Ethanol not worth it!!

[dajoga]

So sez this study:

ITHACA, N.Y. -- Turning plants such as corn, soybeans and sunflowers into fuel uses much more energy than the resulting ethanol or biodiesel generates, according to a new Cornell University and University of California-Berkeley study.

"There is just no energy benefit to using plant biomass for liquid fuel," says David Pimentel, professor of ecology and agriculture at Cornell.


more (http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/July05/ethanol.toocostly.ssl.html)

Time to go back to horse and buggy--I get transportation plus the horses keep my lawn cut and their "apples" fertilize my garden!! What a great IDEA!!!

:rotflmbo: :rotflmbo: :rotflmbo:

[John Galt]

One of the worst things about ethanol as fuel is that it is hygroscopic.

Get it out of my gas and back in my tequila!

[DoctorDoom]

Ethanol is just the latest version of MTBE, which the ecowackos were fixated on ... until it turned out to be a pollutant of water supplies.

One of the worst things about ethanol as fuel is that it is hygroscopic.That's one of the reasons why it can't be shipped through pipelines. It will absorb any condensation that it might encounter. And it will do the same thing in fuel storage tanks and vehicle fuel tanks. Add that to its being a net consumer of energy and its value as a transportation fuel is nil.

[dajoga]

The bottom line on any alternative fuels is the consumer's pocketbook. What ever saves the consumer money is what they will buy!

All the EVW's make a big deal about Brazil, but we already produce more ethanol yet it's only about 3% of what we need.

[cerberus]

Yup, US ethanol production is a boondoggle alright, but as long as Iowa has early caucuses and Senators from mid-west farming states keep a keen eye on the Ag Spending Bill, it's not going away.

That said, I would like to see the numbers on ethanol produced from sugar-cane, which has a much higher energy content than corn or the other plants listed. As I understand it, Brazil is doing very well with sugar-based ethanol as substitute for gasoline.

[Timberwolf]

Besides, burning ethanol as fuel emits water vapor out the tailpipe...everyone knows water vapor is the most abundant greenhouse gas in our atmosphere and exerts a FAR greater influence than CO₂ on 'warming'. Adding MORE water vapor will only exasperate 'climate change'. :evilgrin:

[Naturalized-Texan]

Like the rest of the global warming alarmism, ethanol is nothing more than a political boondoggle.

[Oldeshooter]

The mehanol laced gas gets lower mileage and the higher the methanol content the lower the mpg, up to 40% less. Some savings.

[oldcoastie]

The mehanol laced gas gets lower mileage and the higher the methanol content the lower the mpg, up to 40% less. Some savings.

And you have to burn more of it to go the same distance as unlaced gasoline.

I wish someone would explain how this is more cost, energy and emissions efficient.

[DeclinetoState]

Quote:
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">Originally Posted by Oldeshooter http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/showthread.php?p=544159#post544159)
The mehanol laced gas gets lower mileage and the higher the methanol content the lower the mpg, up to 40% less. Some savings.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
And you have to burn more of it to go the same distance as unlaced gasoline.

Same difference.

I wish someone would explain how this is more cost, energy and emissions efficient.<!-- / message -->Carbon credits, man, carbon credits!

[thoughtomator]

It's really not dissimilar to Chinese melamine spiking, except in this case they're not even bother to hide the scam, they expect us to be too stupid to understand it.

If I had a choice at the pump, I would choose unadulterated gasoline over the ethanol-spiked stuff every time. Funny that in a free country I don't have that choice.

[dPrasse]

I burn ethanol in my vehicles ... insides of the motors are cleaner ... never had an engine/fuel problem since 1980 ...

Ecologist David Pimental says ....in assessing inputs, the researchers considered such factors as the energy used in producing the crop (including production of pesticides and fertilizer, running farm machinery and irrigating, grinding and transporting the crop)

ah , dumbass ... the corn is being planted already ...

Also , never figured into the "net worth" is the value of the by-products ....

corn distillers is good cattle feed , highly digestible protein source , better than soybean meal , thus reducing the input of other protein sources ..

other byproducts are aslso not figured into the cost of ethanol ...

CO2 is captured and sold to bottling companies ...

ethanol is also being looked at as an ingredient in fuel cells ...

[thoughtomator]

other byproducts are aslso not figured into the cost of ethanol ...

Neither is the rise in the cost of corn and other products derived from corn due to a new, massive source of demand in that market.

[dPrasse]

Neither is the rise in the cost of corn and other products derived from corn due to a new, massive source of demand in that market.

Yep , the damn farmers should always sell their product at below cost so you can have your cheap tortilla chips anf Fritos ... gosh , the farmers might actually make a return on their investmest , finally for once getting rid of the need of subsidies to the farmers and rediculous payments NOT to grow products ...

Cheap cheap food has been US policy for years ... it's about time the farmers get some real money , ...

[thoughtomator]

Yep , the damn farmers should always sell their product at below cost so you can have your cheap tortilla chips anf Fritos ... gosh , the farmers might actually make a return on their investmest , finally for once getting rid of the need of subsidies to the farmers and rediculous payments NOT to grow products ...

Cheap cheap food has been US policy for years ... it's about time the farmers get some real money , ...

I'm all for people getting fair market value for their labor. Since we're putting market economics back into effect in this sector, then it is appropriate to eliminate agricultural subsidies as well.

With regards to subsidies, my understanding is that the vast majority of these dollars go to large agricultural corps and not to citizen Joe farmers, anyway. So count me in on eliminating this little bit of socialism. Of course if we're eliminating subsidies, then eliminating the mandatory ethanol requirement for gasoline goes along with that, since it is nothing more than a subsidy in thin disguise.

[dPrasse]

With regards to subsidies, my understanding is that the vast majority of these dollars go to large agricultural corps and not to citizen Joe farmers, anyway.

The average joe farmer is a large corporation these days ....

the ave Joes you think of died in vast numbers over the past 25 yrs ... starting in the early 80's .... Jimmy Carters 20% interest rates destroyed farmers , they borrowed to expand , the very thing the govt was telling farmers to do ... expand , feed the world with cheap food ...

The only way to survive in the farm world these days is to be incorporated (nobody in their right mind would invest 100,000's of thousands to a million dollars without incorporating) and large ...

The govt wanted the small farmers gone so they could dictate farm policy more easily ...

[DoctorDoom]

Ethanol is not a net energy source. It requires more energy in the production and delivery cycle than it can provide as a fuel. Ditto hydrogen.

The energy content of gasoline in BTUs/gallon is 125,000. For gasohol (90% gas, 10% ethanol), it's 120,000. Therefore, for the same amount of fuel, gasohol provides 96% of gasoline's energy. Therefore, all things considered, the mileage will be lower with gasohol. BTW, the content for straight ethanol is 84,600, 67.7% of gasoline. Pure ethanol as a motor vehicle fuel is thus impractical.

Ethanol as a supplement to petroleum-based fuels is reasonable. Ethanol as a substitute for them is a fairy tale on a par with wind and solar energy replacing nukes and coal in power generation.

[dPrasse]

Ethanol as a supplement to petroleum-based fuels is reasonable. Ethanol as a substitute for them is a fairy tale on a par with wind and solar energy replacing nukes and coal in power generation.

Agreed ....

As far as BTU "equivalants" for fuel in automobiles ,
on paper it does make a big difference ...
in the older carburator engines it makes a big difference ...

in todays computer controlled engines where the injection is precisely monitored and the spark timing is altered by computer , the difference is not quite the same ...

I notice no loss in fuel economy in my 460 powered F150 truck on long drives down the interstate between E10 and regular .... maybe the engines higher compression ratio and advanced spark and tuned carb all negate the theoretical differences ??

the dealers of E85 are screwing the consumers as their fuel should be much cheaper ...