Corn and Ethanol.

[FUTURESTRADER]

This type of Fuel (I think it is called E85) taught me a lesson last year that I would have never believed but it happened to me.

June of 2009 I bought me a Brand New Stihl Blower. Before that blower I also had a Stihl blower that lasted me 12 years. I use my blower allot. I live on 2.5 acres and my driveway is 275 feet long. On average I blow the driveway of all the debris once a week. The new Stihl blower worked great. Easy to start, idle and throttle response great just like the first one I had. During the winter of 2009 I didn't use the blower that much maybe once a month. Now Spring of 2010 rolls around I go to use the blower not thinking twice that it will run fine just like it (they) always do. The blower had not been used for maybe 6 weeks. Well it was a pain in the butt to get started and after I finally got it started it would not run at full throttle at all. The machine is still under warranty (and even if it wasn't) and I take it to the Stihl dealer where I bought it and explained the problem. They told me that they have a tremendous backlog in there service department and it would take awhile before they call me to tell me what the problem is and whether it will be covered under warranty. Twelve day's later they called me and told me the unit needs a new carburetor. I'm like what ?, Why ? They asked me if I had been using E85 fuel in it. I'm like I don't know. I go to the gas station with a 5 gallon can get gas come home and mix the appropriate amount of oil so I have all 5 gallons mixed. Well that was the wrong answer. They tried to tell me that the unit would not be covered under warranty because I had probably used E85 fuel in it and the shelf life is only 30 day's as in you can not have that kind of fuel in the unit for more than 30 days. It deteriorates the gaskets inside the carburetor.

To make a long story shorter I did get them to cover fixing the blower under warranty only because I buy most of my equipment from them and after they checked my history of purchases through them they didn't want to lose me as a customer.

But who would have known that the shelf life is so short for this type of fuel. This year during the winter I drained as much gas out of it as possible and than ran the machine until it was completely out of gas. So in another month or so when I put fuel in it I better not have a problem with it. That machine is not cheap. $285.00

That was not a good experience for me with this fuel.

Poolman - E85 is pretty clearly marked at all stations. A lot of gasoline is 10% ethanol however, which is supposed to not be a problem.

 

[poolman]

This type of Fuel (I think it is called E85) taught me a lesson last year that I would have never believed but it happened to me.

June of 2009 I bought me a Brand New Stihl Blower. Before that blower I also had a Stihl blower that lasted me 12 years. I use my blower allot. I live on 2.5 acres and my driveway is 275 feet long. On average I blow the driveway of all the debris once a week. The new Stihl blower worked great. Easy to start, idle and throttle response great just like the first one I had. During the winter of 2009 I didn't use the blower that much maybe once a month. Now Spring of 2010 rolls around I go to use the blower not thinking twice that it will run fine just like it (they) always do. The blower had not been used for maybe 6 weeks. Well it was a pain in the butt to get started and after I finally got it started it would not run at full throttle at all. The machine is still under warranty (and even if it wasn't) and I take it to the Stihl dealer where I bought it and explained the problem. They told me that they have a tremendous backlog in there service department and it would take awhile before they call me to tell me what the problem is and whether it will be covered under warranty. Twelve day's later they called me and told me the unit needs a new carburetor. I'm like what ?, Why ? They asked me if I had been using E85 fuel in it. I'm like I don't know. I go to the gas station with a 5 gallon can get gas come home and mix the appropriate amount of oil so I have all 5 gallons mixed. Well that was the wrong answer. They tried to tell me that the unit would not be covered under warranty because I had probably used E85 fuel in it and the shelf life is only 30 day's as in you can not have that kind of fuel in the unit for more than 30 days. It deteriorates the gaskets inside the carburetor.

To make a long story shorter I did get them to cover fixing the blower under warranty only because I buy most of my equipment from them and after they checked my history of purchases through them they didn't want to lose me as a customer.

But who would have known that the shelf life is so short for this type of fuel. This year during the winter I drained as much gas out of it as possible and than ran the machine until it was completely out of gas. So in another month or so when I put fuel in it I better not have a problem with it. That machine is not cheap. $285.00

That was not a good experience for me with this fuel.

 

[Show-me]

You might want to brush your teeth and gargle again before you leave for work.

 

[Show-me]

Your point is well taken. There are 8 people in this message board that are knuckle dragging low IQ right-wing gasoline users for every reasonably intellegent left winger on this board. I certainly don't dispute that, nor would the NPR guy.

Jim quit self pleasuring yourself. Your not as smart as you think you're just delusional and blinded by your false prophet. Data can be skewed to make any argument. You find data to help your argument so that you can sleep at night making money on the taxpayers while destroying the environment in a different way. You are no better than the evil oil industry, just as delusional.

 

[RealMoneyIssues]

Your point is well taken. There are 8 people in this message board that are knuckle dragging low IQ right-wing gasoline users for every reasonably intellegent left winger on this board. I certainly don't dispute that, nor would the NPR guy.

Would you mind not being SO rude? Or are you incapable?

 

[James48843]

I second the above, and agree with ALL Showme said.

You're right about my car not having a carb, Jim - rather m-p injectors. I wasn't trying to be technical, but the additives cleaned those - and much more. The point, and the problem, was real though - I checked various sources prior to desperation of going to the dealer.

Additives cleaned your fuel injectors. Great. Most people don't worry about fuel injectors, some pay to have them cleaned.

Personally, I don't believe a word that vehicles were being made Ethanol/Flexfuel-ready back to '82 (or what the gov says about much, especially about ethanol for vehicles way back then, except for the military - maybe). -

Let me refresh you, then.

Jimmy Carter. Iran. Arab Oil Price Spike. GASOHOL.

GASOHOL was widespread in 1979-1980-1981. It was the reason the federal goernment adopted standards, and the auto industy adopted standards, that all cars be tolerant of E10 fuel- be made compatible with low levels of ethanol. that's when all the gaskets changed from real rubber to viton rubber, or silocone, so they could be compatible with ethanol. NO, they weren't called flex-fuel then. They were only doing low levels of ethanol then, but yes, the standards were changed.

You fought the good fight with the gov-garbage that TSP tried to feed us. Anyway, my point was made, and so far this thread is 8 to 1 - just since my post.

Your point is well taken. There are 8 people in this message board that are knuckle dragging low IQ right-wing gasoline users for every reasonably intellegent left winger on this board. I certainly don't dispute that, nor would the NPR guy.

I don't think that ethanol-fuels wwere even a twinkle in any carmaker's eye back then, and don't recall the initiative mentioned, or the word Flexfuel mentioned until maybe '08.

Riiigghhtt.


Please go exercise google and learn when flex-fuel cars became high-production items. You 'll find they go back into the 1990s. The government was purchasing them starting in 1994. The EPA's website has fuel economy data on them dating back to around 2001.
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/byfueltype.htm

BTW, I endorse alternate-energy: Nuclear and electric vehicles. Norway and Denmark have been recycling their Nuclear waste to 98% for roughly 6-8 years now. Why aren't we NOT doing the same?

Denmark sends it's spent nuclear fuel to....THE UNITED STATES.

Norway has stored it's spent fuel, and doesn't yet know what it is going to do with it.
http://www.nordregio.se/filer/Files/r003broden.PDF

Volvo had a concept "plug-in", with a gas engine that only functioned as a generator for the car's fuelcell. [Imagine using this in reverse to power the basics in your home during a power outage.] Well, I guess that vehicle made too much sense, as "they" killed that idea quickly here in the US.
Truely, VR.

That car only cost $182,000 to build. that's why fuel cell cars haven't taken off. the technology is WAY too expensive for now.

Flex-fuel cars cost an exta $100. Fuel cell cars cost an exra $160,000. That's the difference.

 

[Show-me]

The lie that it make livestock feed cheaper. Step away for the Koolaid Jim.

Corn farmers are pushing for more ethanol production as the industry creates an enormous new market for their crop, giving corn prices the kind of lift they haven’t seen in years. But the corn farmer’s win is the hog farmer’s loss. Meat, dairy, and other food producers are pushing back against the ethanol boom as higher grain prices cut into their already slim profit margins.

But the pain is more acute for corporations like Tyson Foods Inc., the nation’s largest meat company. The Springdale, Ark.-based company’s stock fell 13 percent earlier this month when it lowered its profit projections for the year.

Part of Tyson’s problem is higher grain prices — the company said grain costs for its chicken feed shot up $113 million in the third quarter of this year alone when compared to the year before.

The American Meat Institute has taken heed. AMI spokeswoman Janet Riley said the group is “absolutely” opposed to more ethanol mandates and will continue to lobby against them. The AMI has joined dairy, egg and turkey lobbyists to fight any increase in ethanol mandates that could divert yet more feed into fuel refineries.

The coalition launched a Web site recently called “Balanced Food and Fuel.” The home page is filled with stories and editorials culled from media outlets around the county, spelling out the seemingly dire consequences of growing demand for biofuel.

Headlines on the site warn of a “spiral of rising prices” as “corn prices skyrocket.” One story outlines an ominous increase in pizza prices.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20760839/ns/business-oil_and_energy/

 

[Show-me]

From 2006.

Over the next five years, $5.7 billion in federal tax credits will support the ethanol market - a boon to Midwest corn growers who are certainly no hayseeds when it comes to lobbying members of Congress

Other downsides: Corn ethanol does reduce atmosphere-warming carbon emissions, but environmental organizations such as the Sierra Club say it actually is worse than gasoline in making smog. Meanwhile, builders of the nearly 200 ethanol manufacturing facilities under construction or planned are being tempted to power their facilities with coal. That's because it's less expensive than their current choice, natural gas. Coal power would wipe out or reduce the greenhouse gains of ethanol.

However, there is a better way. Fly on down to Rio for a look at the world's leader in sugar-cane ethanol. Brazil's widely consumed ethanol is almost eight times more fossil energy efficient to produce than the US corn-based stuff. Its ethanol manufacturing is powered not by fossil fuels, but by cane-stalk residue. The downside is huge acreage demand (no small consideration if the US greatly ramps up production).

http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0512/p08s01-comv.html

 

[Show-me]

There are no tariffs on imported oil, that's why we buy and use so much of it. But there is a 54-cent-per-gallon tariff on Brazilian ethanol, which is made from sugarcane and is much cheaper than American ethanol. Why the tariff? Again, political pressure from US corn and soybean producers to protect their profits. When you consider that China and India will make as many cars as the U.S. in another decade or two, you can just imagine what the competition for energy and food is going to be like. You don't need to be an expert on agribusiness. If there's a cheaper way of producing alternate energy without gobbling up one of the world's major food sources, shouldn't we be taking a closer, more determined look?

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89817188

 

[anthony]

No, we (the government) didn't become overly fixated with corn.


Corn was used because that happened to be the crop that works well in all climates.

Yes, sugarcane, and sugar beets, produce more ethanol per acre.

Cattails (the swamp time) do even better than sugar cane.

And hemp does even better than that.

Some say Algae is going to be the best - at 6,000 gallons ethanol produced per acre, compared to 250-300 per acre for corn.


The only problem is- Algae doesn't mass-produce into factory ready stuff just yet, they are still working on technique. Same for cellulostic ethanol from other sources. the factory techniques to scale up to multi-million gallon production means are still being developed. Corn is well developed and easy to do, and price wise is now cheaper than oil. (a change from ten years ago). Sugar is now slightly more expensive to make ethanol from than corn today, but it is very competitive. Three years ago sugar cost twice as much as corn to make ethanol from. Now it's more like 0 to 10% higher than corn.


All are things to look at, to develop, as we move forward.

All depend on corn to help build out the number of pumps, the number of flex-fuel vehciles. etc. it's all part of it, and yes, corn plays a role.

(Corn used for ethanol os NOT sweet corn you eat. It's field corn, and the byproduct of ethanol production is Dried Distiiler's grain DDG), which IS USED FOR ANIMAL FEED. That's right folks- the production of ethanol CONTRIBUTES TO LOWER PRICES FOR ANIMAL FEED DUE TO LARGE VOLUMES OF DDG BEING AVAILABLE THAT WOULD OTHERWISE NOT BE IN THE MARKET. )



But hey- it takes a while to educate people.

James thanks for clarifying some of the out of line assumptions I made. It was a quick post without much research on my part. I appreciate the depth you added.

 

[nnuut]

The fact is that ethanol is costing us much more than regular gas and hurting the economy in many ways. No I don't believe the SPIN and never will.

 

[hessian]

Part of the problem is that through government funding and focus over the last 10-20 years, we became overly fixated on corn...
Why is this important? It takes tons of fuel and strips ground much more rapidly to produce the amounts of corn necessary for fuel, plus it competes with livestock food sources. There are other crops that will make better ethanol without competing for livestock food and without stripping land...

My two cents ...

I second the above, and agree with ALL Showme said.

You're right about my car not having a carb, Jim - rather m-p injectors. I wasn't trying to be technical, but the additives cleaned those - and much more. The point, and the problem, was real though - I checked various sources prior to desperation of going to the dealer.
Personally, I don't believe a word that vehicles were being made Ethanol/Flexfuel-ready back to '82 (or what the gov says about much, especially about ethanol for vehicles way back then, except for the military - maybe). - You fought the good fight with the gov-garbage that TSP tried to feed us.
Anyway, my point was made, and so far this thread is 8 to 1 - just since my post.
I don't think that ethanol-fuels wwere even a twinkle in any carmaker's eye back then, and don't recall the initiative mentioned, or the word Flexfuel mentioned until maybe '08.

BTW, I endorse alternate-energy: Nuclear and electric vehicles. Norway and Denmark have been recycling their Nuclear waste to 98% for roughly 6-8 years now. Why aren't we NOT doing the same? Volvo had a concept "plug-in", with a gas engine that only functioned as a generator for the car's fuelcell. [Imagine using this in reverse to power the basics in your home during a power outage.] Well, I guess that vehicle made too much sense, as "they" killed that idea quickly here in the US.
Truely, VR.

 

[burrocrat]

What a crock of BS.

The corn lobby, farm lobby, grain lobby, Round up Ready corn/chemical lobby, pushed ethanol and lobbied for subsidies for ethanol producers and lobbied for tax credits to big oil in order to break into their market. It was a pay off. That way corn producers could increase DEMAND FOR THEIR PRODUCE AND DEMAND HIGHER PRICES. SUPPLY AND DEMAND, farmers know about that too.

Now the corn and ethanol lobby has used high oil prices to lobby legislation to force big oil to use their ethanol. How would you like it if you produced a produce and was forced to include someone else's product in that finish product. Kind of like forcing you to buy a insurance products.

Livestock feed is not a byproduct of ethonal. Corn has always been livestock feed. PLEASE STOP THE SPIN!!!

Disadvantages: Distillers Grain (DG) is void of starch and that has to be made up for and transportation cost increase as do storage cost. Corn is a nitrogen and water dependent crop and 70% of the fresh water use in the USA is for agriculture. When the tap runs dry, and it will, corn ethanol will not be the darling you are profiting from right now. Ride the wave until the water runs out Jim.

And now nitrogen.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/...ionid=8586AF02C24392EC9C466EB2E317DA3C.d01t03

You liberals keep stroking each other and collecting the profits from the taxpayers.

i think he knows what he's talking about.

hey, anybody hungry? yet?

 

[Show-me]

What a crock of BS.

The corn lobby, farm lobby, grain lobby, Round up Ready corn/chemical lobby, pushed ethanol and lobbied for subsidies for ethanol producers and lobbied for tax credits to big oil in order to break into their market. It was a pay off. That way corn producers could increase DEMAND FOR THEIR PRODUCE AND DEMAND HIGHER PRICES. SUPPLY AND DEMAND, farmers know about that too.

Now the corn and ethanol lobby has used high oil prices to lobby legislation to force big oil to use their ethanol. How would you like it if you produced a produce and was forced to include someone else's product in that finish product. Kind of like forcing you to buy a insurance products.

Livestock feed is not a byproduct of ethonal. Corn has always been livestock feed. PLEASE STOP THE SPIN!!!

Disadvantages: Distillers Grain (DG) is void of starch and that has to be made up for and transportation cost increase as do storage cost. Corn is a nitrogen and water dependent crop and 70% of the fresh water use in the USA is for agriculture. When the tap runs dry, and it will, corn ethanol will not be the darling you are profiting from right now. Ride the wave until the water runs out Jim.

And now nitrogen.

Approximately 83% (as of 2004) of ammonia is used as fertilizers either as its salts or as solutions. Consuming more than 1% of all man-made power, the production of ammonia is a significant component of the world energy budget.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/...ionid=8586AF02C24392EC9C466EB2E317DA3C.d01t03

You liberals keep stroking each other and collecting the profits from the taxpayers.

 

[James48843]

in short- for the E10 portion, we don't NEED the VEETC credit. America wpould be dfine without it.

For the E85, or the higher blends, we still NEED the VEETC in some form, so that we continue to build out the demand and infrastructure to encourage more stations to get built. But if we only did the higher blends (E20, E30, E50 or E85 type blends) the VEETC could be done at a small fraction of the cost it is today. (Perahps one tenth what we spend today) and it would still to the critical job we need done.

 

[James48843]

It would shut down because the ptice of E85 would go up at least $1.80 a gallon.

Nope. E85 is only a small, small fraction of all ethanol production. More than 95% of ethanol goes into E10.

To answer the question of what would happen if the VEETC was removed, the answer is- the price of gasoline would jump by at least 15 cents.


Currently the ethanol subsidy of 45 cents per gallon is paid to whoever blends ethanol into gasoline. That is the OIL COMPANIES. So the credit is a tax break for big oil. They are getting 45 cents for every gallon they blend as E10. (Yes, they get it for E85 as well, but only a tiny fraction of ethanol is being used for E85. )


Personally, I would love nothing more than to see the VEETC tax credit elimnianted for the E10 mixtures, and, instead, give a 45 cent VEETC to the GAS STATION that carries and sells E85.

That would eliminate about 90% of the cost of the VEETC, yet would support those who sell higher blend, and give incentive to lowering the price at the pump closer to the consumer. IF they did that, the price of E85 at the pump would come down some more, and consumers would have a better choice. Oil Companies would lose the tax breaks they don't need, ethanol would become MORE cost competitive, and we'd be better off as a nation.

However, the lack of a VEETC subsidy into the gasoline would pop the price of gasoline higher. Today, 10 % of your gasoline is the ethanol, which only costs about $2.04 a gallon, rather than the $3.03 that RBOB costs on the NYMEX. Without that VEETC, the cost of the ethanol rises to market price, which is $2.54 or so today, a 50 cent jump. That would have to be passed on to the gasoline consumer in the form of a higher price gasoline.

 

[nnuut]

It would shut down because the ptice of E85 would go up at least $1.80 a gallon.

 

[RealMoneyIssues]

Just out of curiousity James, what would happen to the ethanol market if the USG removed all subsities?

 

[James48843]

No, we (the government) didn't become overly fixated with corn.


Corn was used because that happened to be the crop that works well in all climates.

Yes, sugarcane, and sugar beets, produce more ethanol per acre.

Cattails (the swamp time) do even better than sugar cane.

And hemp does even better than that.

Some say Algae is going to be the best - at 6,000 gallons ethanol produced per acre, compared to 250-300 per acre for corn.


The only problem is- Algae doesn't mass-produce into factory ready stuff just yet, they are still working on technique. Same for cellulostic ethanol from other sources. the factory techniques to scale up to multi-million gallon production means are still being developed. Corn is well developed and easy to do, and price wise is now cheaper than oil. (a change from ten years ago). Sugar is now slightly more expensive to make ethanol from than corn today, but it is very competitive. Three years ago sugar cost twice as much as corn to make ethanol from. Now it's more like 0 to 10% higher than corn.


All are things to look at, to develop, as we move forward.

All depend on corn to help build out the number of pumps, the number of flex-fuel vehciles. etc. it's all part of it, and yes, corn plays a role.

(Corn used for ethanol os NOT sweet corn you eat. It's field corn, and the byproduct of ethanol production is Dried Distiiler's grain DDG), which IS USED FOR ANIMAL FEED. That's right folks- the production of ethanol CONTRIBUTES TO LOWER PRICES FOR ANIMAL FEED DUE TO LARGE VOLUMES OF DDG BEING AVAILABLE THAT WOULD OTHERWISE NOT BE IN THE MARKET. )



But hey- it takes a while to educate people.

 

[anthony]

Part of the problem is that through government funding and focus over the last 10-20 years, we became overly fixated on corn as the best source for ethanol. There's a lot of competing opinions on this, but by government overfixating on corn, scientists didn't go far enough in exploring other crops. The best corn competitor is sugar, currently being used in Brazil and elsewhere, but there are others as well.

Why is this important? It takes tons of fuel and strips ground much more rapidly to produce the amounts of corn necessary for fuel, plus it competes with livestock food sources. There are other crops that will make better ethanol without competing for livestock food and without stripping land, forcing the need for dangerous chemical fertilizers that later enter our water sources.

My two cents ...