Sign In Join 



Will ethanol E85 catch on in the US? Will we Live Green and Go Yellow? - READ ONLY

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.

What is this discussion about? Chrysler, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz, Mercury, Chevrolet Impala, Chevrolet Monte Carlo, Chevrolet Avalanche, Alternative Fuels, Hybrid Cars, Coupe, Hatchback, Truck, Sedan, SUV


Messages Page 3 of 211
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
...
211
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#21 of 2104
Re: Constructive Comments on E-85 [boilermaker2] by gagrice
Mar 28, 2006 (5:49 pm)

Replying to: boilermaker2 (Mar 28, 2006 2:33 pm)

to commercially produce ethanol under today's technology costs $1.30-1.80/gallon
 
If that is a fact which I doubt. Where does the $1.00 per gallon subsidy fit in. It seems E85 is selling for about $2.05 in the production area. It should be about a dollar less. I think it actually costs about $2.30-$2.80 to produce.
 
I do agree supporting terrorists is a bad thing. Too bad the little farmer is left out on the ethanol corporate welfare scam. A little farmer would have a hard time making any money growing corn at 2 bucks a bushel. They are better off chopping it for silage and feeding their cattle. Remember if something looks too good to be true, it probably is. That fits Ethanol.
 
Biodiesel is also subsidized and about the same price as Ethanol to produce. The difference I see is that biodiesel is being produced by a lot of small operators. Biodiesel has at least 50% more energy than ethanol. E85 in CA is the same price as B20 biodiesel. B20 is more readily available.
#22 of 2104
Re: Constructive Comments on E-85 [gagrice] by boilermaker2
Mar 28, 2006 (6:12 pm)

Replying to: gagrice (Mar 28, 2006 5:49 pm)

If that is a fact which I doubt. Where does the $1.00 per gallon subsidy fit in. It seems E85 is selling for about $2.05 in the production area. It should be about a dollar less. I think it actually costs about $2.30-$2.80 to produce.
 
Why do you think that ADM is actually selling ethanol to the Sunday morning talk shows? That subsidy is going into deep pockets, so much so that some are talking about removing the subsidy. Whether this involves removing the tariff I do not know. Either way, ADM is trying to make you feel better about there making obscene profits right next to Exxon-Mobil.
 
Now, the pity party about the farmers. Actually, the farmers who DO own many of the farmer-owned ethanol plants are doing quite well. You don't have to believe me, just go to the SEC.gov site and look at their financials and realize that alot of these are Co-Op owned. The two largets gorrillas in the ring, ADM and Broin, still have to share the market with the 10,20, and 30+ million gallon plants scattered throughout your state (Minnesota I believe), Kansas, Nebraska and Iowa where the basis was so low that farmers were better off sending a processed commodity and then feeding the waste product, Distillers Grains, to the local feedlots where they were readily consumed as an animal feed. So, while they have struggled for year, many Co-Op shareholders will be investing into new pick-ups, tractors and other on-farm niceties thanks to the profits their plants have made the last two years.
 
Sustainable? That's one I won't tackle. I don't predict the weather, either. As for $1.80 ethanol, those record corn yields for the last two years have influenced that (which you probably already know so don't be offended by the obvious). Scale and process is also a factor.
#23 of 2104
Just in on Ethanol! by gagrice
Mar 28, 2006 (6:13 pm)
Why is Ethanol so expensive outside the corn belt? Is Ethanol another MTBE boondoggle?
 
U.S. gasoline is facing a major change in the way it's manufactured and distributed. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 repealed the 2% oxygenate requirement for reformulated gasoline, the cleaner-burning blend used in the country's smoggiest regions.
 
Due to hundreds of pending groundwater contamination lawsuits against makers of MTBE, the primary oxygenate in most reformulated blends of the fuel, and the fact that the energy law didn't protect producers from past or future lawsuits, many gasoline marketers are planning to eliminate their use of MTBE once the oxygenate requirement lapses on May 5. In addition, the new Renewable Fuel Standard establishes for refiners a baseline use of renewable fuels such as ethanol measuring 4 billion gallons in 2006 and expanding to 7.5 billion gallons by 2012.
While the shifts have been well flagged to the industry, concerns about the switch come from the different properties of MTBE and ethanol that can impact not only gasoline production but its distribution and storage - and ultimately the prices consumers pay at the pump.
 
Ethanol, unlike MTBE and MTBE-blended gasoline, can't be transported by pipeline. It has to be moved and stored separately from the base gasoline mixture to which it is added just before delivery to retail stations. This is a a huge change for an industry that has long relied on pipelines to supplement local gasoline production and imports.

 
Ethanol Market Watch
#24 of 2104
Ethanol and California by gagrice
Mar 28, 2006 (6:19 pm)
"I rise today to open the debate on the ethanol mandate in the Senate Energy Bill," Senator Feinstein said in a speech on the Senate Floor. "I believe that the renewable fuel provisions in this legislation amount to a wish list for the ethanol industry, and the Senate has to consider the impact of these provisions on the rest of the nation."
 
"Frankly, I believe that it is egregious to require this nation to use more ethanol than we need in our fuel supply. This is terrible public policy. It amounts to a wealth transfer of billions of dollars from every state in the nation to a handful of ethanol producers. I believe this mandate amounts to a new gas tax."

 
Feinstein objected to the mandate on the grounds that: Read More
#25 of 2104
Re: Constructive Comments on E-85 [gagrice] by boilermaker2
Mar 28, 2006 (6:24 pm)

Replying to: gagrice (Mar 28, 2006 5:49 pm)

Biodiesel is also subsidized and about the same price as Ethanol to produce. The difference I see is that biodiesel is being produced by a lot of small operators. Biodiesel has at least 50% more energy than ethanol. E85 in CA is the same price as B20 biodiesel. B20 is more readily available.
 
Biodiesel is also made in much smaller quantities at these plants as well. This, however, is about to change:
Biodiesel Plant in Indiana
#26 of 2104
Re: Ethanol and California [gagrice] by boilermaker2
Mar 28, 2006 (6:39 pm)

Replying to: gagrice (Mar 28, 2006 6:19 pm)

I'm sorry, I don't see the merit of your point. Why are you using talking points from a political debate from 2002? Remaining on your point, Dianne got her way and the ETHANOL industry opted to not fight the MTBE replacement issue that the Madamae Senator is upset about (when you take in the full context of her argument). They got their way later with the new Energy Bill which was also another discussion that happened Post-2002.
 
So, when you site information, even over-hyped political rhetoric from EITHER party, realize that the landscape does change.
 
I guess she would rather fund another yacht for a prince in another country...she just won't let them buy the port to park it in.
 
C'mon lets leave the politicians and movie stars out of a semi-rational debate.
#27 of 2104
Re: Constructive Comments on E-85 [boilermaker2] by montzter
Mar 28, 2006 (6:57 pm)

Replying to: boilermaker2 (Mar 28, 2006 2:33 pm)

"subsidize a farmer instead of a terrorist...."
 
I would pay $5 per gallon for fuel for my car if the source was domestic!! Then, we could just blockade the entire Middle East and let the fanatics just kill each other instead of us.
#28 of 2104
Re: Ethanol and California [boilermaker2] by gagrice
Mar 28, 2006 (6:57 pm)

Replying to: boilermaker2 (Mar 28, 2006 6:39 pm)

C'mon lets leave the politicians and movie stars out of a semi-rational debate.
 
Fair enough! I am not totally against Ethanol. I think in the midwest it is a viable option. I just don't trust the government to govern it's use. Seems when they get involved we end up in a bigger mess. I kind of put it in the same arena as CNG. It has very specific advantages to a very specific demographic. I get the feeling that Washington has just discovered it and want to push it on the public. Another thing having grown corn, I do not believe a small farmer will make money selling corn to a co-op for ethanol. It is cheaper now than it was in 1978 when I last planted my farm in corn. I got between $2.60 & $3.00 per bushel. How much is that in today's dollars. And I was losing money at that price.
#29 of 2104
Re: Constructive Comments on E-85 [montzter] by gogogodzilla
Mar 29, 2006 (4:17 am)

Replying to: montzter (Mar 28, 2006 6:57 pm)

You'd pay far less than that if we'd just consider using the old WWII-era technology of coal gasification.
 
Or turning coal into diesel and gasoline.
 
Considering the US has some of the world's largest reserves of coal... we could easily wean ourselves off foreign oil without having to plow under new farmland to do it.
 
But for some reason, no one wants to consider it.
 
 
#30 of 2104
Re: Constructive Comments on E-85 [gogogodzilla] by john1701a
Mar 29, 2006 (6:31 am)

Replying to: gogogodzilla (Mar 29, 2006 4:17 am)

Coal & Diesel are extremely dirty, so the priority right now should be to clean them up to the point where a vehicle can meet the SULEV emission rating minimum. Then they'll become realistic.
 
They still won't become a good idea until a way to use less becomes available. After all, reduction is the key. Simply switching to an alternate fuel only puts a new bandage on an old problem.
 
That's where ethanol comes in. All the hybrids are capable of 10% usage already. And some owners have been fueling their hybrid that way for years now. Both emissions & consumption are reduced.
 
Once that 10% infrastructure becomes well established, the percentage blend can be increased. Until then, this E85 nonsense is just greenwashing.
 
At the same time, the evolution of plug-in hybrids continues. With that comes introduction of a third fuel to the mix... gas, ethanol, and electricity. That last one can be far cleaner than any other source of energy, plus its renewable.
 
In short, the solution is more than just E85 alone.
 
JOHN

Messages Page 3 of 211
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
...
211
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

New? Join Now!

Forum Tools

Please sign in.
Email Address:

Password:

Forgot Password?

Search Forums

Enter Keyword(s)

Advanced Search

Browse by Vehicle



View All Vehicles
Advertisement
Ask the Community
See What People Are Asking

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic


View All Topics

Today's Chats

Advertisement