Recent Topics
Alignment done today.... Need help understanding
by mcrn
1 minute 0 seconds ago
Happy Birthday, Pablo!!
by Turk
12 minutes 35 seconds ago
PAG oil: Available yet? Next Big Thing
by ElastoHydro
28 minutes 38 seconds ago
2010 Silverado 5.3 16,412 Miles AMSOIL Sig Series
by Flareside302
32 minutes 14 seconds ago
Best oil to quiet down kia 3.5L v6 at startup
by Alltherage
Today at 04:42 PM
a/c question
by OneEyeJack
Today at 04:19 PM
Mobil 1 Racing 4t or Valvoline 10w40 Motorcycle oi
by dslofti
Today at 04:15 PM
Biology and Chemistry II - Biological Polymers
by MolaKule
Today at 03:18 PM
got another one
by SteveSRT8
Today at 03:08 PM
following the users manual
by barkingspider
Today at 02:38 PM
Just got the General Altimax RT43s installed
by mcrn
Today at 02:14 PM
GM issues 6 new recalls.
by dave1251
Today at 01:08 PM
Newest Members
chancelee, XJSteve, joehupp, BwanaBob, gt40p
50744 Registered Users
Who's Online
117 registered (AandPDan, 2009Edge, 97tbird, 13Tacoma, 57ChevyLS, 9 invisible), 2014 Guests and 251 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
50744 Members
64 Forums
216737 Topics
3411392 Posts

Max Online: 2862 @ 07/07/14 03:10 PM
Donate to BITOG

Page 5 of 14 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 13 14 >
Topic Options
#3270616 - 02/04/14 06:55 PM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: turtlevette]
kschachn Offline


Registered: 12/26/05
Posts: 2321
Loc: Upper Midwest
Yep, drag out the "you want to breathe (fixed that for you) dirty air and want to drink dirty water if you oppose my way of thinking" lines. Happens every time. You try and shame those who dare to disagree into conforming to your beliefs, or call us stupid or uninformed.

Good use of an acronym there.

Originally Posted By: turtlevette
Regulation is elitism? Most of you OSHLs don't think the EPA should exist.

If wanting to breath clean air and drink clean water is elitism, sign me up.

I'm not exactly a Prius driving ultra leftist. I'm not even a greenie weenie. As a gearhead who tinkers with cars, I'd just like to be able to get my hands on some local E85 fuel. It's frustrating you OSHL's are trying to kill the whole thing.
_________________________
1994 BMW 530i, 186K
1996 Honda Accord, 199K
1999 Toyota Sienna, 301K
2000 Toyota ECHO, 222K

Top
#3270688 - 02/04/14 07:58 PM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: hatt]
TiredTrucker Offline


Registered: 01/04/08
Posts: 882
Loc: Kellogg, IA
Originally Posted By: hatt
A whole lot of stuff being left out. How'd the tractors get to the farm? How'd the guy get to the farm to work on the tractor? How'd the parts get there? Building the tractor? How'd the fertilizer get to the farm? How was it made? Herbicide? Goes on and on and on and on.

And it's convenient to leave out the NG and coal used in the ethanol production. You know we can burn the NG in vehicles too? It's not some waste product, it has to be accounted for.


Somewhat valid points, but myopic. Those tractors getting to the farm are not just doing corn. Ever hear of crop rotation? Soybeans, Alfalfa, Oats, Wheat, etc. See, those that have a limited view of the dynamics of agriculture should really take the time to broaden their education. Whether anyone was making ethanol out of corn, sugar beets, or whatever really has nothing to do with your argument. That equipment and implements would still be used. Y'all must think that since ethanol started being made from corn, that is when John Deere started making tractors, or anhydrous ammonia wasn't considered for crop production before ethanol, or that equipment never broke down and needed parts before ethanol. And all of the stuff that you mention, even if ethanol and biodiesel were not even figured out yet, those things would still be used. And something that a lot of people overlook on the fertilizer scene.... all that stored waste from hog production and cattle feed lots? Well, it gets knifed in the crop land as a nitrogen rich fertilizer. Again, in agriculture, nothing is wasted.

And let's delve a little deeper. What is the average length of time the typical tractor stays on a particular farm? Many times, up to 2 decades or more. Implements, even longer. That spreads the cost out over those acres pretty good. We still wouldn't get to the 420 gallons per acre per year that is the current average amount of ethanol produced per acre. It isn't like there is a new tractor being brought in every year, by every farm, to produce the corn for ethanol.

Granted, this is not a perfect world we live in. But this idea that ethanol uses as much or more energy than it gives back has been debunked a long time ago. At minimum, it provides 27-30% more energy outlay than all the input to produce it. Many biofuel producers are claiming a 50% advantage for ethanol. We can stick with the lower number and I would be fine. And when you look at the "greenie" side of the equation, ethanol is almost GHG neutral when evaluated over the entire production and use cycle.

Oh, and I didn't leave out NG in the discussion. Go back and re-read my posts. And I am all for NG fuels in autos. And propane as well! I want it all! I want wind, solar, nuclear, ethanol, butanol, NG, biodiesel, petroleum fuels, coal, hydroelectric, etc. I want us all to have a broad based selection of products from which to use. Whatever offers people the best value for their needs. Only government and myopic fools want to restrict things.
_________________________
Hey there, VA, what do ya say? How many vets did you kill today?

Top
#3271046 - 02/05/14 08:25 AM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: markum]
hatt Offline


Registered: 01/03/12
Posts: 796
Loc: Florida
That 30% comes at the cost of millions of acres of farmland diverted from food production and billions of gallons of water, etc.


Quote:
Producers Panic as Ethanol Mandate Loses Support

Quote:
Beyond that, poultry companies are going bankrupt due to rising prices of feedstock as crops are diverted to ethanol. The rising costs of farming and egg production are taking their toll on states like Minnesota.

On the other side of this divide we have the biofuels producers for whom uncertainty is rising fast as a resolution on the ethanol mandate looms. States like Iowa are leading the lobbying here because they have been reaping the benefits of all that demand for corn. This has come along with new jobs. Iowa will certainly baulk at the proposed cuts because the bulk of US biofuels are made from corn, with soybeans, grasses, crop waste and Brazilian sugarcane playing lesser roles.

Link
_________________________
2013 F150 5.0, PU 10w-30, FL500s
2010 Camry 2.5, PP 5w-30, Wix 57047

Top
#3271944 - 02/05/14 10:16 PM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: hatt]
TiredTrucker Offline


Registered: 01/04/08
Posts: 882
Loc: Kellogg, IA
Originally Posted By: hatt
That 30% comes at the cost of millions of acres of farmland diverted from food production and billions of gallons of water, etc.


Quote:
Producers Panic as Ethanol Mandate Loses Support

Quote:
Beyond that, poultry companies are going bankrupt due to rising prices of feedstock as crops are diverted to ethanol. The rising costs of farming and egg production are taking their toll on states like Minnesota.

On the other side of this divide we have the biofuels producers for whom uncertainty is rising fast as a resolution on the ethanol mandate looms. States like Iowa are leading the lobbying here because they have been reaping the benefits of all that demand for corn. This has come along with new jobs. Iowa will certainly baulk at the proposed cuts because the bulk of US biofuels are made from corn, with soybeans, grasses, crop waste and Brazilian sugarcane playing lesser roles.

Link


The U.S. corn production, nationwide, is at the highest level in U.S. history. Of that production, 20% is used for food. The remaining 80%, 40% of that is used for ethanol production. And that corn used for ethanol production, is also used to get corn oil, high lysine feed supplements for livestock, and a host of other products. Corn used for ethanol is not totally used for ethanol production. Only the sugars and starches from the corn. The remaining dried distillers grain is a high quality feed supplement in demand here and worldwide. Nothing is taken away from the livestock producers. Market corn prices, right now, are at the same level they were during the Bush Administration. Fact. Go online and check the spot market prices for corn, then and now.

So if the livestock folks are losing money, it is due to other factors and not ethanol. They still can buy all the corn they want, at the same price it was a decade ago. Matter of fact, corn prices being what they are, the corn growers are looking at break even cost of production spreads and very small profit margins.

Farmers will use the land for whatever brings the best bang for the buck of production. And corn just ain't it. And some nincompoops think that the same land is used over and over, year after year for corn production. It is rotated with other crops. Corn one year, soybeans the next. Or maybe Oats as a starter crop for alfalfa. Or maybe wheat. Then back to corn and cycle repeats. This stupid myopic nonsense about land being diverted from food to produce corn is spread by those that probably haven't even planted a garden, let alone dealt with ag production.
_________________________
Hey there, VA, what do ya say? How many vets did you kill today?

Top
#3272252 - 02/06/14 08:52 AM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: markum]
hatt Offline


Registered: 01/03/12
Posts: 796
Loc: Florida
I see you've resorted to namecalling in order to justify your pet government/mega corp project.

I'm opposed to ethanol solely because of the mandate. If the free market wanted ethanol there'd be no problem. The fact that the ethanol industry needs the government to put guns to peoples heads and orders use of their product says everything I need to know about the product.
_________________________
2013 F150 5.0, PU 10w-30, FL500s
2010 Camry 2.5, PP 5w-30, Wix 57047

Top
#3272600 - 02/06/14 02:06 PM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: hatt]
SteveSRT8 Offline


Registered: 10/10/08
Posts: 14229
Loc: Sunny Florida
Originally Posted By: hatt
I see you've resorted to namecalling in order to justify your pet government/mega corp project.

I'm opposed to ethanol solely because of the mandate. If the free market wanted ethanol there'd be no problem. The fact that the ethanol industry needs the government to put guns to peoples heads and orders use of their product says everything I need to know about the product.


I feel exactly the same. No subsidies, no mandates. Allow the market to justify the program economically, just like any good product or service does.

The name calling is nuttin' new. They always do that when they can't win with facts or agree to disagree...
_________________________
"In a democracy, dissent is an act of faith."
J. William Fulbright
Best ET-12.79 @ 111 mph
4340 pounds, Street tires
Just like we go to Publix

Top
#3273146 - 02/06/14 09:58 PM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: markum]
TiredTrucker Offline


Registered: 01/04/08
Posts: 882
Loc: Kellogg, IA
The EPA is behind the mandates, that is true, and I am against just about everything the EPA does, and there are no subsidies any more. Haven't been for over two years now, and that was at the request of the ethanol producers. Well, the name calling was accurate. If someone thinks that a chunk of crop land is just corn, corn, corn, corn year after year after year, then they are a nincompoop. No farming operation does that. They rotate crops as I mentioned. And from what I have read from some, it is quite clear they probably have never even set foot on a farm, let alone have any basic idea of what goes on with one. In the words of John Wayne in the movie "Mclintock"...... "they think that cows are something you milk, and Indians are something in front of a cigar store". Pretty much sums it up.
_________________________
Hey there, VA, what do ya say? How many vets did you kill today?

Top
#3273188 - 02/06/14 10:31 PM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: SteveSRT8]
turtlevette Offline


Registered: 12/24/13
Posts: 685
Loc: Massachusetts
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
I feel exactly the same. No subsidies, no mandates. Allow the market to justify the program economically, just like any good product or service does.

The name calling is nuttin' new. They always do that when they can't win with facts or agree to disagree...



The subsidies have gone away which I don't agree with. Sometimes its the only way to get a technology in its infancy going. Would you support a subsidy for Fusion power? Is there anything that should ever get a break?

Yep, 10 or 15% ethanol in all gas is a mandate. The same way unleaded gas was and your type said that would be the end of the world. We made the switch with hardly any problems at all. Now we're not poisoning everybody. The air is much cleaner than in the 70s.

Yes in some things the Government does know what's best for you. You really need to get over it and move on.

Name calling. You don't like Old School Hard Liner. You tell me what you are. Libertarian hard liner? Anarchist? I'll just say "your type".
_________________________
08 Mustang 4.0 GC
02 Suburban 5.3 M1 0w-30 AFE
75 Corvette Val 0W-20 syn
79 Trans Am M1 TDT
84 Suburban Castrol Edge Ti 5W-20 syn

Top
#3273303 - 02/07/14 05:50 AM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: TiredTrucker]
hatt Offline


Registered: 01/03/12
Posts: 796
Loc: Florida
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
The EPA is behind the mandates, that is true, and I am against just about everything the EPA does, and there are no subsidies any more. Haven't been for over two years now, and that was at the request of the ethanol producers. Well, the name calling was accurate. If someone thinks that a chunk of crop land is just corn, corn, corn, corn year after year after year, then they are a nincompoop. No farming operation does that. They rotate crops as I mentioned. And from what I have read from some, it is quite clear they probably have never even set foot on a farm, let alone have any basic idea of what goes on with one. In the words of John Wayne in the movie "Mclintock"...... "they think that cows are something you milk, and Indians are something in front of a cigar store". Pretty much sums it up.

I know how useless it is to present you with facts and research from previous run ins with you. But here goes anyway for everyone else to look at. You just continue on with your ethanol shilling.

Quote:
Many Midwest growers are considering more corn in their cropping mix, but that usually means
growing corn after corn, a situation that adds production costs, can increase risk, and most would
say compromises yield potential. But many with experience raising corn on corn see no
additional risk and a situation where they can raise some of their best yields. They have found
ways to make the continuous cropping system work
, managing crop residues with fall nitrogen
and tillage, maintaining high P and K levels in the soil, adequate amounts of applied nitrogen, and
high plant populations.

Purdue University

whistle


Edited by hatt (02/07/14 05:55 AM)
_________________________
2013 F150 5.0, PU 10w-30, FL500s
2010 Camry 2.5, PP 5w-30, Wix 57047

Top
#3273607 - 02/07/14 11:21 AM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: turtlevette]
SteveSRT8 Offline


Registered: 10/10/08
Posts: 14229
Loc: Sunny Florida
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
I feel exactly the same. No subsidies, no mandates. Allow the market to justify the program economically, just like any good product or service does.

The name calling is nuttin' new. They always do that when they can't win with facts or agree to disagree...



The subsidies have gone away which I don't agree with. Sometimes its the only way to get a technology in its infancy going. Would you support a subsidy for Fusion power? Is there anything that should ever get a break?

Yep, 10 or 15% ethanol in all gas is a mandate. The same way unleaded gas was and your type said that would be the end of the world. We made the switch with hardly any problems at all. Now we're not poisoning everybody. The air is much cleaner than in the 70s.

Yes in some things the Government does know what's best for you. You really need to get over it and move on.

Name calling. You don't like Old School Hard Liner. You tell me what you are. Libertarian hard liner? Anarchist? I'll just say "your type".


I have some names but I refuse to say them and then retract them as you do. I don't need to use that tactic. Ludicrous to assume you know who I am because of my opinions. That's quite ignorant, although also very common these days.

I have many liberal friends who firmly believe in Central Planning, but even they have admitted that THE ONLY REASON a mandate exists for ethanol in fuel is lobbying. Too bad you imagine it is some deeply benevolent government program only designed to help you. At first it's actually funny, then on further reflection it's actually a bit sad.

"We're here from the Government, and we want to help you"!

Larry the cable guy said "I believe that no matter what you do, no matter how hard you try, you can not baptize cats."
_________________________
"In a democracy, dissent is an act of faith."
J. William Fulbright
Best ET-12.79 @ 111 mph
4340 pounds, Street tires
Just like we go to Publix

Top
#3274022 - 02/07/14 05:44 PM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: SteveSRT8]
turtlevette Offline


Registered: 12/24/13
Posts: 685
Loc: Massachusetts
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Larry the cable guy said "I believe that no matter what you do, no matter how hard you try, you can not baptize cats."


A mentor of yours?

That splains a lot. grin
_________________________
08 Mustang 4.0 GC
02 Suburban 5.3 M1 0w-30 AFE
75 Corvette Val 0W-20 syn
79 Trans Am M1 TDT
84 Suburban Castrol Edge Ti 5W-20 syn

Top
#3274505 - 02/08/14 06:58 AM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: hatt]
TiredTrucker Offline


Registered: 01/04/08
Posts: 882
Loc: Kellogg, IA
Originally Posted By: hatt
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
The EPA is behind the mandates, that is true, and I am against just about everything the EPA does, and there are no subsidies any more. Haven't been for over two years now, and that was at the request of the ethanol producers. Well, the name calling was accurate. If someone thinks that a chunk of crop land is just corn, corn, corn, corn year after year after year, then they are a nincompoop. No farming operation does that. They rotate crops as I mentioned. And from what I have read from some, it is quite clear they probably have never even set foot on a farm, let alone have any basic idea of what goes on with one. In the words of John Wayne in the movie "Mclintock"...... "they think that cows are something you milk, and Indians are something in front of a cigar store". Pretty much sums it up.

I know how useless it is to present you with facts and research from previous run ins with you. But here goes anyway for everyone else to look at. You just continue on with your ethanol shilling.

Quote:
Many Midwest growers are considering more corn in their cropping mix, but that usually means
growing corn after corn, a situation that adds production costs, can increase risk, and most would
say compromises yield potential. But many with experience raising corn on corn see no
additional risk and a situation where they can raise some of their best yields. They have found
ways to make the continuous cropping system work
, managing crop residues with fall nitrogen
and tillage, maintaining high P and K levels in the soil, adequate amounts of applied nitrogen, and
high plant populations.

Purdue University

whistle


Wow. You have Purdue and whatever academic is pushing that view. I have a farm and a large family that have other farms, friends that farm, and we come from a line that has been farming these farms since the 1800's. As opposed to some academia farmer wannabe's at Purdue, we know what works best on farm ground. We all have our college degrees too. We don't have some Ma and Pa Kettle operations going on. And corn after corn after corn is not cost effective, is not beneficial to the soil, is not in any way a good thing. What someone Purdue economist dreamed up is not what goes on out here in the real world. Grain prices do not support such techniques as well. Sure, you might find a few commercial growers that are short sighted and have no problem screwing up their ground, but that is not the norm by any stretch of the imagination. And I would bet that after corn prices settled from their spike a couple of years ago, that it is hard to find anyone playing the corn after corn after corn game. Purdue aside. But then, those academics are not dependent on what the grain prices are and how to run business'. They have tenure and that is all that matters and they will spout the University party line.

I am not a shill for ethanol. I am tired of all the nonsense that gets thrown around about it by folks who barely know how to plant a garden and wouldn't know the working end of a dairy cow trying to claim certain things about farming and how we do things on farms. But it has always been that way. Government hacks and academics in cubicles always deciding what is best for farming. And the so-called experts on ethanol that are really Johnny come lately's, when we have been using ethanol in various blends in almost all of or gasoline fired engines for several decades with no problems. I could really care less if anyone uses ethanol or not. That is the beauty of the system, you pull up to some fuel pumps and make a selection. It is really telling how some, because of their prejudice against a product, will do everything they can to line up anecdotal evidences of the sky is falling scenario about that product. Hey, you can just not buy it! Simple. Oh, you have to because of the government? Well, 3/4 of the country wanted a government that would crawl into our lives so much, so deal with it. Yep, 3/4 of the nation like this kind of thing. How do I know this? 1/2 of the eligible people do not vote, so they by default support this stuff. The half that do vote, half of them actively like this kind of stuff. There is your 3/4 of the nation. Now we all have to live with it.
_________________________
Hey there, VA, what do ya say? How many vets did you kill today?

Top
#3274564 - 02/08/14 08:16 AM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: turtlevette]
SteveSRT8 Offline


Registered: 10/10/08
Posts: 14229
Loc: Sunny Florida
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Larry the cable guy said "I believe that no matter what you do, no matter how hard you try, you can not baptize cats."


A mentor of yours?

That splains a lot. grin


Lots of wisdom there, and this thread is rapidly proving him to be correct.
_________________________
"In a democracy, dissent is an act of faith."
J. William Fulbright
Best ET-12.79 @ 111 mph
4340 pounds, Street tires
Just like we go to Publix

Top
#3274630 - 02/08/14 09:33 AM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: markum]
hatt Offline


Registered: 01/03/12
Posts: 796
Loc: Florida
LOL, excellent. I see TT subscribes to the "When presented with evidence showing you don't know what you're talking about always go directly at the authors personally so you don't have to address the substance" debate strategy.

Quote:
I am not a shill for ethanol.

Do you make money from the ethanol industry?


Edited by hatt (02/08/14 09:35 AM)
_________________________
2013 F150 5.0, PU 10w-30, FL500s
2010 Camry 2.5, PP 5w-30, Wix 57047

Top
#3274692 - 02/08/14 10:34 AM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: markum]
TiredTrucker Offline


Registered: 01/04/08
Posts: 882
Loc: Kellogg, IA
Nope. I personally have nothing to do with the industry. Not a part of any Farmer's Coop that has invested in it. I just truck and farm. I suppose that some of the corn that has come off of my property has made it's way to an ethanol plant somewhere. I am only concerned with getting it to market and getting paid for it. Legalized gambling in a way, try to hit the market highs to sell. I could care less if it goes to an ethanol plant, a feed lot, or to a family in China. I know how all the ethanol industry works, having roughly 40 ethanol plants and 15 biodiesel plants surrounding me, and knowing some folks who are directly involved with it.

See, many in farming may or may not have any interest in the ethanol thing, but the market price for corn is all it really comes down to. The cost of production factored in. It isn't like very many grain producers are shipping from the field to the ethanol plant. There is a little of that, but a very small percentage. Most farmers are timing markets, rotating crops, and doing things based on profits and losses. Ethanol hardly even gets much more than a blip on the farming radar. The higher market prices, across the board, that occurred at the end of the 90's is what drove up the opening of more land to crop production. Ethanol probably had a hand in that, but a huge chunk of the upward price came from worldwide demand. We export more corn than we use for ethanol production.
_________________________
Hey there, VA, what do ya say? How many vets did you kill today?

Top
Page 5 of 14 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 13 14 >