Domestic Fuel

[...] The University of Florida Gators are National Champions again this year and now a UF student has won free ethanol-enriched fuel for a year. … See all stories on this topic [...]

Everyone??? As a UF grad myself – along with my husband (both TEL 1980) – we would have to seriously disagree. We believe there are both economic and environmental benefits. The revitalizing of rural communities that we have witnessed here in the Midwest is just one example.

I am sure farmers are very happy for receiving subsidies paid for by the rest of America for a product that reduces mileage, does not reduce polution but does create 4 gallons of toxic waste for every gallon of low-performance ethanol.

As you freeze your keesters off up there due to “global warming”, the farce that created ethanol in the first place.

Lets use our heads instead of our emotions to address this problem. Ethanol is BAD FOR AMERICA and should have to stand up to the economics of a true capitalist market and not one of subsidies, by me and the rest of America.

Go Gators

Again, you forgot to mention the 4 gallons of toxic waste that has to be treated for every gallon of ethanol.

Ethanol CANNOT provide more power than gasoline. Have you ever heard of a BTU? Look at the ratings for both.

Ethanol supports American farmers only because they get subsidies for their products. Ethanol has 49 cents a gallon subsidies on it..it would NOT be competitive against gasoline.

Yes, gas comes from oil which is a fossil fuel..so what…so, I ask this question..what is a NATURAL resource…oil or ethanol?

While farmers get rich in the midwest, Americans get poorer for funding the subsidies and the HUGE PRICE INCREASES in everyday staples…all because 40% of our corn stocks go to feed cars instead of people.

See, you environmental people don’t care that humans starve, just as long as we don’t use fossil fuels.

Lets us use our heads.

First generation ethanol cost competitive down to below $2/gallon. First generation “corn” ethanol will get you 5,670 miles per acre farmland production with a 14 mpg vehicle. Second generation cellulose 9,450 miles/acre at 14 mpg. Third generation cellulose already in pilot plant operations 28,350 miles at 14 mpg.

Now consider the 3rd generation engines to push mileage of ethanol blended fuels to typical 25 mpg. These engines already in test prototype stage featuring direct injection, high compression, variable valve timing, turbo’d, etc. That would calculate out to a single acre of farm land producing enough fuel energy for 50,625 miles. These 3rd generation engines just improvement upon carnot cycle not including hybrid technology.

A 4th generation engine pushes mileage higher. For example, Transonic corp. currently testing technology to further improve carnot engine efficiencies. They have developed engine technology to greatly improve mileage. Ultra high compression, look ahead algorithms for combustion control, and new generation injectors. They project 100 mpg autos. Flex fueled engines able to burn diesel, unleaded, and biofuels. No hybrid technology, but plug in hybrid could be adapted to increase mileage.

Did I mention approximately 12 companies in a competitive race to produce the lowest polluting, lowest cost producer of ethanol energy. Technology is amazing, but most think plain Jane corn ethanol still very handy, flexible, and improvements to processing will make it a very competative opponent. Lots of unproductive farmland about and many farmers interested in making more money. Crop hybrids, GMO, and modern farm technology, for instance, will produce some fine energy crops. Probably a mix of corn, sorghum, cane, etc.

David..you need to look up the definition of BTU. Ethanol will NEVER meet the BTU of refined gasoline. So, you can build whatever engine you want, you cannot make Ethanol burn one degree hotter.

Mike; David’s insult not warranted. You have accurate info. Yes, subsidies upon ethanol. Some tax breaks and protection or tariff on import ethanol. Jeff Broin CEO of Poet, if you ever get a chance to read his interviews is very interesting. This guy has it together and knows ethanol. One recent interview he lists the return on investment upon ethanol as one of the best investments the taxpayers could have made.

Yes, less btu on ethanol, but consider the high octane which very important for efficient engine combustion. Ethanol actually best suited for diesel i.e. E95. Diesel engines about 30% more efficient from get go….so that would put ethanol above unleaded for fuel mileage. Yes, diesel fuel the king of btu and a diesel running diesel fuel the mileage champ. But, ethanol beats unleaded if exploited to the carnot cycle.

The pollution or waste water not a big problem as not toxic. It’s basically dirty water. Water that biologically active and a superb affluent for gardening. No, not good to dump in river as it has to much nutrients, but farmers love the water for field crops.

I’m jazzed upon the technology and fuel…lol can you tell? It will be good for country. But as you say the open market the best decision maker. My wish would be to continue the success, bolstered by some public monies for short term untill the technology can percolate to best in class. I would hope the country would max out petro, natural gas, oil exploration, oil shale, tar sands, bio diesel, coal, nuclear, or what ever promising energy steam. My wishes or hope, the country would flip to a Saudi Arbia exporter of energy. To export technology and energy. To never, ever, beg to tyrants, socialists, and communist for our life blood. Instead drive their economy down and dis way any anti American sediment vulnerabilities. Talk gently, but carry a big stick. We really won’t endear ourselves to rest of world by committing energy hari kari as no energy solution is utopia. Not wind, not solar, not fuel cells.

I didn’t insult anyone and didn’t intend to. I apologize if I did.

“David..you need to look up the definition of BTU. Ethanol will NEVER meet the BTU of refined gasoline. So, you can build whatever engine you want, you cannot make Ethanol burn one degree hotter.”
Why would I want ethanol to burn hotter?? I know it doesn’t. Heat is harmful to an engine so a cooler burning engine would be better.

I agree the government has blown global warming out of proportion. It exists to a degree but I don’t think we are going to “cook” the Earth any time soon. Ethanol uses and replaces the same amount of CO2 so it is “pollution neutral”(not the right term but you get the point).
Using Ethanol, biodiesel and whatever other alternative fuel is important and the sooner the better. Whats happens in 20 years when oil runs out(or the tap slows dramatically)? It’s already been proven(and even by big oil) that we have past peak oil. We are using fossils fuels way faster than they are being made and any fuel made out of plant/tree material is renewable as long as the sun shines. If the sun stops shining we wont be around anyways.

“Americans have been led to believe that the new “foo-foo” energies are going to replace oil, coal and nuclear in 10 years. Read some of these posts. They ACTUALLY BELIEVE that this is going to happen.”
Why couldn’t this happen?? Brazil is on there way if they haven’t done it already. Now before you say it, I’m not out there beating that drum because it may not but why shouldn’t that be the goal? The US really needs to change the crop of choice for making ethanol but at this point that isn’t going to happen.

Mike,
You seem to overlook the fact that even after almost 100 years of use in this country, the OIL industry continues to be subsidized. Just one example is $18 billion in tax breaks for multinational oil companies. What about the US Strategic petroleum reserve? There are numerous other examples. Not to mention the fact that one of the so-called ethanol “subsidies” – the 54 tax credit for blenders – actually goes to oil companies not anyone who grows corn or makes ethanol.

Mike,
I have to agree with you there – too bad it will never happen. Certainly not with the new administration and congress – instead it will be more and higher taxes and even more subsidies. Makes no sense to me.