« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Ethanol, the Fuel Only a Politician Could Love

By: Steve Maley (Diary)  |  March 14th, 2010 at 08:00 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

The Energy Information Agency (EIA) admits in its 2010 Annual Energy Outlook that, under present law, ethanol use in 2022 is projected to be almost a third less than the 35 million gallons-equivalent per year mandated by Congress way back in 2007.

What to do? The ethanol industry, with the blessing of Congress and the Obama Administration, is lobbying the EPA to mandate increased ethanol usage. This would be accomplished by increasing the allowable proportion of ethanol in gasoline from 10% to 15% (E10 to E15). In addition, ethanol lobbyists are pushing the administration for fleet mandates on automakers, to require a higher percentage of flex fuel vehicles (FFVs) capable of running on ethanol blends of up to 85% (E85).

The 70+ year experiment in central planning that was the Soviet Union ended in failure. Why can’t our political class learn from history?

By granting lucrative tax credits to finance the entree of Big Corn into the motor fuel business during times of high gasoline prices, Washington definitely has some skin in the game.

Conservatives hate ethanol because it represents an intrusion of Big Government into the marketplace. Tons of dough are being spent to try to develop an alternative fuel that represents a very poor alternative – perhaps even a net energy loss.

Liberals and Greens (at least the honest ones) quietly admit their disdain for corn based ethanol. Tax credits are “corporate welfare” for ADM and Cargill. You can’t name a crop that is more depleting of the soil. Corn requires heavy fertilization, which in turn runs off, polluting the Mississippi River Basin and the Gulf of Mexico. The ethanol production subsidy makes it more difficult to develop competing technologies.

The marketplace is not clamoring for more ethanol. To engineers and mechanics, it is underpowered and corrosive, thus hard on pipelines and rotating equipment. Last but not least is the impact that a distorted world price of corn has on the developing world’s food supply.

No, the only parties who are unabashed ethanol lovers are:

  • Big Corn
  • Corn Farmers & Corn States (especially Iowa)
  • Politicians (Congress & Iowa Caucus Presidential candidates)

The only thing efficient about corn ethanol is the Beltway process of turning taxpayer dollars into reliable votes.

Cross-posted at VladEnBlog.

Tags: , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • RedBeard

    When I bought my current pickup, the GMC dealer (before GM became Obama Motors) tried hard to push me into a dual-fuel model. I smelled a rat (the smell of greenie political pressure) and refused. The poor dealer had a lot full of unsold dual-fuel models, and very few others. Seemed like they bought into the hype.

    Ethanol is about as practical as a rubber screwdriver.

    • http://www.dcworksforus.com Kenny Solomon

      It’s made by a company called ‘Democrat Tools’, purportedly the only manufacturer remaining within the borders of Washington DC.

      The big one is marked as ‘Harry’.

      The next one down is ‘Da Reed’.

      Another large one has ‘H-Wax’ engraved in the handle. Don’t know what that means – no wax screws made that I know of.

      A fourth I think is named – well, I can’t tell – It begins with an ‘N’ and ends with a ‘y’…… There’s way too many scratches, dents and dings on the entire handle and shaft to figure it out, plus it’s unusable anyway because the head is a total mess.

      But the one that I have to deal with the most in the kit is the ‘Alcee’. It’s something I call a ‘reverse screwdriver’. It’s got to be made of some seriously defective material because no matter what I try to do with it, the thing turns only one way and it even disappears at random for months at a time.

      ;)

      Cheers !

      • RedBeard

        Does it have two very large tips, as if designed to go into two very large side-by-side holes?

        Pretty limited utility, I must say. ;-)

  • acat

    It’s a better “oxygen-additive” for fuel than MTBE as it doesn’t contaminate groundwater.

    It lets ADM grab some turf from the “seven sisters”.

    It lets politicians from corn-belt states encourage their farmers to plant and harvest *fully* – no empty fields, no subsidies for not planting. (remember that boondoggle, everyone?)

    The thing to keep in mind is the current food-into-fuel model (which is insane on the face of it) isn’t the long-term goal. That’s basically a sugar-to-alcohol transformation that moonshiners have been performing since before recorded history.

    The goal is cellulose-to-alcohol, which is a bit trickier but could convert everything from corn stalks to waste paper to tree branches into fuel. That’s not quite ready for prime time yet, alas, although it sounds like commercial plants are getting closer.

    Mew

    • eastbaylarry

      Although a better idea than corn, there still remains the problem of where to get the megatons of cellulose. Clear-cut our forests? Try to raise “cellulose” crops on marginal land?

      Where can ANY alcohol source come from without either reducing the world food supply or destroying native growths?

      • acat

        Not sure where you’re located, East Bay Larry, but I’m guessing it’s not in the midwest, where there’s acres and acres of corn *stalks* (not ears of corn, just the 7-8′ stems left behind) or soybean leaves and stems, same with potatoes, or my personal favorite – yard waste like what ends up in the lawnmower bag, plants that didn’t make it, tree limbs that came down or needed pruning…

        For a change, picking up such “yard waste” could become for-profit instead of getting hauled away and dumped into a special “composted landfill” or turned into firewood.

        Another thought is paper recycling. It’s still cellulose, even with some ink on it, and since conversion to alcohol doesn’t require the same long cellulose fibers that “high quality” paper requires, it should be a logical end to the recycling chain.

        A final thought is scraps left over by pulp wood and timber farms. The growers don’t use the whole pine tree – needles don’t make good paper or good lumber – frequently these “leftovers” are just burned in the field. Why not convert it to fuel to run the chainsaws, eh?

        As far as crops go, there’s a variety of bamboo, “giant bamboo” seems to be the Americanization, that produces quite a lot of cellulose over a fairly short period (compared to other grasses and to trees like the Southern Yellow Pine.

        Mew

        • edintexas

          Anyone who would propose planting bamboo extensively is unaware of bamboo’s ability to escape confinement and spread everywhere. It would probably be worse than Kudzu – and for those outside the South, it was a disaster of an import which still clings to almost everything in the southern states.

          And while ethanol is wonderful as Everclear, it is crap as a fuel. It can’t make it in the marketplace without substantial subsidy, which is the fact which tells us how good it isn’t.

          As for Archer Daniel Midland needing any help – that’s a bunch of crap – just like the ethanol their lobbying has forced us to pay for at least twice. Once with our tax money and once at the pump, plus the problems the corrosive nature of the stuff causes in transporting and using the fuels containing it.

          • edintexas

            I also forgot to mention that alcohol from cellulose has, indeed, been the Holy Grail of the alcohol pushers. And so far their efforts have delivered less alcohol than a single one of the persistent shiners which ATFE can’t seem to totally eradicate.

            As for MTBE, indeed it was found in the water table in California. Came from leaking in-ground gasoline tanks. At least partially as a result of that find, EPA has required underground gasoline storage tanks to be replaced across the country. Whether the US chemical industry could have found another compound which would do the job and not migrate to the water table is an open question since the industry wasn’t asked to do so. And we don’t know if the tank replacement would have worked, since the change wasn’t given a chance to work.

            Regarding full planting and not paying for fallow fields, who says we should be paying not to plant? The “family farmer” is gone, having either gotten out, or forced to become a larger operation. This program didn’t save him. Why would anyone who considers himself “conservative” even consider using the issue of paying for farmers to not plant as a valid argument for spending taxpayer’s money on another program? Heck, might as well use the “I’m for it because it will save the world from Global Warming!” argument.

          • acat

            Greetings Ed.

            Having seen “escaped” bamboo in Virginia, and escaped kudzu in Georgia, I have to tell you the bamboo is nicer to look at, and has more natural opportunists who will keep it in check, be they college kids harvesting it for cheap decor or animals eating the green leaves and stalks. Unlike kudzu, bamboo can be harvested “in situ” or torn out completely – also it doesn’t compete well with native forests, and doesn’t kill trees outright.

            Texas, being grasslands, may have a different reaction but since cattle won’t touch kudzu but may well eat young bamboo (it’s a grass, after all) I’m seeing this as an unknown and possibly an opportunity instead of a problem.

            My point regarding pay-for-fallow is that it’s stupid, as you say, but that converting from pay-for-fallow to pay-for-ethanol would be less disruptive to the area economies and, long term, easier to convert to no pay at all. It’s steps in the right direction. Don’t get me started on the global warming hoax.

            Cellulose-to-alcohol is the “holy grail” – and it can be done in laboratory-quantities. It cannot be done in industrial quantities yet, although the last I heard the Germans were quite close.

            Mew

  • bk

    We know it raises consumer prices due to the impact to corn, but does it even cut down on the uses of gasoline? If you get lower gas mileage with an ethanol blend, then aren’t you using almost as much gas as you would have been were it just gasoline and not a blend?

    Example with made-up numbers – could be off in either direction.
    - Let’s say I get 20 miles a gallon and can drive 360 miles on my 18-gallon tank with “normal” gas.
    - Now let’s say an E10 blend lowers gas mileage by 10%. Now it takes me 20 gallons to go 300 miles at 18 mpg. This is 18 gallons of gas and 2 gallons of ethanol.

    Either way I used the same amount of gas, but one waste a bunch of corn and makes me stop at the gas station more frequently.

    Similarly, if gas becomes E10 and the price stays the same I’m losing money just on the gas. Even if the gas price drops a little I break even at best, except for having to fill up more frequently.

    • bk
      • ColoKid

        subsidizes retail ethanol blended gas to the extent of $.10 per gallon. I’m sure the other Corn Belt states do similar things. At current prices, this is about a 4% savings from regular gas. But the consumer gets about 10% poorer mileage from the ethanol blend. Most people have no clue about the gas mileage their vehicle gets and simply buy the cheaper ethanol blend. So they save 4% to lose 10%. Consumer illiteracy sure doesn’t help the problem.

        • eastbaylarry

          the subsidy also comes out of their pocket.

    • mosander

      One is to look like they are doing something “positive” and two is to drive up the price of corn and starve people in third world countries by raising the cost food. The really dumb part is sugar cane makes more ethanol than corn. There is another boon to manufacturers. The rubber/plastic grommets, diaphrams, seals and hoses are demolished by the ethanol fuel (shelf-life – 30 days). This is why lawn mowers, boat motors and other chain saw/lawn equipment fail so often. A major safety issue is destruction of fuel tank linings in boats and mowers; also rubber hoses causes corrosion and major risk of fire. Instead Congress should promote bio-diesel (shelf life > 1 year), which is less combustible and smells better and has less pollution and has great mpg compared to gasoline/ethanol mix, Congress continues to do destructive things to engines nationwide.

    • nateiniowa

      E-85 has a 10 – 15% decrease in MPG, not E-10. The ideal blend is between e-30 and E-40. It is like a curve when it comes to ethnaol blends. Depending on the engin, E-35 is the prime.

      I run E-85 in my truck and loose about 10% on MPG. The price diference is over 20% ($2.65 for E-10 or $1.99 for E-85).

      On 20 gals, my range on E-85 is 360 mi. My range on E-10 is 400 mi. The range on straight unleaded is 400 mi.

      The 20 gals breaks down this way … E-85 – 3 gal Unleaded, 17 gal Ethanol, E-10 18 gal Unleaded, 2 gal Ethanol and straight unleaded 20 gal.

      Doing the math for 20 gal:
      E-85 – $39.80 360 mi 18MPG fuel 120MPG Petro 21MPG Ethanol
      E-10 – $53.80 20 MPG 22 MPG Petro 200 MPG Ethanol
      Straight Unleaded – $55.00 20 MPG 20 MPG Petro 0 MPG Ethano

      Why does the Indy Car circut use E-99? Becuase it has high octain ratings. E-85 is 105 vs premium unleaded of 95. The power is as great as regular gas without the smoke.

      Don’t forget, we pay farmers for ethanol, not third world countries who want to kill us. The money stays in the US and provides US Jobs. It is renewable. It has fewer greenhouse gases then Petro. The inputs are all American made (Nitrogen in the fertilizer is from US natrual gas, which we have over a 100 year supply, rain, soil and farm equipment made in the US. Most farmers are using B-10 Diesel, so that input is less dependent on those before mentioned third world countries. They also rotate crops in order not to deplete the land, What corn uses from the soil, soybeans replace and vice versa.

      Is it the best fuel source? We have not found the best fuel source yet, but it is the best one in mass production at this time.

      • bk

        Found a piece in the Des Moines Register saying that there’s supposedly a small dropoff in E10 and a 20% dropoff in E85.
        Ref: http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060827/OPINION03/608250397/1035/OPINION

        Most places I’ve checked seem to use 3% as a rule of thumb for E10. Based on what you’ve tracked, YMMV. (pun intended)

        BTW I don’t see what Indy cars have to do with anything – they’re going to have engines custom built to use some particular type of fuel. I wouldn’t necessarily use the same wheels or tires they do for the same reason – apples vs oranges.

        • derhoosier

          Right, those IRL engines will pretty only run right on the fuel they’re designed for. And, BTW — that fuel is Brazilian– not Hawkeye. Iowans weren’t too happy about that when that went down and you’ll notice where the IRL opened its season this past weekend…

    • acat

      Not sure where you’re at, bk, but most of the U.S. mixes something into the gas to raise the oxygen content and make it burn cleaner.

      In Cali, they use a nasty little compound, MTBE, that contaminates groundwater. In Illinois (and Iowa and the rest of the corn belt) they use ethanol. Not necessarily from corn, although that is the usual source.

      Also, as I’ve said before, the current food-to-fuel is stupid, but it’s an ADM stopgap until cellulose-to-fuel (i.e. paper, wood, grass clippings) can be made to work on an industrial scale.

      Mew

      • bk
  • Paul_In_Houston

    The 70+ year experiment in central planning that was the Soviet Union ended in failure. Why can?t our political class learn from history?

    Because we are dealing with a cult religion and to actually learn from experience would amount to heresy.
    -

  • dsmurf

    is damaging to the lawnmower engine, so my 95 clunker gets almost 30 mpg on premium and about 23-25 on regular, our 2003 gets a maintenance light warning within a week if anything less than premium is used.
    So they push this and the Slaughter amendment and I’ll be ready to wish a sink hole on the farm states, Greens and Bush and whoever else signed this jolly stuff, Obama and his alternative energy zealotry, into law.

    Good grief :(

    • acat

      And is required (at least in Illinois) to be clearly marked on the pumps.

      If you require non-E-10, good luck, because it’s also required legally to meet EPA standards. Not Obama’s EPA, IIRC it’s a patchwork of each State EPA, which is one reason gas prices are so high – what Shell sells in Illinois to meet the Illinois EPA isn’t the same mix they sell in Michigan or Iowa …

      If your car is getting a light if you’re not using premium, then either there’s something wrong with the car, or it’s an engine that requires something cleaner than regular – you’re not posting octane levels but I noticed that the low-end in Illinois is 85 octane, while in some western states there’s lower octane stuff marketed as “regular”.

      Mew

  • http://pocketchangeproductions.net/ anotherindyfilmguy

    Because they are addicted to power and in denial of reality.

    Like any other addict nothing changes until the addict wants it to change/faces the problem head on or the addict hits rock bottom and is removed from society…

    The big question is always which comes first… and a historic perspective does not matter to them, because they are *different* or *zealots* whose mission itself is more important to them than the real world consequences of their actions…

  • http://truthupfront.blogspot.com jsanzone

    Ethanol is right up there with global warming as an “idea” that simultaneously sank honest, decent environmentalism and faith in government.

  • midwest

    acat and nateiniowa make some good points ….

    for one thing, chemicals are expensive, and improved practices keep most of them in the field, not down the river. Also farmers are getting smarter about how much is necessary to apply, and better products also reduce usage.

    The “corn should only be for food” idea strikes me as odd also. If there was such a shortage, wouldn’t it cost more than $3.50 for a whole bushel? That’s a lot of corn bread. And is there some reason we should give away our corn, while

    Also … higher prices for our grains helps our trade balance, since we don’t export many other products. Plus there is a food by product from the ethanol process that feeds livestock.

    Some old studies (eg. Pimentel) that were as wrong as AGW even in their day, are still trotted out to say it takes more than a gallon of fuel to produce a gallon of ethanol. That was wrong then, and much more wrong now with improved technologies. And yeah, better crops than corn may be engineered in time … or even better varieties of corn specifically for ethanol.

    Many farmers would just as soon do away with the subsidies, I just have a very few acres, and the paperwork is just a hassle. But I guess if corn was $2/bushel farmers might need it, and we want a secure food supply. But coming up with more uses for the product makes more sense than handing out more subsidies.

    And not enriching foreign enemies makes sense … as would the “drill baby drill” in the US approach.

    http://corncommentary.com/2010/02/23/government-earns-400-roi-on-ethanol-blenders-credit/

  • e85prices

    The United States imports 68% of the Oil we need , 18% directly from the Bloody Middle East

    We subsidize the building of Palaces and grandeur in places like Dubai , we subsidize Kings and Princes and we subsidize the bloody terrorist ..each time we fill up on OPEC gasoline

    We subsidize them with the blood of our Soldiers and as well as with hundreds of billions each year

    The beauty of ethanol is that it doesn’t require any expensive changes to the vehicles we already drive. It literally costs less than $100 for the Auto Industry to turn a non-FFV into a flex fuel vehicle.

    The Fuel Mapping is changed on the cars computer and sometimes larger fuel injectors.. everything is is the same .

    Ethanol is produced here in the US , providing much needed jobs all across the United States.. tens of Billions that is STAYING in the US instead of going to OPEC.

    While ethanol also gets subsidies (what Industry doesnt ?) at least that money stays HERE .. providing jobs , helping local Cities and Towns.

    We produce nearly 12 Billion gallons of ethanol this year (2 billion more gallons than 2008) and the price of corn has dropped from high of $8 a bushel in late 2008 to less than $4 a bushel today .

    That’s $4 for 56 POUNDS of corn… How many of you would invest a million or 2 into farm land and farm equipment and be happy making $4 a bushel ? ..enough of the corn is expensive nonsense.

    Next Generation Ethanol has already started ..

    Coskata.com has GM as a Partner.

    Costkata can turn any carbon based feedstock ..from wood chips to garbage , industrial waste and even old tires into ethanol..they are already producing at there pilot plant and selling licensing for their process.

    Range Fuels in Georgia begins Production next Q ..producing Ethanol from wood waste feedstock

    Algenol is gearing up for ethanol from Algae

    Bluefire ..

    “BlueFire’s technology has demonstrated production of ethanol and other petroleum displacing fuels from urban trash (post-sorted MSW), rice and wheat straws, wood waste and other agricultural residues.”

    and a 100 other cellulosic ethanol companies are in various stages of production ..some finalizing research , some finalizing loans to begin production. some running pilot plants and gearing up full production.

    Corn ethanol has been a fantastic …it’s “job” has been to be a stepping stone to cellulosic ethanol.. a cheap way to get the volume of ethanol need to make it worthwhile to invest in cellulose ethanol.

    Corn ethanol will continue as a base .. a foundation but the reality is that cellulosic ethanol is already here and is where all the investments ..private investment to Government incentives is going.

    Having Ethanol reduces our need for foreign oil , provides jobs here in the united States, uses the same combustion engine we already use AND in high blends like E85 allows the consumer to actually VOTE at the pump.. American Made Ethanol or OPE$C produced Gasoline..

    Dan McCullough
    E85Prices.com