Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Quote: That consistent message was laid out by Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, who spoke to ethanol lobbyists on Capitol Hill recently and said ethanol was good for business. "We are committed to this industry because we understand its benefits," he said. "We understand it's about farm income. It's about stabilizing and maintaining farm income which is at record levels." |
Quoting casinterest (Reply 3): The downside of corn ethanol is well known. However their are other far better sources for ethanol than corn. The technology is ramping up, and eventually other types of ethanol will be added to the mix to mitigate the issues with corn ethanol production. |
Quoting ImperialEagle (Thread starter): I guess it all boils down to that the planet was just never meant to support the level of human population we now have. |
Quoting doug_Or (Reply 4): My understanding is that Brazil has had a fairly good go of using sugar for ethanol, does anyone know if this is accurate? |
Quoting doug_Or (Reply 4): (t)he corn ethanol industry in the US is a counterproductive waste of time, money, and energy. It has nothing to do with the environment and everything to do with helping subsidize farmers. |
Quoting doug_Or (Reply 4): My understanding is that Brazil has had a fairly good go of using sugar for ethanol, does anyone know if this is accurate |
Quoting casinterest (Reply 3): "And when President George W. Bush signed a law that year requiring oil companies to add billions of gallons of ethanol to their gasoline each year, Bush predicted it would make the country "stronger, cleaner and more secure."" |
Quoting fridgmus (Reply 8): From what some motorcycle mechanics have told me, ethanol is very bad for motorcycle engines. |
Quoting scbriml (Reply 5): What population is the Earth meant to support? |
Quoting okie (Reply 7): It is time to let the ethanol production stand on its own and curtail subsidies and feed the poor. Unfortunately the Obama administration does not want to hear that. |
Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 9): It's horrible for any engine |
Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 1): And there's the problem right there. The program has nothing to do anymore with green energy or energy independence - it's about making sure a powerful political lobby gets tons of money through government mandates. |
Quoting AyostoLeon (Reply 12): I can also understand that diverting from food production to fuel production may distort the market for some food products, but my questions are related to the practical side of things in terms of ethonal based fuels as an alternative to conventional fuels. |
Quoting AyostoLeon (Reply 12): If cars can be engineered to operate on ethanol fuels rather than fossil fuels, are they inherently less efficient both in terms of miles per gallon or price per gallon? |
Quoting doug_Or (Reply 4): My understanding is that Brazil has had a fairly good go of using sugar for ethanol, does anyone know if this is accurate? |
Quoting doug_Or (Reply 4): It has nothing to do with the environment and everything to do with helping subsidize farmers. |
Quoting okie (Reply 7): It is time to let the ethanol production stand on its own and curtail subsidies and feed the poor. Unfortunately the Obama administration does not want to hear that. |
Quoting okie (Reply 7): Your quote is at least 7 years old but |
Quoting blueflyer (Reply 6): I'm sure it has to do with subsidizing farmers, especially the largest, most profitable ones, but I do think there's more to it. That the largest corn crop comes from Iowa, the same state that proudly claims to be "first in the nation" when it comes to presidential primaries, has certainly something to do with it as well. |
Quoting okie (Reply 7): Unfortunately the Obama administration does not want to hear that. |
Quoting AyostoLeon (Reply 12): Okie mentions the increased fuel requirement to achieve the same horse power |
Quoting okie (Reply 19): The stoichiometric air to fuel ratio is 9:1 for ethanol and 13.7:1 for gasoline. So it takes about 1.5 times the amount of ethanol to produce the same amount of energy. That in itself equates to 15% additional fuel usage for a 10% ethanol mixture. I will not get into having to have Rich of Stoichiometric charge required for acceleration but you can pretty much take the 18% as a conservative average of additional fuel usage for 10% Ethanol. |
Quoting NSMike (Reply 20): Ethanol has 34% less energy content than gasoline so a 10% ethanol blend would not decrease fuel economy by 15%... more like 3%. |
Quoting okie (Reply 21): edit: I checked with my friend that operates a fleet of 180 3/4 ton pickups. He says that cost wise with the lower cost of 90% that it runs him about 5% more in costs to run the 90%. Maybe that is where you are getting your 3% number. They operate with company fuel card that is not usable at any station nor does every station that takes the card have 100% gasoline. He has no fuel policy for his employees. |
Quoting ImperialEagle (Reply 10): Why, Mars, of course |
Quoting okie (Reply 21): You have to make it burn, that is a stoichiometric charge 1.5 to 1 ratio roughly. That does not equate to 3% |
Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 1): it's about making sure a powerful political lobby gets tons of money through government mandates |
Quoting scbriml (Reply 5): What population is the Earth meant to support? |
Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 27): Only the Chinese have really addressed the population problem, the Chinese population will drop to around 700m by the end of this centuary whereas the numpties next door in India will have well over 2 billion at current reproductive levels. |
Quoting okie (Reply 19): The stoichiometric air to fuel ratio is 9:1 for ethanol and 13.7:1 for gasoline. So it takes about 1.5 times the amount of ethanol to produce the same amount of energy. That in itself equates to 15% additional fuel usage for a 10% ethanol mixture. I will not get into having to have Rich of Stoichiometric charge required for acceleration but you can pretty much take the 18% as a conservative average of additional fuel usage for 10% Ethanol. |
Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 27): About 4 billion is apparently the realistic limit. We close to double that today. The planet is close to f.ucked, mainly because there are far to many of us. |
Quoting okie (Reply 19): The stoichiometric air to fuel ratio is 9:1 for ethanol and 13.7:1 for gasoline. So it takes about 1.5 times the amount of ethanol to produce the same amount of energy. |