Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Hybrid Vehicles Hybrid Vehicles - Archived Discussions Will ethanol E85 catch on in the US? Will we Live Green and Go Yellow? 
2104 messages, Last post on Oct 27, 2006 at 5:34 AM
You are in the Hybrid Vehicles - Archived Discussions Forum. Your Host is pf_flyer
This discussion is ARCHIVED. To reactivate the discussion, post a request in the Lost? Ask the Hybrids Host for directions! discussion.
|
Replying to: albert6 (Jul 04, 2006 9:19 am) If this was removed E85 would be lots cheaper than regular unleaded even adjusted for energy content. Brazil could export very large quantities of ethanol if the playing field was level. Other countries would also quickly develop ethanol capacity.
|
|
|
Replying to: scott1256 (Jul 04, 2006 9:26 am) Hollman W. Jenkins words it - “The U.S. imposes a 54-cent-a-gallon tariff on Brazilian ethanol, to discourage competition with domestic ethanol, which receives a 54-cent subsidy from taxpayers. … This should lay bare the fraud that what’s going here has anything to do with energy security. It has only to do with the agricultural lobby masquerading its interests behind foolish and misleading rhetoric about energy security.” Our government in deja vue action: 1980 - The Energy Security Act offered insured loans for small ethanol producers (less than 1 million gallons per year), up to $1 million in loan guarantees per project that could cover up to 90 percent of construction costs on an ethanol plant, price guarantees for biomass energy projects, and purchase agreements for biomass energy used by federal agencies. 1980 - Congress placed an import fee (tariff) on foreign-produced ethanol. Previously, foreign producers, such as Brazil, were able to ship less expensive ethanol into the United States. |
|
|
Here is one of the arguments used, to try and convince the Congress and President, not to lift the ethanol tariff on Brazil. Renewable fuels are produced only in countries where programs have been created to assist in their production. Thus, any reduction in the U.S. secondary tariff on ethanol would result in U.S. taxpayers further subsidizing imported ethanol beyond the subsidies that are already be given in the country of production. Since imported ethanol receives the 51 cent per gallon tax credit, if the U.S. tariff on ethanol is removed or dips below 51 cents, then U.S. taxpayers would be effectively subsidizing imported ethanol. The subsidy would be equal to the difference between the tax credit and the amount of any reduced tariff. |
|
|
Replying to: scott1256 (Jul 03, 2006 10:35 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: jim314 (Jul 04, 2006 10:57 am) Ethanol is added to gasoline both to act as an oxygenate (to reduce pollution) and as an octane booster (to reduce knocking). |
|
|
|
|
Last week I drove by a new ethanol plant under construction. It was one of 3 new plants being built in our state in the next few years. It is nice to see new jobs getting created in the Midwest. E85 will be adopted rather quickly as oil prices continue to rise. When you look at the adoption rate/process E85 fits the bill. It is compatible, not complex, easy to try if you have a car that is FFV and the results are observable. Right now innovators and early adopters are trying the product. Some have argued that ethanol is energy negative. No, recent studies have shown that ethanol is not energy negative. http://www.ncga.com/ethanol/debunking/index.htm As many people have pointed out, ethanol does not allow you to travel as far on a gallon as gasoline. In the future, car makers will be able to use smaller more fuel efficient engines that take advantage of the higher octane. http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/AutoshowArticles/articleId=108748 Just about everything gets a subsidy. Oil is no exception. Why are we subsidizing oil exploration when oil companies are making record profits? http://www.taxpayer.net/TCS/fuelsubfact.htm E85 is here to stay, people should get over it.... 
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: avalon02wh (Jul 04, 2006 5:05 pm) Ethanol is, from all I can determine, NOT going to be helpful, other than in the arificial short term and perhaps far far in the future. How is oil, per se, subsidized? Please explain. Ethanol and the approach that seems to be the one that has been taken will offer much lower miles per gallon and even with subsidies not economic incentive for us to want to use it and no other proven incentives (pollution?) either. It is King Corn getting a government teat. The people are not being helped by this anymore than that infamous bridge to nowhere is helping. We cannot subsidize our way to energy independence, especially when the solution is far more expensive than continuing to use our own vast resources. Despite this, I say, let's keep trying to develop alternatives, but also let's really develop the largest oil reserves (triple the Saudi's) on the planet Earth rather than try to turn our food into fuel. The unintended consequences will catch up with us within a decade or two if we don't move forward without these onerous subsidies and mandates. People will NOT buy FFV's and, upon discovering the high cost and difficulty of fueling them with E85, go merrily on supporting Ethanol and subsidies, unless Ethanol is able to be offered at a huge price advantage over gasoline. The evidence, thus far, says ethanol is a synonym for false promises. 
|
|
|
Replying to: avalon02wh (Jul 04, 2006 5:05 pm) Please explain how a business expense being written off is a subsidy. I do agree with them on wasted subsidies on corn ethanol. However, the huge ethanol subsidies given out year after year have benefited few besides corn growers and ethanol producers, who are often just different units of the same large company. Despite the lobbyists' claims, ethanol has neither reduced dependence on foreign oil nor significantly helped to reduce pollution. Taxpayers' repeated payments in the form of subsidies to corn growers, ethanol producers, and opportunity cost serve no other purpose than to artifically prop up the corn and ethanol industry http://www.taxpayer.net/energy/ethanol.htm As far as the study by the National Corn Growers Association (NCGA) would you expect them to tell us that corn ethanol is energy negative? Find a legitimate study by some one that does not have their fingers in the till. Or in this case the still. |
|
|
Replying to: scott1256 (Jul 03, 2006 10:35 am) Ethanol doesn't cost hp but simply requires more, in volume, to produce that power (given that the engines are FFV as opposed to ethanol specific). Given the seemingly insurmountable problems in creating an infrastructure for ethanol distribution, it would seem easy to create an engine that might cut significantly into that 30% economy difference by simply improving combustion efficiencies (much like has been done with some recent dino fuel engines). Logically, though, why would any mfgr. try to sell (or develop) something like an 'ethanol' engine for a fuel that doesn't even exist in most parts of the country. Kind of like keeping the horse in front of the cart!
|
|
|
Replying to: captain2 (Jul 05, 2006 6:53 am) If the $1.50 subsidy/import duty goes away E85 availablity will spread really quickly. We have engines... that produce... excess on a hp/cubic inch, something unheard of, even 15 years ago Chrysler 300s of the mid 50s, Corvette 327/375 Fuelie, etc...1 HP per c.i. goes back many years, Captain. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Hybrid Vehicles Hybrid Vehicles - Archived Discussions Will ethanol E85 catch on in the US? Will we Live Green and Go Yellow?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Chevrolet Impala
2007 Chevrolet Monte Carlo
2010 Chevrolet Avalanche
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
