More bad news for the ethanol mandate.

Status
Not open for further replies.
We could call gasahol the biggest "green" boondoggle ever but there are too many to choose from to be sure. I do kind of like using algae as a feedstock if we can mature that.
 
Lots of pros and cons, mostly cons to ethanol blends. Used to be cars burned it cleaner, but with modern engine control I don't think it matters anymore for cleaner air what you run, your engine will be dialed in. I could see it phasing out. Maybe go to a 5% (instead of 10%) for a while as an interim measure.
 
If this stuff were to become economically viable without the dead hand of government meddling in the free market for it, then it will stay ON the market in some fashion. If not, some fat agribusiness types will not be buying bigger boats anytine soon.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: HerrStig
If this stuff were to become economically viable without the dead hand of government meddling in the free market for it, then it will stay ON the market in some fashion. If not, some fat agribusiness types will not be buying bigger boats anytine soon.



Yep this was never a "green" thing but a way for big agribusiness's to line their pockets.

Next need to cut the sugar tariffs that were also put in place to protect big agribusiness/corn. Aka the corn syrup protection laws.
 
Originally Posted By: Donald
If they would use a waste weed or something similar (not corn) I would be OK with a few percent of ethanol.


That was in the original law. Cellulosic ethanol was supposed to ease the pressure on food prices by growing switchgrass on marginal lands, and it was only going to take 10 years to make it work. Now its 10 years later, and cellulosic ethanol is still a pipe dream. When a politician says that some big political goal can be achieved in 10 years, he's really saying EFF YOU.
 
Last edited:
Either way, it takes another variable out of gasoline prices if ethanol goes away. Fluctuations in the prices of corn actually plays a role in gas prices. I'll be glad to see it go.
Not to mention, if the demand for corn drops, the cost of other food products that rely on corn, corn products, or corn for feed may decrease.
 
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
Originally Posted By: Donald
If they would use a waste weed or something similar (not corn) I would be OK with a few percent of ethanol.


That was in the original law. Cellulosic ethanol was supposed to ease the pressure on food prices by growing switchgrass on marginal lands, and it was only going to take 10 years to make it work. Now its 10 years later, and cellulosic ethanol is still a pipe dream. When a politician says that some big political goal can be achieved in 10 years, he's really saying EFF YOU.


Thought I read somewhere that water worries killed the switchgrass momentum.
 
Originally Posted By: ExMachina
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
Originally Posted By: Donald
If they would use a waste weed or something similar (not corn) I would be OK with a few percent of ethanol.


That was in the original law. Cellulosic ethanol was supposed to ease the pressure on food prices by growing switchgrass on marginal lands, and it was only going to take 10 years to make it work. Now its 10 years later, and cellulosic ethanol is still a pipe dream. When a politician says that some big political goal can be achieved in 10 years, he's really saying EFF YOU.


Thought I read somewhere that water worries killed the switchgrass momentum.

They use a ton of water to make ethanol from corn as well. It is all a bad deal in my opinion. Why use our freshwater and a food source for fuel?
 
It took this long for politicians to use up the campaign those donations.

Now it's time to deal with the doomsday machine we call the EPA. It appears that the people that established the EPA got the idea from the movie "Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb".
 
Novozymes at Blair,NE is working on new enzymes that can be used to produce ethanol out of corn stover and non-crop biomass such as switch grass. Some of the ethanol plants are already undergoing retrofit to produce biomass ethanol. Unless something better than ethanol comes along, it's going to be the oxygenator of choice for years to come unless the auto makers can come up with a cleaner burning engine design.
 
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
When a politician says that some big political goal can be achieved in 10 years, he's really saying EFF YOU.


Like this one?




Not arguing, just having some fun. What a difference 50 years makes.
 
Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
It took this long for politicians to use up the campaign those donations.

Now it's time to deal with the doomsday machine we call the EPA. It appears that the people that established the EPA got the idea from the movie "Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb".
The new no nonsense governor of a New England state at the BOTTOM of the economic ladder has just cleaned house of a bunch of anti growth sky is falling types who infested the Department of Environment in the hopes the state would not remain next to LAST in the favorable business climate ratings forever.
 
There are so many other products that come out of corn being used for ethanol production, that ethanol is going to be made, mandate or not. If it doesn't sell here, it is going to ship outside the U.S. And it is the cheapest form of oxygenate that is available right now. At least that is environmentally approved. So it is not going away anytime soon. Clean air mandates, by default, will keep ethanol in the mix for some time.

Biodiesel, the same way. There is no mandate on biodiesel, except at some state levels, yet it is still made and a large portion of it goes outside the country, mostly to Europe. But while there is no mandate, there has been a trend to having biodiesel blends at the pumps across the country for some time. I go thru over 20,000 gallons of diesel a year in my business, trucking, and I haven't fuel with diesel without biodiesel blended in for over 7 years. Not that I chose biodiesel, it is blended into every gallon of diesel at every fuel stop location I frequent. And with the very substantial discounts I get fueling at those locations, I am not going to go running around the countryside looking for bio free diesel and pay thru the nose for it.

And one of the little known facts is, when corn is used for ethanol production, corn oil is removed, along with other stuff before the ethanol process begins. That corn oil is use for a variety of purposes. You see corn oil in the cooking section of the grocery store. But a major portion of corn oil goes to.... biodiesel plants! So corn is actually producing two different fuels from the same bushel of corn. One of those little snippets that the anti-ethanol crowd fails to consider in its argument that ethanol production is not energy efficient.
 
Originally Posted By: DBMaster
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
When a politician says that some big political goal can be achieved in 10 years, he's really saying EFF YOU.


Like this one?




Not arguing, just having some fun. What a difference 50 years makes.


Excellent post! Too bad it was the only worthwhile goal that was met inside of 10 years, and we haven't been back since the 70's. Not sure, if I was an astronaut in this day and time, that I would care to volunteer for a moon shot today. NASA has had a poor track record of successful launches for a while.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top