EPA Passes 15% Ethanol..Sorta

Years back when Gasohol came on the scene, and I was the sole retailer of it in SLO, I did an experiment along with the help of the students at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo. We converted my 1969 Buick Special Deluxe coupe to run on about 50% gas / alcohol mix. Start up was a problem, so separate one gallon tank with gasoline in it was installed to warm up the car until the fuel could be switched over to run the mix. Keep in mind this was before computer control spark advance and the very beginning of electronic ignition. The timing of course was a comprimise between between gas and the mix. Performance was adequate but not ideal. Ran the car like this for about six months. No harm to the engine or carb and oil was changed at 1500 miles because of concern for alcohol washing down the cylinders of an engine that already had 75,000 miles on it.

 

Oh happy days.....just need to take on the government who run the country(and half of Europe ) on the tax revenue from petrol sales at our service stations, and the oil companies who will be non too pleased to be the owners of a billion gallons of black sticky stuff no one wants anymore, the arab countries who only have power through oil...but it seems the good boffins at this place have come up with the answer to our prayers...

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/225924/Hopes-soar-of-hydrogen-fuel-costing-90p-a-gallon

 

Remove all ethanol subsidies. If it remains viable, fine, if not-----.

 

Of course, there is that.

Beyond that tiny issue, it is not the fuel itself that is the problem. I can build you an engine that can run on whatever fuel you want, and, in several cases, multiple fuels, either concurrently, or one-at-a-time.

The real problem is where the fuel comes from, as in raw material or feedstock, and how much that really costs to get it, from there, to fuel, and then to the tank of the average consumer.

Making and selling fuel needs to make someone, or rather a lot of someones rich (and by definition bring tax revenue to the government(s)), or it is not going to happen.

 

DING DING!!!! It's about $$$$$$. Look at it from a tax revenue stand point. E85 is less efficient therefore, on average, most people will purchase more fuel. This increases the tax dollars recieved. Now, slowly raise the prices per gallon and you get more tax dollars yet. Thera are far more better way's to create fuel but why would you go to the effort when this was so easy to give yourself a raise. HELLO!

 

The Oil Sands


heres the story of where the US will be getting it's oil from, and already is,
it's a documentary by the environmental community so yes they put their spin on
it, but still it is a small glimpse of the future to come. the video is over one hour long.

http://www.cbc.ca/documentaries/natureofthings/video.html?ID=1769597772

a strange side note, up here we can't even buy E85 because it is seen as being environmentaly unfriendly, i think there are 3 stations selling E85 in all of Canada.

also on the property where i live the owner and a partner are doing a test project of growing "jerusalem artichokes" to be used to produce butanol alcohol.

 

Thats the catch22. There still is and always will be farm subsidies, CRP? Thats paying them NOT TO GROW products.

 

My daughter's boyfriend is a dairy farmer here in NY state.With his brother and dad,about 1000 acres,250 or more cows,grow their own feed,corn and soy,the rest is sold on the market.The boyfriend,40 years old and is the farm business manager,claims other than some Fed money to buy the seed,there is no money to grow or not grow crops in his case.His excess corn is sold to the highest price buyer.He doesn't know if the corn is used for canning of Ethanol,and doesn't care so long as he is paid.
Is he bullshitting me on the lack of subsidies? Any dairy farmers here ?
Yeah,Ethanol with no fed money ,see what happens.
Change is scarey for many people.Some have to have everything in order or they freak out.

 

No, he's not bullshitting. Not all farmers take subsidies.

You can enroll, and the feds will pay you to leave ground fallow (don't grow anything salable on it), but it is not required.

You can also drop out at any time. If you don't want to leave the ground fallow anymore, you just don't enroll for the year. Once you've been paid though, that ground has to remain fallow for that year, or your ass will be in the sling.

I never have understood the rational behind letting fertile ground lay fallow while people all over the place are starving to death.

Instead of paying the farmer not to work, and the UN to steal, why not buy the grain or corn that the farmer raised on the ground that isn't fallow anymore (using the same money you were gonna pay him to do nothing), and then give that food to people who need it? We buy grain on the international market (usually from Russia, but also from some European and South American countries) to send to those starving folks anyway.

With as much excess crop capacity as the US has, we could feed damned near the whole world just off of what we alone produce.

Of course, somebody has got to pay for it. That's always the rub.

 

Yes, the oil sands of Alberta are going to be a boon to Canada AND the US, when they get the process up and fully rolling. Last I checked they're getting very close to ready for full production.

We have a similar technology here in the US, where they liquefy coal to create a stable liquid motor fuel with a similarly high energy density as gasoline. Same mileage, same engines, better emissions, not much if any higher cost.

Right now, it can't move an inch because the coal mining industry is under a full time multi-front assault. On the one side you've got MSHA that is trying to regulate methane out of coal mines (as though that were possible), then you've got EPA and BLM who basically refuse to issue any new permits or expand old ones, and then you've got the anti-civilization environmentalists who are backstopped by the courts holding up and outright stopping any mines that do manage to get permitted.

There is no shortage of energy in the US or North America. What there IS a shortage of, is restraint on the part of government regulators.

Hell, every time they discover some new deposit of coal or precious minerals or oil, the feds declare the area a National Monument and lock it up forever as unexploitable. That's happened many many times in the past two or three decades.

It is as though the government is systematically trying to deprive the country of energy resources. To what end, I have no idea.

I would hope that even the stupidest of politicians knows that an economy without energy is no economy at all.

 

Wow, exactly. Dont worry about it, city boys love voicing their opinion on stuff they know nothing about. All they know is that there are crop subsidies and they are certain that it is a conspiracy against them.

Yep, its FREE money and farming is soo easy! All the city folk should head to the nearest John Deere dealership and pick up some equipment to get in on this "free" money that is so bountiful! /sarcasm

 

While all of the above is the truth, you won't read this in the Des Moines Register.

 

Nope, you need to go see what he really said, instead of some news source taking it out of context or misquoting.

Former Vice President Al Gore is admitting that he was wrong about “first generation” ethanol subsidies, calling them “not good policy” and admitting his support of them were clouded by his presidential ambitions.

“It is not a good policy to have these massive subsidies for (U.S.) first generation ethanol,” said Gore, speaking at a green energy business conference in Athens sponsored by Marfin Popular Bank."

Someone saying he thinks it's a mistake is like saying he said he created the internet. Another misquote.

Corn will not be in the equation. Period. That's the issue. It's about the least efficient way to make ethanol.

 

My uncle would put the worse land in CRP for wildlife habitat. Made for good pheasant hunting. Otherwise it was hard to farm.

 

This is my thinking as well. There are far better feedstocks for ethanol conversion than corn. The original decision to use corn for the conversion was a political one.

If ethanol is to ever be profitable, they are going to have to get past corn.

That's how they do it around here as well.

The .gov essentially pays folks not to farm land that they didn't really want to (or couldn't economically) farm in the first place.

Now, don't take that to mean that I think farmers have it easy, far from it. I live out here. However, this is one of those programs that seems to me like a colossal waste of money.

But, then again, I am pretty much always against paying people not to work.

 

Remember, leaving ground fallow can and does help the soil recover if it has been overworked. Kinda a tune-up if you will.

 

It's true that first generation ethanol from corn probably isn't the best and last solution. We'll eventually evolve to switchgrass, forest waste and biomass in general. Saying that, We should recognise that corn is a good place to start, as it is readily available and the processes are well known and easy to implement on a large scale. The other stuff still needs a lot of process development and raw material infrastructure building, but in time we'll get there.

Why didn't my 36 Ford pickup have an automatic transmission and power steering / brakes, or where are the airbags on my Falcon? Because things evolve. Same thing will happen with fuels.

I can see getting rid of the etanol subsidies as soon as we get rid of the tax breaks available to the oil companies. While we're at it send the bill for all the cost we're paying to keep the peace (such as it is) in the mideast back to Exxon Mobile.

Alan

 

F.Y.I. has any HAMBers had any problems with water asorbing in the fuel if you let it sit for a time.why you see more ads for gas savers(fuel additives) have read about this on other forums. RD

 

We have covered this a ton, play around with the search. No issues for me.

We have folks working locally on celluosic ethanol. This is based on logging slash. And we have a ton since the pine beetles are destroying everything!

 

Please hunt up this link if it is still valid?

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/1996-11/UoK-KRAA-141196.php

It's about diesel fuel made this way.

From KU here next door to MO, 54 percent syrup, (7.5 grams water and 46.5 grams sugar), 8 percent cetane improver that may be no more than soy biodiesl or Alkyl Nitrate(??) and 38 percent methanol.

I figure ethanol can be used here too!

pdq67

 

This was the original intent of the soil recovery act that was legislated by FDR after the dust bowl, the farmers argued that they could not leave their land fallow so subsidies were placed into action to allow the farmer time to let nature recover his soils without damaging his ability to make a fair living. Grass has the ability to replace nitrates proteins and convert minerals back into the soil. We seem to live by the spray stuff on it and it's all better way now. Soil really does need a break every now and again and a guy does still need to pay his bills. That top soil layer we have is the single most valuable resource this country has next to clean fresh water. I agree, very necessary. What would really be wrong with using alcohol from naturally derived sources, algal, grain, or micro bacterial? Even if in the end we had to put in an additive, change our fuel lines etc. Even if we had to poly coat or apply a composite to the internals of our fuel systems. I would be perfectly willing to apply a coating or change out a few parts so long as I could keep my ride going and strike a balance with nature. If we develop a balanced usage system where we only burn what we grow we will not have all the pollution concerns. Hey, we are not polluting, we are just recycling carbon matrix. We really need to find answers and be progressive, there's only so much dino poop out there.

 

No, we need to use the oil we have! Their are two formations North of me, one is the Bakken that contain more oil that any of the Arab countries. They have also discovered a huge amount 50 miles north of me by Sturgis SD.

Hmmm, I could handle a well pump on my spare 8 ares!

 

You ain't gonna suck it outta the ground by no stretch!

pdq67

 

Reality: the farm program includes your school lunch tickets, I don't care how big your city is. There is no program to set-aside land for payment in farming today. There is a conservation reserve program that you bid price per acre. It takes land that is highly erodible and along waterways and streams and makes them filter strips for better water quality (normally shi* ground in your eyes). There is no program payment to not grow a crop. There is no program to buy seed. There is a price subsidy program, but at $6 corn it's not paying out. As far as subsidies go, the Chicago Tribune and New York Times, your railroad lines, are all subsidized by the US Government. You need to know more about subsidies before you yell ethanol.

 

Bakken

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CroMuF6kyy8&feature=related

 

Actually the stuff found around here is easily accessible just like the wells across the border in Wyoming. And, I do have a refinery 60 miles west of me

 

I don't see why people have a such a hard time getting over the fact that Ethanol is a good. Change is sometimes a good thing. Gasoline stinks, its dirty and its going to run out, cellulose and bacterial ethanol production is the future. The oil industry is what has been fighting Ethanol so hard, they know it will kill them eventually, and they have a hard time embracing it.

 

Ethanol is a perfectly viable fuel. Ethanol that is derived from corn is foolish. Every feedstock for ethanol production is better than corn. The energy in to energy out is 1:1.1 for corn ethanol.

 

If there was any money to be made in it, the big oil players would be in there up to their asses already. They are the ones who developed the solid to liquid tech for converting coal. They're not married to oil, they're energy companies. If solid to liquid were more profitable, they'd make the transition in very short order, likewise with ethanol or butanol.

Businessmen are not stupid or evil, they want to make money, that's the whole point.

Which do you think is more profitable? Buying politicians to artificially stop the market from progressing past your tech, OR getting out in front of the market with new tech? The market follows the best value. Right now, gasoline is still a better value to most people.

If there was any profit to be made in corn based ethanol, we wouldn't be having this argument, because it would be self supporting. The fact that they need continuous subsidies pretty much makes my point for me.

There are all kinds of things I'd love to be doing, if someone else was paying the bills regardless of the outcomes. That doesn't mean that any of them are good businesses to be in.

 

How are the Germans and/or western European countries handling this?