Corn and Ethanol.

They took a vote to use their own or import them from Chile. 95% of the citizens voted to use their own but a judge decided that they are not smart enough to make those tough decisions.:laugh:
 
We've gotta stop moving "things" half/all the way around the world. Why does California need grapes from Chile when they've got their own?
 
It's time to end the excessive subsidies for corn ethanol

Saturday, July 24, 2010
The Washington Post
Editorial

".....At this point, the question should not be whether to allow corn ethanol's tax incentives and trade protections to expire. The debate should be about why corn ethanol deserves any federal protection at all. There are certainly more effective ways to reduce oil consumption and greenhouse emissions."

Complete editorial at [URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/23/AR2010072304345.html"]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/23/AR2010072304345.html[/URL]

Free trade.
 
Ethanol Grand Opening two weeks ago
at Norfolk, Virginia. The first E85 station in
Norfolk.

Something to think about-- It's more than just another alternative fuel- it's part of the solution to break our dependence on foreign oil. Just ask the military people at Norfolk how important it is.
 
FSN In Depth: Michael C. Ruppert, Confronting Collapse

Confronting Collapse: The Crisis of Energy and Money in a Post Peak Oil World

http://www.financialsense.com/finan...-depth/michael-c-ruppert/confronting-collapse

Ruppert outlines a 25-point plan of action, including the creation of a second strategic petroleum reserve for the use of state and local governments, the immediate implementation of a national Feed-in Tariff mandating that electric utilities pay 3 percent above market rates for all surplus electricity generated from renewable sources, a thorough assessment of soil conditions nationwide, and an emergency action plan for soil restoration and sustainable agriculture.
 
It's time to end the excessive subsidies for corn ethanol

Saturday, July 24, 2010
The Washington Post
Editorial

".....The fuel was supposed to free America from its dependence on foreign oil and produce fewer carbon emissions in the process. It's doing some of the former and little of the latter. But corn ethanol certainly doesn't need the level of taxpayer support it's been getting. Lawmakers are considering whether to renew these expensive subsidies; they shouldn't.

.....feds give companies that combine corn ethanol with gasoline a 45-cent tax subsidy for every gallon of corn ethanol added to gasoline.

.....The Congressional Budget Office this month estimated that, all told, the costs to taxpayers of replacing a gallon of gasoline with one of corn ethanol add up to $1.78. The tax incentives alone cost the Treasury $6 billion in 2009....."

Complete editorial at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/23/AR2010072304345.html
 
I thought that ethanol had more acute side effects than gasoline, therefore requiring an updated public awareness campaign on the dangers of unprotected skin exposure vs. the relative minimal effects of gasoline.
I was under the impression that this issue was the primary reason a slow transition was inherent, to educate the public and put forth new standards involved with i.e. u-fill fueling where there would be a minimally controlled environment by a wide variety of users.
I equated this to propane, where filling was limited to trained personnel.

I'd assume this would equate to gloves being provided at fill stations and/or some sort of a quick video or "test" where a disclaimer/acceptance would be required at the new electronic self-fill pumps for a given time until it became part of public culture, probably with MSDS awareness.
http://www.jtbaker.com/msds/englishhtml/m2015.htm

thoughts?

First, you pulled the MSDS for Methanol, not Ethanol. Big difference.

Secondly, no, ethanol has very few issues with handling. It's pretty much the same as gasoline, only not quite as bad as gasoline for you. You don't get the benzene cancer causing chemicals with ethanol that you do with gasoline.
 
I thought that ethanol had more acute side effects than gasoline, therefore requiring an updated public awareness campaign on the dangers of unprotected skin exposure vs. the relative minimal effects of gasoline.
I was under the impression that this issue was the primary reason a slow transition was inherent, to educate the public and put forth new standards involved with i.e. u-fill fueling where there would be a minimally controlled environment by a wide variety of users.
I equated this to propane, where filling was limited to trained personnel.

I'd assume this would equate to gloves being provided at fill stations and/or some sort of a quick video or "test" where a disclaimer/acceptance would be required at the new electronic self-fill pumps for a given time until it became part of public culture, probably with MSDS awareness.
http://www.jtbaker.com/msds/englishhtml/m2015.htm

thoughts?
 
Hey Jim..Whatever happened to your plans to start your Ethanol bulk delivery service?...Is it up and running yet?..That would be cool me thinks.

Hope it's going good for ya!
 
USDA produces short video on ethanol, E85



By Holly Jessen
http://www.ethanolproducer.com/article.jsp?article_id=6772

Posted July 1, 2010

Just two weeks after USDA released its “Regional Roadmap to Meeting the Biofuels Goals of the Renewable Fuels Standard,” it now has a short video, touting the importance of ethanol and other biofuels in reducing U.S. dependence on fossil fuels.

The ethanol industry needs to go national, said Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack, in the video. To build the 527 biorefineries the USDA estimates will be needed to meet the goal of 36 billion gallons by 2022, a variety of feedstocks will need to be used, depending on the strengths of that region. “It’s an opportunity for us to make sure that … ethanol is more readily available to folks in all parts of the country and all four corners of the country,” he said in the video.

USDA has also indicated that infrastructure is an important part of the success of biofuels. “There are a number of potential barriers and bottlenecks in the current ethanol use supply chain,” the report said. “While we expect the market to respond to the infrastructure needs of a growing industry, we recognize that the path from production to actual consumption presents challenges that will need to be anticipated and addressed.”

Besides additional blender pumps, the U.S. needs infrastructure to distribute ethanol by rail or truck as well as blending terminals and storage facilities.

The report also singled out California, Texas and Florida as possible primary targets for more blender pumps and flex-fuel vehicles.

 
with variants commonly used in all the various injector cleaners, FWIH.
It's an old car, so I'm not too concerned. I doubt that 4oz/15gal would have significant effect on components.
Next week I will run a full tank test without and see where my mileage ends up.

Acetone is a solvent thay may have cleaned your injectors an increased your efficiency a little. That is the only thing I can think of. I would not use it long term.
 
I can verify no ill effects and a noticeable increase in power. My car is still a gas hog, but definitely more efficient, from once a week fills to 1.5 weeks between fills (390 miles w/ 15g)
Acetone is a solvent thay may have cleaned your injectors an increased your efficiency a little. That is the only thing I can think of. I would not use it long term.
 
D_oh.jpg

http://www.kjm.org/simpsons/sounds/32dohs.wav

Are those the same evil oil industry scientist that are making up the lies about ethanol? ;)
 
We spoke to a fuel-systems engineer who works for one of the major oil companies. He said that because of all these rumors floating around on the Web, his company tested acetone in its own labs and found no increase in mileage.

Are those the same evil oil industry scientist that are making up the lies about ethanol? ;)
 
Back
Top