Message Forum - Read Message

Category: All Things Ethanol > Topics	Add to favorite topics Post New Topic

Author	Topic: is ethanol a scam	Post a Reply Back to Topics

CORNHICK All-Star Author Omaha Posts:597 Points:270,505 Joined:May 2008	Message Posted: Jun 17, 2012 10:56:44 PM Ignore CORNHICK Report Abuse or is it just a cram on the American people?

CORNHICK

All-Star Author
Omaha

Posts:597
Points:270,505
Joined:May 2008

Message Posted: Jun 17, 2012 10:56:44 PM

Ignore CORNHICK Report Abuse

or is it just a cram on the American people?

REPLIES (newest first)Ignore Short Messages

First

Next Last

GM1954 Champion Author Illinois Posts:7,950 Points:131,880 Joined:Dec 2004	Message Posted: Jul 20, 2012 12:11:21 PM Ignore GM1954 Report Abuse "...... and now there is a shortage." No. Now there is a surplus of corn and most other US grain. If a shortage occurs a year from now, it remains to be seen. The market will adjust. As price rises, less corn will be used. Substitution with other grain will reduce corn consumption as well.
jay93LA Champion Author New Orleans Posts:2,444 Points:598,735 Joined:Aug 2011	Message Posted: Jul 20, 2012 11:41:42 AM Ignore jay93LA Report Abuse yes its all about the farm industry and now there is a shortage
bub03 All-Star Author Milwaukee Posts:843 Points:307,480 Joined:May 2012	Message Posted: Jul 17, 2012 12:01:00 AM Ignore bub03 Report Abuse GM1954 - well said.
dulberg Sophomore Author Long Island Posts:242 Points:265,480 Joined:Nov 2007	Message Posted: Jul 16, 2012 11:04:17 PM Ignore dulberg Report Abuse scam
GM1954 Champion Author Illinois Posts:7,950 Points:131,880 Joined:Dec 2004	Message Posted: Jul 15, 2012 10:01:39 AM Ignore GM1954 Report Abuse The horsepower thing is really simple. One pound of ethanol requires 33% less air to burn than one pound of gasoline. So, at full throttle, a fixed diameter intake will allow over 50% more fuel into the engine. Pound per pound both fuels will produce the about the same amount of combustion byproduct. Gasoline has a slight advantage. Make no mistake, ethanol will develop more hp than gasoline, but you will use more fuel in the process. In addition, ethanol has a higher octane rating. This means ethanol can be ignited sooner than gasoline can and burn longer at a higher temperature (without knock). More heat during combustion means more transfer of energy to kinetic energy. How far the carmaker allows timing to advance determines how well the engine will use ethanol. In general, the greater the timing advance, the better the fuel economy.
Banjoe Champion Author Winnipeg Posts:4,240 Points:613,210 Joined:Apr 2011	Message Posted: Jul 15, 2012 9:06:46 AM Ignore Banjoe Report Abuse GM1954 - interesting comment on the higher horsepower on E85. I need to track down the back story because this confuses me a bit. Thanks for posting and giving me a new challenge.
GM1954 Champion Author Illinois Posts:7,950 Points:131,880 Joined:Dec 2004	Message Posted: Jul 15, 2012 7:42:30 AM Ignore GM1954 Report Abuse "Ethanol is a great fuel in an engine designed to maximize its value...none of the big 3 offer such an engine" I would disagree. We purchased a new Chevrolet Tahoe in 2002. We have run mostly E85 through it. We have measured almost every tank of fuel into the vehicle. Under similar driving conditions, the fuel economy is indistinguishable between E85 and gasoline. I also had the opportunity to speak with the General Motors VP of alternate Fuels a few years ago. He indicated that when running E85 in our Tahoe, the engine would develope an addition 20 hp or more over regular gasoline. We certainly don't have anything to complain about.
Edpap Champion Author Pennsylvania Posts:4,324 Points:505,950 Joined:Oct 2011	Message Posted: Jul 15, 2012 7:08:09 AM Ignore Edpap Report Abuse Ethanol is a great fuel in an engine designed to maximize its value...none of the big 3 offer such an engine. It may work as a fuel for an electrical generator in a hybrid, but i am not aware of anyone with this technology.
mr157ifhz Sophomore Author Gasbuddy Posts:155 Points:3,120 Joined:Mar 2012	Message Posted: Jul 13, 2012 9:51:38 PM Ignore mr157ifhz Report Abuse 'I've tried unsuccessfully to find out if ethanol products are a net gain in energy or not.' ~Doesn't look like you tried very hard. Search this very forum and you will find links to many different studies showing ethanol production is net energy GAIN. You will find exactly ONE study saying it's a net loss (Patzek/Pimental, Cornell University). Regarding your carbs needing cleaning - let gasoline sit around, doesn't matter if there is ethanol in it or not, and it will go bad. -Matt
SilverStreaker Champion Author Twin Cities Posts:11,934 Points:2,215,565 Joined:Mar 2006	Message Posted: Jul 13, 2012 9:48:58 PM Ignore SilverStreaker Report Abuse 5150windsurfer ponders "I've tried unsuccessfully to find out if ethanol products are a net gain in energy or not. In other words, does it take more energy to produce ethanol than what the ethanol actually contains." According to the US Dept. of Energy's Ethanol Myths and Facts site, "Ethanol has a positive energy balance – that is, the energy content of ethanol is greater than the fossil energy used to produce it – and this balance is constantly improving with new technologies". The site says that it takes 0.74 BTUs to make a BTU of ethanol. Comparatively, it takes 1.23 BTUs to make a BTU of gasoline, so gasoline has a negative energy balance.
5150windsurfer Rookie Author Washington Posts:4 Points:63,230 Joined:Jun 2012	Message Posted: Jul 13, 2012 8:47:15 PM Ignore 5150windsurfer Report Abuse I've tried unsuccessfully to find out if ethanol products are a net gain in energy or not. In other words, does it take more energy to produce ethanol than what the ethanol actually contains. I believe that if there was a net gain in energy through ethanol, the ethanol worshipers would be proclaiming it far and wide.
5150windsurfer Rookie Author Washington Posts:4 Points:63,230 Joined:Jun 2012	Message Posted: Jul 13, 2012 8:43:58 PM Ignore 5150windsurfer Report Abuse Not sure if it is a scam or not, but it sure cost me big bucks to get my motorcycle carbs cleaned when I left it sit for too long with ethanol tainted gas in it.
nichols Champion Author Halifax Posts:6,841 Points:1,831,025 Joined:Aug 2003	Message Posted: Jul 13, 2012 1:25:52 PM Ignore nichols Report Abuse scamm as well as hard on many motors especially in lawn mowers, motorcycles etc
tlk0408 Champion Author Raleigh Posts:1,010 Points:327,435 Joined:Apr 2012	Message Posted: Jul 11, 2012 7:47:11 PM Ignore tlk0408 Report Abuse I have used both types (ethanol and regular gas) in my vehicles and while I might pay more at the pump when I fill up with regular gas, my actual gas mileage is better and my overall gas bill is lower because I don't have to fill up as often.
haddeby Rookie Author San Antonio Posts:89 Points:1,007,630 Joined:Mar 2008	Message Posted: Jul 11, 2012 4:40:00 PM Ignore haddeby Report Abuse it's a crime, using food for powering cars.
krzysiek_ck Champion Author Illinois Posts:5,322 Points:728,160 Joined:Apr 2011	Message Posted: Jul 11, 2012 8:35:52 AM Ignore krzysiek_ck Report Abuse Atmonauti wrote: "Drop the corn subsidies" Please feel free to list them for us.
bithehr Champion Author Atlanta Posts:1,849 Points:423,485 Joined:Mar 2009	Message Posted: Jul 11, 2012 8:26:03 AM Ignore bithehr Report Abuse no
Atmonauti Rookie Author British Columbia Posts:6 Points:20,485 Joined:Jun 2012	Message Posted: Jul 9, 2012 1:44:27 AM Ignore Atmonauti Report Abuse Ethanol is a waste of time money and resources. Drop the corn subsidies
SilverStreaker Champion Author Twin Cities Posts:11,934 Points:2,215,565 Joined:Mar 2006	Message Posted: Jul 8, 2012 12:10:08 PM Ignore SilverStreaker Report Abuse Bus561 says "When it was introduced it was supposed to make gasoline cheaper, HA, that was a joke to say the least." According to The Impact of Ethanol Production on U.S. and Regional Gasoline Markets: An Update to 2012, Ethanol Reduced Gas Prices by More than $1 in 2011.
Bus936 Champion Author Lexington Posts:16,439 Points:3,219,030 Joined:May 2004	Message Posted: Jul 8, 2012 12:12:14 AM Ignore Bus936 Report Abuse When it was introduced it was supposed to make gasoline cheaper, HA, that was a joke to say the least. We were also supposed to have a choice, and that too was a joke.
Shockjock1961 Champion Author Illinois Posts:20,113 Points:2,184,185 Joined:Apr 2006	Message Posted: Jul 7, 2012 6:59:44 PM Ignore Shockjock1961 Report Abuse "Talk about Mandates, gasoline it the most mandated product in the history of the world." Really? Please prove this by providing the Federal minimum usage mandate for gasoline? You say there isn't one? Then I guess you are wrong them... [Edited by: Shockjock1961 at 7/7/2012 7:00:31 PM EST]
Hannie59 All-Star Author Appleton Posts:585 Points:15,175 Joined:Apr 2010	Message Posted: Jul 7, 2012 3:38:47 PM Ignore Hannie59 Report Abuse Red, why is it that gasoline is forced on this country as the only choice by sheer monopoly and oil owned government. Talk about Mandates, gasoline it the most mandated product in the history of the world.
RedRider1OK All-Star Author Oklahoma City Posts:943 Points:25,440 Joined:Mar 2008	Message Posted: Jul 7, 2012 3:10:28 PM Ignore RedRider1OK Report Abuse I have to ask: Why is it that such a wonderful, outstanding, performance making, power producing, fuel system cleaning, octane improving, water removing, cost lowering, American made, positive renewable, mileage improving product that "ethanol" is, has to be mandated in our fuel supply? Wouldn't consumer demand determine ethanol's existence?
jenksjr All-Star Author Washington Posts:502 Points:36,275 Joined:Oct 2009	Message Posted: Jul 7, 2012 12:20:04 AM Ignore jenksjr Report Abuse another worthless government mandate.
GM1954 Champion Author Illinois Posts:7,950 Points:131,880 Joined:Dec 2004	Message Posted: Jul 5, 2012 2:28:28 PM Ignore GM1954 Report Abuse "On the news ..... 39% of corn produced in the USA goes for Ethanol Production...... SO we plant water grow harvest refine distribute at wat cost !! A FOOD PRODUCT to get LESS milage....." You are overlooking a fundamental piece of history. While 39% of the corn may be going into ethanol (and animal feed) production, farmers have increased corn production by 40% since 2007. No children have starved in the making of ethanol.
f250jbh Sophomore Author California Posts:208 Points:184,875 Joined:Oct 2008	Message Posted: Jul 5, 2012 1:34:23 PM Ignore f250jbh Report Abuse On the news ..... 39% of corn produced in the USA goes for Ethanol Production...... SO we plant water grow harvest refine distribute at wat cost !! A FOOD PRODUCT to get LESS milage..... SO the government thinks there is NOTHING wrong with this picture!!
nichols Champion Author Halifax Posts:6,841 Points:1,831,025 Joined:Aug 2003	Message Posted: Jul 5, 2012 10:16:18 AM Ignore nichols Report Abuse scam
rumbleseat Champion Author Winnipeg Posts:22,925 Points:3,529,415 Joined:Oct 2002	Message Posted: Jul 4, 2012 4:22:07 AM Ignore rumbleseat Report Abuse "The math is not working. Cost more to produce." Gee, thanks for the amazing proofs you have provided, all that fanatastic information, you must have had the same team that Trump used to gather that amazing information about Barack Obama! LOL!!
MikeCapeCoral Champion Author Cape Coral Posts:1,932 Points:419,845 Joined:Feb 2012	Message Posted: Jul 4, 2012 12:36:03 AM Ignore MikeCapeCoral Report Abuse The math is not working. Cost more to produce.
SilverStreaker Champion Author Twin Cities Posts:11,934 Points:2,215,565 Joined:Mar 2006	Message Posted: Jul 3, 2012 7:24:02 PM Ignore SilverStreaker Report Abuse willp09 asks "Doesn't ethanol cause lower gas mileage?" It depends on the engine. The reasons are posted in the topic BTU's are 35% less for Ethanol but we are not heating water...
willp09 Champion Author Houston Posts:1,270 Points:369,325 Joined:Jul 2009	Message Posted: Jul 3, 2012 7:10:43 PM Ignore willp09 Report Abuse Doesn't ethanol cause lower gas mileage? Doesn't it produce less thermal energy than gasoline?
Shockjock1961 Champion Author Illinois Posts:20,113 Points:2,184,185 Joined:Apr 2006	Message Posted: Jul 3, 2012 8:19:30 AM Ignore Shockjock1961 Report Abuse "Well, that sure proves conclusively it is safe for human consumption, doesn't it?" LOL! It sure doesn't prove its a carcinogen! "And whether you believe it is safe to add to your daily diet or not, we aren't getting it back in our fuels anyway!" You need neither it, nor ethanol in our gas. That's where the scam comes in. [Edited by: Shockjock1961 at 7/3/2012 8:23:19 AM EST]
bustermoves Champion Author Fort Worth Posts:3,470 Points:690,625 Joined:Apr 2010	Message Posted: Jul 3, 2012 5:28:03 AM Ignore bustermoves Report Abuse yes
rumbleseat Champion Author Winnipeg Posts:22,925 Points:3,529,415 Joined:Oct 2002	Message Posted: Jul 2, 2012 11:53:11 PM Ignore rumbleseat Report Abuse "It states right here that they don't have enough data to reach a conclusion." Well, that sure proves conclusively it is safe for human consumption, doesn't it? I prefer to believe it is unsafe until proven safe. And whether you believe it is safe to add to your daily diet or not, we aren't getting it back in our fuels anyway! [Edited by: rumbleseat at 7/2/2012 11:53:55 PM EST]
GM1954 Champion Author Illinois Posts:7,950 Points:131,880 Joined:Dec 2004	Message Posted: Jul 2, 2012 11:35:02 PM Ignore GM1954 Report Abuse "So they grow a lot of corn but sell it at high prices for ethanol leaving all of the original corn customers paying high prices for the feedstock needed for chickens, cows etc. which drives up cost throughout the supply chain." Nice theory. But, corn growers produce a surplus of corn every year. No children have starved. [Edited by: GM1954 at 7/2/2012 11:37:06 PM EST]
GM1954 Champion Author Illinois Posts:7,950 Points:131,880 Joined:Dec 2004	Message Posted: Jul 2, 2012 11:35:00 PM Ignore GM1954 Report Abuse "So they grow a lot of corn but sell it at high prices for ethanol leaving all of the original corn customers paying high prices for the feedstock needed for chickens, cows etc. which drives up cost throughout the supply chain." N
Sampson20 Rookie Author Florida Posts:14 Points:7,330 Joined:Jun 2012	Message Posted: Jul 2, 2012 11:21:59 PM Ignore Sampson20 Report Abuse I used to work for a sugar cane growing company and I did a lot of research on ethanol as it can be derived from sugar cane as well as corn. In fact it is seven times more efficient to get it from sugar cane. Brazil gets all of their ethanol from sugar cane as does Australia. At least when I did my research more than five years ago that was the case; i can't say what they are doing tody. I say all of this because my research showed that ethanol from corn is extremely inefficient in fact even getting it from sugar which is so much more efficient was such a risky business that no one wanted to spend the money to build the ethanol conversion plant. Ethanol producers only make money when oil is super expensive and we all know how oil prices go up and down. If ethanol is truly a substitute for gasoline or can at least lower our dependence on foreign oil or any oil for that matter then I am fine with making government subsidies to get the business started. Things like building the conversion plants and paying for first crop seed, stuff like that. But the current system doesn't pay farmers to grow ethanol it just sets high prices for their finished product. So they grow a lot of corn but sell it at high prices for ethanol leaving all of the original corn customers paying high prices for the feedstock needed for chickens, cows etc. which drives up cost throughout the supply chain. The US ethanol program has a lot of flaws. I think it is more to do with political lobbiest from the corn growers than any thing else.
tractormantim Champion Author Knoxville Posts:1,537 Points:674,755 Joined:Sep 2010	Message Posted: Jul 2, 2012 9:08:25 AM Ignore tractormantim Report Abuse The biggest problem with ethanol is the economics and energy balance of ethanol production. And don't forget the huge amounts of water used in ethanol production, which will become more of an issue in the future.
Shockjock1961 Champion Author Illinois Posts:20,113 Points:2,184,185 Joined:Apr 2006	Message Posted: Jul 2, 2012 8:27:24 AM Ignore Shockjock1961 Report Abuse "The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has concluded that available data are inadequate to quantify health risks of MTBE at low exposure levels in drinking water" LOL! It states right here that they don't have enough data to reach a conclusion...
goldseeker Champion Author West Virginia Posts:19,537 Points:2,717,840 Joined:Sep 2005	Message Posted: Jul 2, 2012 1:04:19 AM Ignore goldseeker Report Abuse Phase separation??? What a farce! Take two test tubes or small containers. Fill one with regular gasoline and one with straight ethanol. Then take an eye dropper and start dropping water in the solution. Let me know which one phase separates first. You will be surprised.
GM1954 Champion Author Illinois Posts:7,950 Points:131,880 Joined:Dec 2004	Message Posted: Jul 1, 2012 11:46:00 PM Ignore GM1954 Report Abuse "Without a doubt. Canada still uses MBTE in their fuels. Better gas mileage, no phase separation, no water absorbtion issues. This is nothing more than a farm susbsidy in hiding that has disaterous consequences." Actually, MTBE reduces fuel economy more than does ethanol. Yes there is phase separation with MTBE fuel. It just happens much sooner with the MTBE fuel. Water enters the fuel system the say way without regard to the type of fuel: heating and cooling of the fuel in a partially fulled tank. Its called condensation. Farm subsidies in the US have decreased as a result of increased demand for corn.
rumbleseat Champion Author Winnipeg Posts:22,925 Points:3,529,415 Joined:Oct 2002	Message Posted: Jul 1, 2012 4:41:42 PM Ignore rumbleseat Report Abuse From the EPA: "However, researchers have limited data about what the health effects may be if a person swallows (ingests) MTBE. EPA's Office of Water has concluded that available data are not adequate to estimate potential health risks of MTBE at low exposure levels in drinking water but that the data support the conclusion that MTBE is a potential human carcinogen at high doses." It seems the EPA isn't quite so quick to give MTBE a clean bill of health. "As of 2007, researchers have limited data about the health effects of ingestion of MTBE. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has concluded that available data are inadequate to quantify health risks of MTBE at low exposure levels in drinking water, but that the data support the conclusion that MTBE is a potential human carcinogen at high doses." MTBE doesn't cling well to soil, meaning it migrates quickly into underground water sources after a fuel spill. It takes only a small amount to affect the taste. It takes many years for it to start to disappear. It does evaporate quickly from a reservoir, but not from underground sources, such as the aquifers that many places get drinking water from. So, I guess you would be comfortable serving your family cold drinks with MTBE-laced ice cubes, then? [Edited by: rumbleseat at 7/1/2012 4:42:17 PM EST]
Shockjock1961 Champion Author Illinois Posts:20,113 Points:2,184,185 Joined:Apr 2006	Message Posted: Jul 1, 2012 10:02:08 AM Ignore Shockjock1961 Report Abuse "MTBE is a carcinogen" MTBE is NOT a carcinogen. " The National Toxicology Program (NTP) is formed from parts of several different US government agencies, including the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Exposures that are thought to be carcinogenic are included in the Report on Carcinogens, published every few years. The NTP has reviewed MTBE and voted not to include it in the lists of compounds known or reasonably anticipated to be human carcinogens. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) is part of the World Health Organization (WHO). Its major goal is to identify causes of cancer. The IARC has concluded that there is inadequate human evidence, and limited animal evidence, for the carcinogenicity of MTBE, leading to an overall evaluation of MTBE as "not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity to humans.""
Banjoe Champion Author Winnipeg Posts:4,240 Points:613,210 Joined:Apr 2011	Message Posted: Jul 1, 2012 9:19:31 AM Ignore Banjoe Report Abuse runbleseat - thanks for that info. I was wondering why fuel was tasting differently whenever I syphoned any. :^) Do you know of any similar additive in diesel fuel locally?
rumbleseat Champion Author Winnipeg Posts:22,925 Points:3,529,415 Joined:Oct 2002	Message Posted: Jul 1, 2012 8:33:21 AM Ignore rumbleseat Report Abuse gaffed posts: "Canada still uses MBTE in their fuels." Where do you get your information from? You need a new source. MTBE is a carcinogen, and polluted a lot of groundwater, no we don't use it in our fuels! In 2001 MTBE poisoning of groundwater was found in every province in Canada. It has been phased out by all Canadian gasoline producers as of a 2004 report. We have E10 in every regular pump in Manitoba. We have no problems, and, as a bonus we don't need to add fuel-line anti-freeze to our tanks in winter, which is expensive bottled alcohol anyway.
gaffed Rookie Author Massachusetts Posts:2 Points:8,165 Joined:Jun 2012	Message Posted: Jul 1, 2012 8:17:44 AM Ignore gaffed Report Abuse Without a doubt. Canada still uses MBTE in their fuels. Better gas mileage, no phase separation, no water absorbtion issues. This is nothing more than a farm susbsidy in hiding that has disaterous consequences. Just ask a boater how much they like ethanol enhance fuels...
GM1954 Champion Author Illinois Posts:7,950 Points:131,880 Joined:Dec 2004	Message Posted: Jul 1, 2012 8:00:59 AM Ignore GM1954 Report Abuse "Perhaps it is not a scam but it certainly is a shame! Gasoline diluted with ethanol decreases gas mileage and performance. " Any reduction in fuel economy depends on the car. Nost people using fuel containing 10% ethanol or less will not be able to detect any difference in fuel economy. As far as decreases in performance, that doesn't happen. Ethanol produces more horse power than gasoline, in any given engine. The higher the ethanol content, the greater the increase in horse power.
SilverStreaker Champion Author Twin Cities Posts:11,934 Points:2,215,565 Joined:Mar 2006	Message Posted: Jun 30, 2012 11:56:40 PM Ignore SilverStreaker Report Abuse Mr_Bill, Oh No! I've used ethanol blends in two non-ffvs for over 3 years and did not see any significant change in mileage and no performance or maintenance issues. I used over 35% ethanol in a 2003 Honda CRV and over 65% ethanol in a 2000 Ford Windstar.
Mr_Bill_W All-Star Author Virginia Posts:566 Points:357,510 Joined:Feb 2012	Message Posted: Jun 30, 2012 11:43:30 PM Ignore Mr_Bill_W Report Abuse Perhaps it is not a scam but it certainly is a shame! Gasoline diluted with ethanol decreases gas mileage and performance. This observation is based on my personal experience with a 15% reduction in gas mileage using E85 vs ethanol free gasoline... This first happened with the introduction of E85 to my vehicle and the same results are confirmed on those rare occasions when I can find ethanol free gasoline. Anyone have a similar experience?
waynefun Rookie Author Twin Cities Posts:80 Points:876,425 Joined:Jan 2006	Message Posted: Jun 30, 2012 11:22:13 PM Ignore waynefun Report Abuse It is not a scam.