The Insanity We Call Ethanol

[KD5NRH]

I think we need Sally Fields' input.

Rendered down for fuel?  Rosie O'Donnell would be much more effective.

[Scout26]

Bringing this one back from the dead as it seems ethanol won't die.

Just to sum-up:
1) It reduces Gas Mileage.
2) It costs more to produce.
3) It uses more energy to produce than it does when used.
4) It requires a subsidy (from taxpayers) to produce.
5) It causes gas prices to be higher (see points #2 and #5).
6) It increase food prices (42% of the US corn crop went to Ethanol).
7) The EPA fines oil companies millions of dollars for not using Cellulosic Ethanol even though not one drop of CE has ever been commercially produced.
8) And now they are pushing for E-15 which causes even worse mileage while ruining your engine and fuel lines/tanks.

What's not to love in Washington?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/aug/15/beauprez-epas-renewable-fuel-folly/

[Brad Johnson]

Whoever wrote that story needs to do a LOT better job at lending perspective, and stop using Facebook and the Wayback Machine for their facts.

1) Yes, but only by 1-5 percent, depending on ethanol concentration.
2) Only if you consider the ethanol to be the sole economically valuable result of the production process.  (Like looking at gasoline as the only product of crude oil refining)
3) See response #2
4) No, it doesn't.  Ethanol is plenty viable in the market without a subsidy of any kind.  Vehicle fuel isn't the only market for it by a long shot.
5) See response #1
6) WTF came up with that pile of bovine feces?  Uses of corn, 2012/13, Nebraska Corn Board - Ethanol 36%, Feed 27%, Exports 18%, Other processing 12%, Carryout 5%, Exports 2%.  And field corn used for ethanol production IS! NOT! THE! SAME! THING! as sweet corn (the kind that us human animals eat).  Also the amount of corn we export (sell cheap, or often just give away) and the amount not produced on lands set aside under CRP or shifted to more profitable use exceeds, by some estimates, the amount of corn used in ethanol production.  In short, the whole "It-Drives-Up-Food-Prices-OMG-We're-All-Gonna-Die!" argument is so much uneducated alarmist hooey.
7) If your vehicle is less than ten years old then it's already set up to tolerate oxygenated fuels, including those containing ethanol.  That argument had some merit back in the early 2000s when it was first proposed, but it's no longer an issue for the VAST majority of motorists.  The EPA CE debacle?  Completely unrelated.  Stupid and decidedly moronic, but unrelated.

[Matthew Carberry]

Feed corn used for ethanol is also used as animal food or displaces other kinds of animal food right?

If ethanol isn't -mandated- for use in fuel then lack of demand for that particular market for ethanol for fuel by consumers (because it sucks) will either cause more to be available for booze, lowering booze costs, for animal feed, lowering the cost of meat, or other crops will be grown instead, lowering those crops products costs.

The problem is the mandate, the market should be free on general principles.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/ftpdocs/100xx/doc10057/04-08-ethanol.pdf

[AZRedhawk44]

I filled up with the mandated 10% ethanol garbage we have in Maricopa County and drove around, got 16.9mpg.

I filled up with 100% real gas up in Payson.  Drove around, got 18.5mpg.


Vehicle is a 2005 Dodge Ram 1500 SLT with 4.7L V8.

That's a 10% loss of fuel economy, with 10% fake gas.

[Waitone]

I've done the same thing.  Non-ethanol gas gives my '97 3.0 L truck 10-12% better mileage depending on the kind of driving.

[AZRedhawk44]

http://pure-gas.org/index.jsp?stateprov=AZ

I'm trying to figure out how these guys in the Maricopa County area are able to sell pure gas as this site reports.

I'll spin by a couple of them over the next few days.  It's supposedly a $100,000 fine and jail time to deliberately sell non-ethanol gas in Maricopa County.

If they're still pure gas, I'll make an effort to fill up at least half the time at the half dozen or so stations listed in my area.

[brimic]

) No, it doesn't.  Ethanol is plenty viable in the market without a subsidy of any kind.  Vehicle fuel isn't the only market for it by a long shot.

Its plenty viable, if its used for anything else but fuel.

6) WTF came up with that pile of bovine feces?  Uses of corn, 2012/13, Nebraska Corn Board - Ethanol 36%, Feed 27%, Exports 18%, Other processing 12%, Carryout 5%, Exports 2%.  And field corn used for ethanol production IS! NOT! THE! SAME! THING! as sweet corn (the kind that us human animals eat).  Also the amount of corn we export (sell cheap, or often just give away) and the amount not produced on lands set aside under CRP or shifted to more profitable use exceeds, by some estimates, the amount of corn used in ethanol production.  In short, the whole "It-Drives-Up-Food-Prices-OMG-We're-All-Gonna-Die!" argument is so much uneducated alarmist hooey.

Do you actually do your own shopping? Have you noticed that the price of even the cheapest ground beef is about double what it was just a few years ago?
The corn that we are mandated to burn in our cors is the exact same corn used to feed the animals. Animals=meat.
To make this simple so that anyone can understand- the field corn used for ethanol production is in direct competition with the field corn used to make meat.

[æg151337]

Heh.  Looked up gas stations in WA.  No wonder I'd noticed better gas milage in both my truck and my wife's Camry when I'd fill up at one particular station.

Meh, Only 5 in california... 

[Brad Johnson]

I filled up with the mandated 10% ethanol garbage we have in Maricopa County and drove around, got 16.9mpg.

I filled up with 100% real gas up in Payson.  Drove around, got 18.5mpg.


Vehicle is a 2005 Dodge Ram 1500 SLT with 4.7L V8.

That's a 10% loss of fuel economy, with 10% fake gas.

There's only one problem, the math doesn't work.  Ethanol energy content is roughly two-thirds that of gasoline.  If you replace 10% of the gasoline with ethanol, then you are lowering the energy content of 10% of the total liquid volume by a third.  A third of 10% is 3%, so you have a 3% reduction in energy content of 10% ethanol blends vs 100% uncut gasoline.  You should see a corresponding 3% reduction in mileage.  Your experience showing three times that much indicates something else is amiss, and there are dozens of things that it could be.  Heck, it could even be a time of year issue.  Crappy high-volatility summer blend gasolines can have less energy content than a winter blend 10% ethanol mix.  Unless you have a direct, mile-for-mile, day-for-day, and vehicle-for-vehicle comparison, a blanket claim of efficiency reduction due strictly to the ethanol blended product is pretty shaky at best.

By the way, 18.5 to 16.9 is a reduction of 8.6%, not 10. 

To make this simple so that anyone can understand- the field corn used for ethanol production is in direct competition with the field corn used to make meat.

Then let me make it even simpler.  The price of corn has about as much to do with beef prices as the price of crude has to do with gasoline prices at the pump (read: very little).  Those prices are independently determined by the market.  Those of us who grew up in, and are still deeply involved with, the ranching industry can only wish retail beef pricing were as simple and direct as you propose. 

Brad

[HankB]

1) Yes, but only by 1-5 percent, depending on ethanol concentration.

Incorrect.

The "official" claims are for a 3% penalty, but personal experience - and that of colleagues at work - consistently showed more like a 10% penalty.

Used to live in Minnesota, and frequently had to make business trips from the Twin Cities down to New Ulm, about 110 miles each way; normally stayed down there for several days to a week when we were scaling up a new product in the factory. Once the MN legislature mandated alcohol dilution of gas in the Twin Cities, fuel economy dropped. Filling up in the TC and driving down to New Ulm yielded a clear difference from filling up in New Ulm and returning - a difference that didn't show up before the ethanol dilution was mandated.

Oh, and WHY is ethanol mandated? A local MN news station did a little study, and found almost a perfect correlation between legislators who pushed for ethanol dilution of fuel, and legislators who received campaign contributions or jobs for family members from Archer-Daniels Midland, then one of the largest produces of ethanol fuel in the Midwest and possibly the nation. Hmmmm . . . .

[Brad Johnson]

Incorrect.

The "official" claims are for a 3% penalty, but personal experience - and that of colleagues at work - consistently showed more like a 10% penalty.

Used to live in Minnesota, and frequently had to make business trips from the Twin Cities down to New Ulm, about 110 miles each way; normally stayed down there for several days to a week when we were scaling up a new product in the factory. Once the MN legislature mandated alcohol dilution of gas in the Twin Cities, fuel economy dropped. Filling up in the TC and driving down to New Ulm yielded a clear difference from filling up in New Ulm and returning - a difference that didn't show up before the ethanol dilution was mandated.

The energy content of both liquids is known so it's a straight math problem.  If the result is different than the math predicts, that means there is something else besides the ethanol to blame.

Guys, I didn't invent the chemistry or the math I just put them to a calculator.

Brad

[tokugawa]

that stuff is nasty in small engines.

 And as soon as the dictators new EO on ammonium nitrate takes effect, I would bet the price goes way up, as it takes a lot of fertilizer to grow it.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

he use of ethanol in gasoline has increased substan-
tially over the past decade. Currently, most ethanol in the
United States is produced from domestically grown corn,
and the rapid rise in the fuel’s production and usage
means that roughly one-quarter of all corn grown in the
United States is now used to produce ethanol. Since
2006, food prices have also risen more quickly than in
earlier years, affecting federal spending for nutrition pro-
grams (such as school lunches) and the household bud-
gets of individual consumers. The increased use of etha-
nol accounted for about 10 percent to 15 percent of the
rise in food prices between April 2007 and April 2008,
the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates. In
turn, that increase will boost federal spending for the
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, for-
merly the Food Stamp program) and child nutrition pro-
grams by an estimated $600 million to $900 million in
fiscal year 2009. Last year, the use of ethanol reduced
gasoline consumption in th
e United States by about
4 percent and greenhouse-gas emissions from the trans-
portation sector by less than 1 percen

[Brad Johnson]

he use of ethanol in gasoline has increased substan-
tially over the past decade. Currently, most ethanol in the
United States is produced from domestically grown corn,
and the rapid rise in the fuel’s production and usage
means that roughly one-quarter of all corn grown in the
United States is now used to produce ethanol. Since
2006, food prices have also risen more quickly than in
earlier years, affecting federal spending for nutrition pro-
grams (such as school lunches) and the household bud-
gets of individual consumers. The increased use of etha-
nol accounted for about 10 percent to 15 percent of the
rise in food prices between April 2007 and April 2008,
the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates. In
turn, that increase will boost federal spending for the
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, for-
merly the Food Stamp program) and child nutrition pro-
grams by an estimated $600 million to $900 million in
fiscal year 2009. Last year, the use of ethanol reduced
gasoline consumption in th
e United States by about
4 percent and greenhouse-gas emissions from the trans-
portation sector by less than 1 percent

That's from a 2009 report using 2008 and prior data.  A lot has changed since then..  Updates?

Brad

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/2011/01/the-great-ethanol-debate/index.htm

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

http://community.cartalk.com/discussion/2285295/big-increase-in-mpg-since-switching-to-ethanol-free-gas
http://www.energytrendsinsider.com/2009/03/07/fuel-efficiency-of-ethanol-in-the-real-world/

[dm1333]

I wonder if we would be better off taking all that field corn and bombing middle east and south west asia countries with it.   

[Cliffh]

The new 15% Ethanol mix is going to wreak havoc on older vehicles and air cooled engines - including motorcycles.  My '90 truck isn't going to like it.  Likely to void some warranties too.

I've got the carcasses of a few not-so-old air cooled tools that were destroyed by the 10% crap.  That diagnosis was confirmed by two different small engine repair companies.

I used to drive a race car powered by a 2 cycle engine.  Ran it on pure alcohol.  Had to drain & clean the fuel system after every race day, or the alcohol would start eating parts.

[Azrael256]

The energy content of both liquids is known so it's a straight math problem.  If the result is different than the math predicts, that means there is something else besides the ethanol to blame.

Guys, I didn't invent the chemistry or the math I just put them to a calculator.

Brad

Straight energy content is not fuel mileage.  It's just not that simple.

Ethanol needs higher compression to burn efficiently.  If you didn't up the turbo boost... you do have a turbo, don't you... you just tossed some of your ethanol out the window.

You also adjusted your injectors to achieve the correct stoichiometric ratio, right?  You need different amounts of air to burn different fuels.

Oh, and the ignition timing.  You advanced that automatically based on the alcohol content of the fuel, right?

You may have a turbocharged flex-fuel car, so you can answer 'yes' to all of the above.  You may not.

BTU/gal != MPG.

Polyethylene has a slightly higher energy/volume (and the same energy/mass) as gasoline.  If we're only interested in energy content, shredded milk jugs should give you better MPG than pump gas.

[makattak]

6) WTF came up with that pile of bovine feces?  Uses of corn, 2012/13, Nebraska Corn Board - Ethanol 36%, Feed 27%, Exports 18%, Other processing 12%, Carryout 5%, Exports 2%.  And field corn used for ethanol production IS! NOT! THE! SAME! THING! as sweet corn (the kind that us human animals eat).  Also the amount of corn we export (sell cheap, or often just give away) and the amount not produced on lands set aside under CRP or shifted to more profitable use exceeds, by some estimates, the amount of corn used in ethanol production.  In short, the whole "It-Drives-Up-Food-Prices-OMG-We're-All-Gonna-Die!" argument is so much uneducated alarmist hooey.

Allow me to introduce you to a friend of mine. Opportunity Cost, Brad. Brad, Opportunity Cost.

The land used for Ethanol could, and WOULD, barring Government interference, be used to grow some other crop, likely food. (To say nothing of the fertilizer, pesticides, water, and other inputs into Ethanol corn.)

Does the Government do other things to distort the market and raise the price of food? Of course, its tentacles are in everything. That, however, does not mean we ought to support this stupid Government meddling. It just means we ought to also end those other ones as well.

[JonnyB]

Also, Brad, humans don't eat only sweet corn. Your basic corn meal, corn syrup, corn sugar, corn starch, etc., all come from standard field corn.

Only kernel-type corn is sweet corn.

jb

[Stand_watie]

http://www.mlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/ken_braun_ethanol_night_at_the.html

Ken Braun: Here's why ethanol is a profoundly immoral waste of money

[drewtam]