185
Points:21,680
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Jan 2, 2013 10:28:22 AM

" Brazil's example and not use corn."

Golly, I wonder why they don't use corn?
Profile Pic
rugby2
Rookie Author Kalamazoo

Posts:38
Points:17,835
Joined:Jan 2012
Message Posted: Dec 27, 2012 12:08:06 AM

just Goggled ethanol and came up with some articles supporting my position, that ethanol is bad. Kris Kettle don't blame it on the rain, dump ethanol by Rick Newman. cellulose ethanol fraud @ smart fuel of the future , and an article in business week.
Profile Pic
rugby2
Rookie Author Kalamazoo

Posts:38
Points:17,835
Joined:Jan 2012
Message Posted: Dec 26, 2012 11:54:29 PM

my opinion on this is based on WSJ, Detroit news, Motor trend, road and track and talking to mechanics. bad on cut and paste, but suggest anyone can Google and find articles to support their opinion. I would be suspect of any farmer, or person that works for the ethanol industry. And if we must use ethanol suggest we follow Brazil's example and not use corn. Note some of the supporters have tractor/combine logo's. Even go by huskers, as in corn husker's if it is so good why the need for lobbyist spending millions to sell us this stuff, the public doesn't want?
Profile Pic
rugby2
Rookie Author Kalamazoo

Posts:38
Points:17,835
Joined:Jan 2012
Message Posted: Dec 26, 2012 11:46:00 PM

takes more BTU to produce in the mfg process then it puts in your car. so not an energy saver. gets less mpg so pollutes more per gallon, costs us money per mile. bad for your engine gaskets, rubber. raises food prices. is a scam put on by ADM etc. Google ADM legal problems in the past . worse we have no choice. try and find real gas. now they want to force 15% on the public. plus less HP. we have little engines now for the mpg so losing power is a bad thing. you might need it to merge or something. .
Profile Pic
tropicalmn
Veteran Author Minnesota

Posts:276
Points:254,120
Joined:Mar 2011
Message Posted: Dec 23, 2012 1:02:13 PM

Banjoe,shockjock’s purpose in this thread isn’t to discuss facts but rather to give the illusion of discrediting & winning a argument with some who has a better understanding as in the case of SoylentGrain. If someone with no business sense or real understanding of a subject attempts to engage in a factual discussion they generally will have their ignorance revealed by their adversary. On the other hand it’s no accident that shockjock knows about a red herring & a straw man argument. They and many other fallacies are commonly used by politicians ,lawyers & others(shockjock)to divert from a subject ,muddy things up, confuse, basically whatever it takes to wear the other down,have the last word & seemingly win a debate- argument.(the spin you see mentioned here often) Generally in this forum any real facts then get buried back a page or two where they are seldom seen having been replaced with drivel & propaganda.

[Edited by: tropicalmn at 12/23/2012 1:04:36 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Banjoe
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:8,422
Points:1,218,030
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Dec 23, 2012 8:34:08 AM

With all this talk of spinning, I'm getting dizzy.....make that dizzier.
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,289
Points:1,331,505
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Dec 22, 2012 10:08:59 AM

Shockjock1961, where is the proof for the spin you are trying to spread? I'm still waiting to see it.
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,289
Points:1,331,505
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Dec 21, 2012 5:33:54 PM

Shockjock1961 wrote: "" Try reading the USDA paper I referenced, below" I did. It's at least six years out of date..."

Please feel free to explain to all of us how the USDA paper is "at least six years out of date". Do you even know what USDA paper was referenced by SoylentGrain. How about you post a link to it.

At the same time explain to us, what makes the WPI undergraduate students paper, that does not even mentions the distillers grains once, anything but their personal opinion.
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,749
Points:2,786,215
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Dec 21, 2012 4:53:09 PM

"Open your mind and you will see"

I have, and all I see is you posting inaccurate misinformation...
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,289
Points:1,331,505
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Dec 21, 2012 1:47:47 PM

SoylentGrain wrote: "Open your mind and you will see."

Shockjock1961 is not interested in facts, he/she is only interested in

Spin, half-truth, and lies
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,289
Points:1,331,505
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Dec 21, 2012 1:46:33 PM

Shockjock1961 wrote: "I've yet to see SoylentGrain offer proof for any of the misinformation that it spreads"

For a person who does not provide any proof himself/herself, you sure require others to do so. More double standards by Shockjock1961.
Profile Pic
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,185
Points:21,680
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Dec 21, 2012 12:56:45 PM

The information has been posted by me and many others. Open your mind and you will see.
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,749
Points:2,786,215
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Dec 21, 2012 11:06:21 AM

I've yet to see SoylentGrain offer proof for any of the misinformation that it spreads
Profile Pic
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,185
Points:21,680
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Dec 21, 2012 7:38:41 AM

Shockjock appears to be a "low information" poster.
Profile Pic
SilverStreaker
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:14,132
Points:2,796,495
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Dec 20, 2012 7:56:41 PM

He/she is also very good at ducking and weaving. He/she fails to prove his/her statement and instead attacks the one questioning his/her statement. Typical Shocky MO.
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,289
Points:1,331,505
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Dec 20, 2012 4:22:36 PM

SoylentGrain, keep in mind that Shockjock1961's motto is:

Spin, half-truth, and lies

and he/she is very good at it.
Profile Pic
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,185
Points:21,680
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Dec 20, 2012 3:07:26 PM

Hey, shockjock, you are the one claiming "they" conspire with the "corn lobby."
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,749
Points:2,786,215
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Dec 20, 2012 1:20:59 PM

Actually, it seems like you like misinformation more, since you spread so much of it...
Profile Pic
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,185
Points:21,680
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Dec 19, 2012 3:46:13 PM

"Well, since they are conspiring with the corn lobby, NO... "

I love conspiracy theories. Tell me more.
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,749
Points:2,786,215
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Dec 19, 2012 3:11:01 PM

"Golly, shockjock. Don't you think the ethanol producers would have picked up on that one, if it were true?"

Well, since they are conspiring with the corn lobby, NO...

" Try reading the USDA paper I referenced, below" I did. It's at least six years out of date...
Profile Pic
tropicalmn
Veteran Author Minnesota

Posts:276
Points:254,120
Joined:Mar 2011
Message Posted: Dec 19, 2012 2:33:48 PM

Somebody who’s quoting ag & ethanol facts from three students writing a paper which hasn’t been peer reviewed while attending a Mass. University shouldn’t gloat about a possible discrepancy by others.

“However one acre of sugar beets will produce about 1930 kg ethanol while one acre of corn will produce only 1000 kg."

This would amount to only about 115 bushels of corn per acre based on 2.8 gallons ethanol per bushel typical in a modern dry ethanol plant. Ridiculously low corn yield in a average year.

“ Whether ethanol is being produced from corn or sugar beets there are some
unusable parts of the plant that are left over. In sugar beets the pulp and tops are a valuable
food for sheep, cows, and other livestock. In corn the stover (stalks, leaves, husks, and cobs)
are generally just tilled back into the earth”

Correct me if I wrong (no I didn’t read all 143 pages of this drivel) but there is no mention of distiller grains from corn ethanol used for feed. Co products such as distiller grains & corn oil extraction make ethanol from corn feasible. Cattle are often fed corn stover.

The article doesn’t address the sugar loss from storage until processed in sugar beets from decay and fermentation. The ND energy beet plants that have been proposed are going to require big investment for small seemingly inefficient sized 10-20 million gallon per year ethanol plants.


[Edited by: tropicalmn at 12/19/2012 2:38:20 PM EST]
Profile Pic
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,185
Points:21,680
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Dec 19, 2012 2:11:01 PM

Golly, shockjock. Don't you think the ethanol producers would have picked up on that one, if it were true?

Furthermore, the water source for corn in the corn-belt is rain.

Try reading the USDA paper I referenced, below. It's slightly more realistic.
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,749
Points:2,786,215
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Dec 19, 2012 9:40:03 AM

"In addition, cane and sugar beets have no food value when ethanol is made"

Once again SoylentGrain could be no more wrong...

"It was also found that corn and sugar beets require approximately the same amount of water and fertilizer per acre of land planted. However one acre of sugar beets will produce about 1930 kg ethanol while one acre of corn will produce only 1000 kg."

"g. This means that
more energy from fossil fuels will be used to irrigate and fertilize corn per kg of ethanol
produced. Whether ethanol is being produced from corn or sugar beets there are some
unusable parts of the plant that are left over. In sugar beets the pulp and tops are a valuable
food for sheep, cows, and other livestock. In corn the stover (stalks, leaves, husks, and cobs)
are generally just tilled back into the earth"
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,289
Points:1,331,505
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Dec 19, 2012 8:40:50 AM

borsht wrote: "If something idiotic is going to be done, it requires that the government get behind it with subsidies!"

Can you list all the federal Ethanol subsidies?
Profile Pic
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,185
Points:21,680
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Dec 19, 2012 7:32:57 AM

" Sugar beets produce twice as much ethanol per acre as corn. And it doesn't compete with food."

Twice the yield. That's an embellishment. Regardless, the primary reason corn us used to produce ethanol is it costs 5 to 7 times more to make ethanol from sugar cane or sugar beets. In addition, cane and sugar beets have no food value when ethanol is made. Corn produces 600 gallons of ethanol per acre (in the corn belt region) and almost two tons of animal feed. That's the reason corn is used.

/oce/reports/energy/EthanolSugarFeasibilityReport3.pdf

[Edited by: SoylentGrain at 12/19/2012 7:35:05 AM EST]
Profile Pic
borsht
Champion Author Oakland

Posts:3,308
Points:785,600
Joined:Aug 2012
Message Posted: Dec 19, 2012 1:09:20 AM

If something idiotic is going to be done, it requires that the government get behind it with subsidies!
Profile Pic
borsht
Champion Author Oakland

Posts:3,308
Points:785,600
Joined:Aug 2012
Message Posted: Dec 19, 2012 1:07:20 AM

Using corn for ethanol is moronic. Sugar beets produce twice as much ethanol per acre as corn. And it doesn't compete with food.
http://newenergyandfuel.com/http:/newenergyandfuel/com/2010/12/16/sugar-beets-may-push-corn-out-of-ethanol-production/
Profile Pic
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,185
Points:21,680
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Dec 17, 2012 9:27:16 AM

"Brazil is energy independent due to Ethanol. But of course unlike us, they get it off used sugar cane which grows like grass over there. Ethanol in the USA won't be cost effective until we get the corn lobby out of the way. Ethanol from corn is just a waste in and of itself. "

In twelve to fourteen months one acre of land in the Brazil sugar can region produces 600 gallons of ethanol. In four to five months, one acre of US corn-belt land produces 600 gallons of ethanol and almost two tons of animal feed. Tell me again which one is more efficient. Furthermore, what conspiracy has the "corn lobby" committed that prevents other sources of carbohydrate from being used to make ethanol?
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,289
Points:1,331,505
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Dec 16, 2012 10:02:53 PM

69mustang wrote: "I don't think I will be using it, because of what mechanics, and Chrysler mechanics have said about E-85."

What exactly did "mechanics" and "Chrysler mechanics" have said?
Profile Pic
69mustang
Champion Author Minnesota

Posts:12,366
Points:1,998,985
Joined:Apr 2008
Message Posted: Dec 15, 2012 11:15:50 PM

I just bought a new vehicle. In the manual that I got from Chrysler, it is stated that if you use E-85 in the vehicle, you will need to change your oil more often. It has a flex fuel engine in it, but I don't think I will be using it, because of what mechanics, and Chrysler mechanics have said about E-85. In our area, gas is 2.89, and E-85 is 2.83. I don't see much savings there, for what you get mileage wise. I can't think that a Chrysler mechanic would say a bad thing about the product he is working on, if it wasn't true. They work on them everyday.
Profile Pic
SanchoNY
Rookie Author New York

Posts:29
Points:84,595
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Dec 15, 2012 9:42:45 PM

Brazil is energy independent due to Ethanol. But of course unlike us, they get it off used sugar cane which grows like grass over there. Ethanol in the USA won't be cost effective until we get the corn lobby out of the way. Ethanol from corn is just a waste in and of itself.
Profile Pic
rumbleseat
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:25,306
Points:3,831,180
Joined:Oct 2002
Message Posted: Dec 15, 2012 5:50:01 PM

"Look at beef prices and milk prices. Milk has doubled inprice in the last 3 years becase of price of cattle feed."

And you have figures, of course, to show that in the hundred years before ethanol production beef and milk prices NEVER changed?
Profile Pic
SilverStreaker
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:14,132
Points:2,796,495
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Dec 15, 2012 11:46:17 AM

Many unfounded claims by rugby2:
"eats gaskets hoses" - Prove that Flex Fuel Vehicles have different gaskets and hoses than non-FFVs. Look up material compatibility charts that prove that ethanol is more harmful than gasoline components to the gaskets and hoses the auto makers use. You will find the opposite is true.

"gets less power" - Drag racers use ethanol because it supplies more power.

"it pollutes the air more per gallon" - Show a study proving your claim.

"takes more BTU's to produce then creates" - According to the US Dept of Energy, it takes 0.74 BTUs of fossil fuel to create 1 BTU of ethanol. Comparatively, it takes 1.23 BTUs of fossil fuel to create 1 BTU of gasoline.
Profile Pic
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,185
Points:21,680
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Dec 15, 2012 11:45:03 AM

"because it is bad for your car. eats gaskets hoses. "

Prove that one.

"gets less power, performance and less gas mileage per gallon ."

Actually, ethanol produces more horsepower than gasoline."forced to use it , no choice. is a subsidy for big business Archer Daniels "

ADM has less than 10% ethanol market share.

"takes more BTU's to produce then creates, so not an energy savor. drives up the cost of food."

You have that one backwards. Ethanol yield is as high as 175%, meaning for each btu used to produce, you get 1.75 back. Gasoline on the other hand requires more energy to produce than is retained in the final produce. It's yield is only 85%, meaning, for each btu used to produce, you get 0.85 back in the form of gasoline.

"drives up the cost of food. corn is a key part of the food chain."

The US is a surplus producer of grain. The USDA pays farmers not to grow crops. When demand for corn increased, farmers simply grew more corn. Furthermore, one of the main products produced during ethanol production is high protein animal feed.

" In Brazil they make it from waste grass or sugar cane, so not as bad on food prices. "

Why is cane sugar better than corn sugar for making ethanol?

"anyone who thinks ethanol is good has not done the research. "

I have done my research and prefer ethanol. I've driven over 100,000 miles using E85.

"And they get a tax payer subsidy from the tax payer, thus an example of wasteful spending driving up the deficit."

Do some research on that one. That is clearly not the case. In previous years fuel suppliers did receive a tax credit against the federal fuel tax. That was applied to all fuels, not just ethanol. But, big ethanol has never received major subsidies. What it did do was decrease tens of billions in government price supports and CRP as demand for grain increased.
Profile Pic
rugby2
Rookie Author Kalamazoo

Posts:38
Points:17,835
Joined:Jan 2012
Message Posted: Dec 15, 2012 11:07:49 AM

there are no stations that don't there are no stations that don't sell diluted ethanol laced gas in our area. Maybe expensive racing fuel (we have a separate issue of tax fraud in that area) but not for general use. if they did educated people would flock to it
Post a reply Back to Topics