Corn and Ethanol.

[James48843]

...How do we explain the chicken producers closing up shop because of high feed prices?

They aren't closing because of the price of chicken feed. Chicken feed costs now are ....chicken feed. With corn at $4 a bushel, chicken feed is cheap.

Here is the real reason the massive chicken producer corporations are closing plants- they are trying to break Union organizing-

From: http://www.wjbf.com/jbf/news/state_...igrants_caught_in_sc_chicken_plant_raid/7396/

300 Suspected Illegal Immigrants Caught In SC Chicken Plant Raid

GREENVILLE, S.C. (AP) - Federal authorities say more than 58 people suspected of being illegal immigrants were busted in a massive raid on a Greenville chicken processing plant that has been under investigation for months.
In all, some 300 people are being detained following the Tuesday raid at the House of Raeford plant. Authorities are checking fingerprints and releasing people in the country legally. They said those checks will take place all day.
Officials said 58 suspected illegal immigrants will not be held because of health or child care reasons. They still must face charges in court.
House of Raeford has eight plants in North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Louisiana and Michigan. A woman who answered the phone at the company’s North Carolina headquarters said there was no immediate comment.


and this one:

from: http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN2825845020070828

Immigration raids Koch Foods Ohio chicken plant

Tue Aug 28, 2007 5:56pm EDT





By Andrea Hopkins

CINCINNATI (Reuters) - Hundreds of U.S. immigration agents raided the Koch Foods Inc. chicken plant in Fairfield, Ohio, and arrested more than 160 employees as part of a criminal operation against illegal immigrants, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) said on Tuesday.

"As of 2:45 p.m. (EDT) more than 180 Koch employees have been identified for further questioning and more than 160 have been administratively arrested for immigration violations," ICE special agent in charge Brian Moskowitz told a news conference in Cincinnati.

-----------------------


If you don't know who "Koch Foods" is, it is a subsidiary of Koch Industries- one of the largest private corporations in the United States, and the founder and chief sponsor of a group called "Americans for Prosperity", one of the largest anti-Union groups in the country.

http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/articleview/882/

"David Koch, the founder of Americans for Prosperity, is a part owner of Koch industries a privately-owned compnay that seems to dabble in just about anything from mining and energy to ranching and oil. It doesn't publicize its financial information, but it is believed to be among the largest privatey-owned companies in the country with annual revenues of $25 billion.

But there are some numbers that the Koch family can't hide. According to OpenSecrets.org, a website that publishes publicly available data on campaign contributions – large donors included – the Koch family, through its company and various members of its households gave well over one-half million dollars to the Republican Party and various GOP candidates, including tens of thousands of dollars to the Bush campaign between 2000 and 2004.

Koch Industries also gave Bush over $35,000 bewteen 1993-1999 for his gubenatorial campaigns and his candidacy for the GOP nomination while benefiting from loopholes in Texas environmental laws. These loopholes allowed the company to avoid having to reduce pollution emissions in some of its Texas facilites or to pay fines aimed at polluters by Texas law, as information from the Public Research Works and Center for Responsive Politics shows.


The company's support for Bush and the GOP also garnered it a lucrative federal oil contract in 2002, which was widely understood as having derived directly from its patronage of the Republicans.

Koch Industries also provided millions in startup funding for right-wing think tanks and lobbying groups like the Cato Institute, which has described Social Security as a "cancer," and Citizens for a Sound Economy, which funnels millions into right-wing campaign coffers every year. David Koch and other directors of Americans for Prosperity have worked at or sat on the boards of both of those far-right organizations.


++++++++++++++++++
Koch, along with other big players in the United Poultry Grower's Association (Pilgram's Pride), are suspected of trying to subvert U.S. labor laws by hiring illegals to do chicken processing, and avoid and break Unions at all costs. Illegals won't vote for a Union, and Koch keeps it's factory lines filled with people who will vote against Unions just to keep their $8 an hour, 12 hour day jobs.

This is the action that started Koch to try and break it up-
http://www.hispanictips.com/2005/07/30/latino-workers-seek-a-union-in-poultry-plant-tennessee/

Latino Workers Seek a Union in Poultry Plant. Tennessee


Seven Hundred and Fifty Poultry workers at two Koch Foods Plants have filed a petition for a Union Election in Morristown, Tennessee. Workers have been organizing for over a month despite intimidation and racism within the community. Most of the poultry workers in this area are Latino. On Sunday, local residents rallied in support of the United Food and Commercial Workers Union. Over 200 workers and community members stood in solidarity.
******

Other members of the Poultry Producer's Association typically close a plant as soon as they hear of any Union organizing going on there.

http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/689/

Poultry Giants Fight Organizers

By David Moberg

After their 30-minute lunch break,
workers Gladys Curbis (left), 57, and
Olga Estaras, 27, prepare to work in
the deboning line.

Perry, Georgia—For 10 years Dorothy McKenzie has worked in poultry processing factories in the South. She knows why unions are crucial in the industry. Two years ago she was working as many as 12 hours a day hanging 40 chickens a minute on the dissasembly line at a plant owned by Cagle’s Inc. Workers could go to the bathroom just once outside their two scheduled breaks, and the repetitive work caused constant pain in their hands and arms. When they complained to management, supervisors told them to drink less water and offered to rotate jobs, as long as they still hung chickens. McKenzie protested that such limited rotation provided no relief, and she and seven coworkers were fired for insubordination.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


And here is a listing of the corporate "Who's Who" who are lobbying against ethanol.
Big business, who all want cheap labor.


http://www.foodbeforefuel.org/press...couraging-congress-revisit-food-fuel-policies

American Bakers Association
American Beverage Association
American Conservative Union
American Frozen Food Institute
American Meat Institute
Competitive Enterprise Institute
Earth Policy Institute
Environmental Working Group
Food For All
Grocery Manufacturers Association
International Foodservice Distributors Association
National Cattlemen's Beef Association
National Chicken Council
National Council of Chain Restaurants
National Restaurant Association
National Retail Federation
National Turkey Federation
Pilgrim's Pride Corporation
Popeye’s Chicken & Biscuits
Snack Food Association
The Hispanic Institute
Tortilla Industry Association
Women Impacting Public Policy

 

[Show-me]

Take one subsidized form of energy and replace it for another. Not making me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Here is a good one, now I have to waste county tax money every time it rains because the farmer on my gravel road farms right up to the ditch and when it rains his top soil fills the ditch and makes it run across the road washing it out.

Farmers around here are not putting fert. on the fields because the K and N prices are still too high because they bought it at the high. Look for lower yield next year.

How do we explain the chicken producers closing up shop because of high feed prices?

 

[James48843]

If corn ethanol is so great, why is it subsidized so much and oil companies allowed use huge tax credits? Because it is not efficient.

Because the oil industry lobby has carved out huge tax breaks for itself over the years, and because in the US we subsidize ALL forms of energy.

Oil is subsidized.

the Coal industry is subsidized.

the natural gas industry is subsidized.

the Nuclear industry is subsidized.

Solar is subsidized.

Wind power is subsidized.

And yes, ethanol receives some subsidies- but when you think about it, ethanol's subsidies to grow and utilize the land, cost the taxpayer LESS than subsidizing farmers NOT to grow anything on it.

Welcome to America, land where everyone wants cheap energy, and will spend other people's money in order to get it.

 

[Show-me]

If corn ethanol is so great, why is it subsidized so much and oil companies allowed use huge tax credits? Because it is not efficient.

 

[Show-me]

Isn't the USDA promoting agriculture like OPEC promoting oil. Not exactly impartial.

 

[James48843]

Criticism and controversy

According to an April 2008 World Bank report, biofuels have caused world food prices to increase by 75-percent.

Wrong. The USDA testified in May of this year, (when corn prices were at $8 a bushel) that biofuels accounted from less than a 3% rise in the cost of food in the period 2004 to 2007.

Source: http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/!ut/p/_s.7_0_A/7_0_1OB/.cmd/ad/.ar/sa.retrievecontent/.c/6_2_1UH/.ce/7_2_5JM/.p/5_2_4TQ/_th/J_2_9D/_s.7_0_A/7_0_1OB?PC_7_2_5JM_contentid=2008%2F05%2F0130.xml&PC_7_2_5JM_parentnav=TRANSCRIPTS_SPEECHES&PC_7_2_5JM_navid=TRANSCRIPT

An extract:

" On the international level, the President's Council of Economic Advisors estimates that only 3 percent of the more than 40 percent increase we have seen in world food prices this year is due to the increased demand on corn for ethanol. Here in the U.S., we're fortunate to be dealing with a much smaller scale of food price increases. As Joe's slides will show you, last year our overall food prices were up 4 percent. That's about 1 1/2 percent higher than the average annual increase of 2 1/2 percent that we've been seeing since 1990.
This year we're expecting consumer prices to increase about 5 percent over last year's levels.
United States and other nations around the world are developing biofuels to cut their reliance on oil as a transportation fuel, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and to create new opportunities in agriculture. The policy choices we've made on biofuels will deliver long-term benefits. But we also have to recognize that there may be some short-term costs or dislocations involved, and we have to consider those costs in the light of the ultimate benefits that we hope to secure for the American people.
Those benefits are substantial, and some have already been secured. According to the International Energy Agency, the biofuels production that has been available to the United States and European markets over the last three years has cut the consumption of crude oil by one million barrels a day. At today's prices, that's a savings of more than $120 million per day.
Ethanol also brings environmental benefits. It gives us cleaner air by cutting tailpipe emissions of carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons that can cause ozone and smog. It also displaces benzene and other toxic ingredients of gasoline that would otherwise be burned at a greater rate. And by replacing MTBE as the blending agent of choice in gasoline, it has relieved us of water quality problems associated with MTBE while still boosting oxygen and octane contents of gasoline."

When all 200 American ethanol subsidies are considered, they cost about $7 billion USD per year (equal to roughly $1.90 USD total for each a gallon of ethanol).

Considerably less than the subsidies given to domestic oil corporations.

Consider this:

American oil and gas industry receives anywhere between $15 billion and $35 billion a year in subsidies from taxpayers.

Why such a large margin of error? The exact number is slippery and hard to quantify, given the myriad of programs that can be broadly characterized as subsidies when it comes to fossil fuels. For instance, the U.S. government has generally propped the industry up with:

• Construction bonds at low interest rates or tax-free
• Research-and-development programs at low or no cost
• Assuming the legal risks of exploration and development in a company's stead
• Below-cost loans with lenient repayment conditions
• Income tax breaks, especially featuring obscure provisions in tax laws designed to receive little congressional oversight when they expire
• Sales tax breaks - taxes on petroleum products are lower than average sales tax rates for other goods
• Giving money to international financial institutions (the U.S. has given tens of billions of dollars to the World Bank and U.S. Export-Import Bank to encourage oil production internationally, according to Friends of the Earth)
• The U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve
• Construction and protection of the nation's highway system
• Allowing the industry to pollute - what would oil cost if the industry had to pay to protect its shipments, and clean up its spills? If the environmental impact of burning petroleum were considered a cost? Or if it were held responsible for the particulate matter in people's lungs, in liability similar to that being asserted in the tobacco industry?
• Relaxing the amount of royalties to be paid (more below)

While it's easy to get bent out of shape that the petroleum industry "probably has larger tax incentives relative to its size than any other industry in the country", according to Donald Lubick, the U.S. Department of Treasury's former Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy, remember that subsidies are important across all sectors of the energy industry.

For instance, nuclear power wouldn't be viable without subsidies - most governments pay between 60 and 90 percent of the cost of construction of new plants.

Solar wouldn't be what it's become without significant German, Californian, U.S. federal and other incentives. Ethanol and biodiesel in the U.S. enjoy large subsidies (details, if interested, here), but let's resist getting into the rat-hole of agricultural industry subsidies.


Source: http://cleantech.com/news/node/554

And, ethanol added to gasoline reduces the price for a gallon of gasoline, from 20 to 35 cents per gallon for the average consumer in 2008, according to the U.S. Department of Energy: http://www.energy.gov/news/6335.htm


Source: http://www.flexiblefuelvehicleclub.org/whyidrive.asp

 

[budnipper1]

The Grocery Manufacturer's Association, and the Poultry Grower's Association, are the one who started the "food vs. fuel" myth, in order to jack up prices and profits of large food corporations.

http://www.growthenergy.org/foodvsfuel/Growth_Energy.pdf

and video:

http://www.growthenergy.org/about/video.asp
Our U.S. Department of Energy confirms there are more myths than facts being pushed by the Grocery Manufacturer's Associaton:
http://www.energy.gov/media/BiofuelsMythVFact.pdf

Criticism and controversy

According to an April 2008 World Bank report, biofuels have caused world food prices to increase by 75-percent. In 2007, biofuels consumed one third of America's corn (maize) harvest. Filling up one large vehicle fuel tank one time with 100% ethanol uses enough corn to feed one person for a year. Thirty million tons of U.S. corn going to ethanol in 2007 greatly reduces the world's overall supply of grain. However, 31% of the corn put into the process comes out as distiller's grain, or DDGS, which is very high in protein, and is used to feed livestock.

Jean Ziegler, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, called for a five-year moratorium on biofuel production to halt the increasing catastrophe for the poor. He proclaimed that the rising practice of converting food crops into biofuel is "A Crime Against Humanity," saying it is creating food shortages and price jumps that cause millions of poor people to go hungry.

The European Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development warns that “the current push to expand the use of biofuels is creating unsustainable tensions that will disrupt markets without generating significant environmental benefits.

When all 200 American ethanol subsidies are considered, they cost about $7 billion USD per year (equal to roughly $1.90 USD total for each a gallon of ethanol). When the price of one agricultural commodity increases, farmers are motivated to quickly shift finite land and water resources to it, away from traditional food crops.

The 2007-12-19 U.S. Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 requires American “fuel producers to use at least 36 billion gallons of biofuel in 2022. This is nearly a fivefold increase over current levels.”

When cellulosic ethanol is produced from feedstock like switchgrass and sawgrass, the nutrients required to grow the cellulose are removed and cannot decay and replenish the soil. The soil is of poorer quality, and unsustainable soil erosion occurs.

Ethanol production from corn consumes large quantities of unsustainable petroleum and natural gas. Even with the most-optimistic energy return on investment claims, in order to use 100% solar energy to grow corn and produce ethanol (fueling farm-and-transportation machinery with ethanol, distilling with heat from burning crop residues, using no fossil fuels), the consumption of ethanol to replace current U.S. petroleum use alone would require about 75% of all cultivated land on the face of the Earth, with no ethanol for other countries, or sufficient food for humans and animals.

If anaerobic digestion technology is used coupled with the new high efficiency vehicles being built by VW (eg Passat Ecofuel), one can travel around 50% more distance for the same waste (or energy crop) compared to converting that waste into a synthetic diesel. This arises because AD is essentially a low energy natural process whereas Biomass to Liquids technologies require huge energy input to convert molecules. Stockholm for example is aiming to go to 100% biomethane for buses within 5 years, replacing all the bioethanol buses that are now running.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel#Efficiency_of_common_crops

View attachment 5408

 

[James48843]

A good series of videos, from Public Television, about the production of ethanol, GM's flex-fuel vehicles, and the growth of E85 across the nation. Included is a section on how ethanol by-products, called "Dried Distillers Grain", is used as a feed source for cattle. Hence, food AND fuel are produced in the process. It's not an "OR" proposition, it's an "AND" benefit.

"The Yellow Brick Road"

http://www.autolinedetroit.tv/show/1131?play

 

[James48843]

The Grocery Manufacturer's Association, and the Poultry Grower's Association, are the one who started the "food vs. fuel" myth, in order to jack up prices and profits of large food corporations.

http://www.growthenergy.org/foodvsfuel/Growth_Energy.pdf

and video:

http://www.growthenergy.org/about/video.asp


Our U.S. Department of Energy confirms there are more myths than facts being pushed by the Grocery Manufacturer's Associaton:

http://www.energy.gov/media/BiofuelsMythVFact.pdf

 

[James48843]

... A theoretically much more efficient way of
ethanol production has been suggested to use sugar beets which make about
the same amount of ethanol as corn without using the corn food crop
especially since sugar beets can grow in less tropical conditions than sugar cane.

From the USDA:

"Factors impacting sugar to ethanol viability

Corn is currently the least-cost feedstock available for ethanol production. Ethanol from sugarcane or sugar beet feedstocks costs twice as much. USDA’s recent sugar/ethanol report provides these comparative production costs.

High oil prices have spurred interest in ethanol, to put it mildly. But for how long? (Prices were dropping at press deadline in September.)

With ethanol prices hovering near $4 a gallon this summer, the USDA report concludes that it would be profitable to produce ethanol from sugar and sugar byproducts. However, if ethanol prices were to drop below $2.35 a gallon, it would not be profitable to use raw or refined sugar as a feedstock. Based on current futures prices, the price of ethanol is expected to drop.

Alternative market prices for sugar

As can be seen above, it is far more costly to convert U.S. refined sugar to ethanol than to convert corn. One reason is that recent domestic sugar prices make it more profitable to convert sugarcane and sugar beets to sugar than to convert it to ethanol. As Jose Alvarez, vice president of operations for the Sugar Cane Growers Cooperative of Florida, said: “It’s simple economics. Refined sugar sells at about 18 cents a pound, and the experts tell us ethanol from sugar would be close to 10 cents.” (Florida Sun-Sentinel, May 31, 2006.)

U.S. policy has long been to protect domestic producers from unstable world prices, where sugar is sold below the cost of production for most countries (often called the “dump” price). Imports are limited to keep domestic prices stable, with the current price support level at 18 cents per pound. Refined sugar is currently a few cents above that, and unlikely to ever fall much below the support price to avoid forfeitures to the government under the sugar loan program.

When domestic sugar prices were very low a few years ago and some sugar was forfeited to the government, alternate uses for surplus sugar were explored. The Minnesota Energy Cooperative experimented with incorporating beet sugar with corn in a drymilling ethanol plant. They found some synergy in combining the two into their fermentation tanks — increasing ethanol production and decreasing the fermentation time, and allowing them to produce an additional 442,800 gallons of ethanol."


More: http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/rbs/pub/sep06/ethanol.htm

and
http://www.usda.gov/oce/reports/energy/EthanolSugarFeasibilityReport3.pdf

 

[budnipper1]

The United States produces and consumes more ethanol fuel than any
other country in the world.

The production of fuel ethanol from corn in the United States is
controversial for a few reasons. Production of ethanol from corn is 5 to 6
times less efficient than producing it from sugarcane. Ethanol production
from corn is highly dependent upon subsidies and it consumes a food crop to
produce fuel. The subsidies paid to fuel blenders and ethanol refineries
have often been cited as the reason for driving up the price of corn, and in
farmers planting more corn and the conversion of considerable land to corn
(maize) production which generally consumes more fertilizers and pesticides
than many other land uses. This is at odds with the subsidies actually paid
directly to farmers that are designed to take corn land out of production
and pay farmers to plant grass and idle the land, often in conjunction with
soil conservation programs, in an attempt to boost corn prices. Recent
developments with cellulosic ethanol production and commercialization may
allay some of these concerns. A theoretically much more efficient way of
ethanol production has been suggested to use sugar beets which make about
the same amount of ethanol as corn without using the corn food crop
especially since sugar beets can grow in less tropical conditions than sugar cane.

On October 7th, 2008 the first "biofuels corridor" was officially opened
along I-65, a major interstate highway in the central United States.
Stretching from northern Indiana to southern Alabama, this corridor
consisting of more than 200 individual fueling stations makes it possible to
drive a flex-fueled vehicle from Lake Michigan to the Gulf of Mexico without
being further than a quarter tank worth of fuel from an E85 pump.

Brasil began exporting ethanol to the U.S. in 2004 and exported 188.8
million gallons representing 44.3% of U.S. ethanol imports in 2007. The
remaining imports that year came from Canada and China.

Brazilian flex fuel vehicles can operate with ethanol mixtures up to E100,
which is hydrous ethanol (alcohol with up to 4% water), which causes vapor
pressure to drop faster as compared to E85 vehicles, and as a result,
Brazilian flex vehicles are built with a small secondary gasoline reservoir
located near the engine to avoid starting problems in cold weather. The cold
start with pure gasoline is particularly necessary for users of Brazil's
southern and central regions, where temperatures normally drop below 15 °
Celsius (59 °F) during the winter. An improved flex motor generation that
will be launched in 2009 will eliminate the need for this secondary gas
storage tank.

Engine cold start during the winter
High ethanol blends present a problem to achieve enough vapor pressure for
the fuel to evaporate and spark the ignition during cold weather. When vapor
pressure is below 45 kPa starting a cold engine becomes difficult. In order
to avoid this problem at temperatures below 11 ° Celsius (59 °F), and to
reduce ethanol higher emissions during cold weather, both the US and the
European markets adopted E85 as the maximum blend to be used in their
flexible fuel vehicles, and they are optimized to run at such blend. At
places with harsh cold weather, the ethanol blend in the US has a seasonal
reduction to E70 for these very cold regions, though it is still sold as E85.

View attachment 5402

 

[Show-me]

Simple answer, Brazil has tons of perfect climate and soil for sugar cane farms and a much lower use of fuel than us. Sugar can is much, much, more efficient for the production of alcohol which is made from sugar.

 

[James48843]

Why is it that our jungle friends in Brazil can function just fine on the "alcohol standard" but all these rich, over educated, know-it-all White boys up here in Amerika can't figure out how to do it? Maybe we are not smarter than everyone else like we think we are.

Jason

Brazil got caught flat-footed in the oil embargo of 1973.

The government there decided they would never let foreign oil control their country's economic future again. So they made it a law that they would research, and develop ethanol as a prime fuel.

The Brazilian National Alcohol Program, or Proalcool, was created on November 14th, 1975, by Decree No. 76.953, with the goal of fostering alcohol production, in order to meet the needs of both the Brazilian domestic market and foreign markets, as well as to comply with government policy for automobile fuels.

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] In 1975 Brazil implemented four policies as part of that decree to stimulate ethanol production.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] 1) It required Petrobras, its major oil company, to purchase a required amount of ethanol.
2) It provided $4.9 billion of low-interest loans to stimulate ethanol production.
3) It provided subsides so that ethanol’s pump price was 41 percent lower than the price of gasoline.
4) It required that all fuels be blended with a minimum of 22 percent ethanol (E22).[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] In 2000, Brazil deregulated the ethanol market and removed is subsidies. However, depending on market conditions, all fuels are required to be blended with from 20 to 25 percent ethanol.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] Flex-fuel vehicles were introduced in 2003. These vehicles can run on straight ethanol, straight gasoline or a blend of the two. Today more than 70 percent of the new cars sold in Brazil are flex-fuel. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
To receive an operating license, all fueling stations must provide an ethanol or ethanol-blend pump. [/FONT]


History: http://www.extension.iastate.edu/agdm/articles/hof/HofJune07.html

Today, in the U.S., there is no government decree that all stations must have an ethanol pump. IN fact, about 1900 of the 170,000 stations in the U.S. sell E85. Today, just about 10% of vehicles sold in the U.S. are flex-fuel. GM has stated it will reach 50% flex-fuel cars by 2012.

So how do you convince Congress to require local gas stations to carry it? (First, there is the jurisdiction problem. Does Congress has jurisdiction to mandate a local gas station to carry ethanol? Then, there is the subsidy problem. Even with the current 45 cent ethanol subsidy blender's credit, it still is only about a 20% subsidy. Ethanol is now price competitive with gasoline, or at least it was when gasoline is $2 a gallon. When it is $1.49 a gallon, it's too hard to compete without help).

Yes, we need a $1 a gallon gasoline tax on top of current taxes, with the proceeds going to alternate-fuel conversion for gas stations, and to help educate consumers on the real cost of imported foreign terrorist gasoline, so they can purchase flex-fuel cars, and we can break our addiction to foreign oil.

BY the way- while this year there are 25 models of GM vehicles that are available as flex-fuel, there is only one model of Toyota- that's the big 5.7 liter Toyota pickup truck. http://www.e85fuel.com/e85101/flexfuelvehicles.php

And there are NO Hondas certified for flex-fuel.

If it were me, I would mandate ALL new cars and trucks sold MUST be flex-fuel, or other alternative fuel.

 

[rawiron1]

Why is it that our jungle friends in Brazil can function just fine on the "alcohol standard" but all these rich, over educated, know-it-all White boys up here in Amerika can't figure out how to do it? Maybe we are not smarter than everyone else like we think we are.

Jason

 

[James48843]

Hopefully, E85 will continue to pick up steam. It would be great to have the choice. The rate of additions is impressive!

Unfortunately, at $1.50/gal, gasoline is making it harder to convince people we need the change and the option. When E85 is consistently 20% cheaper than gasoline, people will buy it. My Dodge Stratus gets about 12% fewer MPG on E85 than gasoline, so anything close to that price difference, and I am happy.

But the rate of addition would be a lot more if gas climbs back upward again, and ethanol becomes much more price competitive.

When you have a flex-fuel vehicle, you have a choice on which fuel to buy. That's the great advantage.

Note- 1900+ is good, but it's not great. There are about 170,000 gasoline stations across the U.S. So we're just a tad over 1% of them carrying E85.

if 10% of them would carry it, our country would be in a much better place, from a National Security standpoint.

We'll get there. It just takes time, and consumer demand.

And lots of flex-fuel cars out there ready to use it, a distribution system built to better distribute it, and more knowledge by the public of the benefits of running E85.

GM, Ford, both say 50% of new fleet E85 capable by 2012.

 

[HappyGoLucky]

Hopefully, E85 will continue to pick up steam. It would be great to have the choice. The rate of additions is impressive!

 

[James48843]

And as of this morning, there are 1926 stations nationwide already selling E85. A year ago there were barely over a thousand.

View attachment 5394
​

If you want E85, go ask your local gas station when they expect to start carrying it. It will be the public asking that will convince them to make an investment to start carrying it.

​

 

[James48843]

Ha, only one E85 station in Virginia, the one run by Citgo in Navy Annex. The closest one in Maryland to the center of Government is in Rockville. This is not a serious Government mandate, this is a joke. Driving out to Rockville or Navy Annex from the government buildings in the District just to get gas is not a serious proposition. It'll take you more than 20 minutes even if you discount the bloody traffic and we are talking about 5 miles only if you are a crow.

E85 IS available within DC:


IN D.C.:

(for GSA Cars
DC Fleet Management Admin. Fueling Location
1835 W Virginia Ave., NE
Washington, DC 20002

Bolling Air Force Base
Bolling Air Force Base
Washington, DC 20032


(For Public )
Georgetown Chevron
2450 Wisconsin Ave
Washington, DC 20007
202-337-6277


Also here are all E85 Pumps in Virginia

NEX Quarters K
801 South Joyce Street
Arlington, VA 22204
703-979-3891
ONLY E85 available to the public, not gasoline. Private station



Stop In Food Stores (Shell)
1220 Seminole Trail (US-29)
Charlottesville, VA 22901
434-973-1005





OTHER VA Stations:


Langley Research Center
Langley Research Center
Hampton, VA 23681
757-864-3676
Private facility. No public access.

Naval Shipyard

Portsmouth, VA 23701

Military use only, no public access.

Office of Fleet Management Services
2400 W Leigh St.
Richmond, VA 23220
804-225-4490
Private facility. No public access.

AAFES Post Exchange Defense Supply Ctr
8000 Jefferson Davis Hwy
Richmond, VA 22134

Access restricted to those who have DSCR security clearance.


Maryland is a bit better- now with 15 locations, if you include GSA vehicle only locations.


Andrews Air Force Base

Andrews, AFB, MD 20762

Government Fleet Vehicle use only.

Quik-Mart Citgo Parole
2042 West St.
Annapolis, MD 21401
410-571-9676


Quik-Mart Citgo Parole
2042 West Street
Annapolis, MD 21041
410-571-9676
Open M-F 5:30 am -9 pm. Sat 7 am
- 9 pm.

Baltimore State Office Center
300 W Preston St.
Baltimore, MD 21201

Private facility. No public access.

City of Baltimore
420 North Front St.
Baltimore, MD 21202

City government facility, not open to the public.

National Institute of Health
9000 Rockville Pike
Bethesda, MD 20892

Government Fleet Vehicle use only!

Fredericktown Chevron
1395 W Patrick Street
Frederick, MD 21702
301-694-6277


Montgomery County Agencies-Fleet Mgmt Services
16640 Crabbs Branch Way
Gaithersburg, MD 20855
240-777-5730
Public credit card access at all times!

Germantown W Express
20510 Frederick Road
Germantown, MD 20876
301-353-8288


Town Center Chevron
12301 Middlebrook Road
Germantown, MD 20874
301-972-5122


Goddard Space Flight Center
Bld 27 Soil Conservation Rd
Greenbelt, MD 20771
301-286-6225
Private facility. No public access.

County Facilities
16640 Crabbs Branch Way
Rockville, MD 20855
240-777-5730
Open to the public. *Call to request public use waiver

Congressional Plaza Sunoco
1469 Rockville Pike
Rockville, MD 20852
301-770-7240


Tacoma Park Texaco
6400 New Hampshire Avenue
Tacoma Park, MD 20912
301-270-7119


Social Security Administration
6401 Security Boulevard
Woodlawn, MD 21235

Government Fleet Vehicle use only.

More on the way in Virginia- expect another 10 stations within the next four to six months, currently in the permittting process.

 

[James48843]

I have a "flex fuel" SUV and that is a JOKE! There's no where near me to purchase it!!

Nine stations so far in Alabama.
http://e85prices.com/alabama.html

Part of the problem in the southern states is, unlike most of the northern/midwest states, the southern states generally have not followed environmental law trends, requiring old single-wall tanks to be replaced with newer double-wall underground tanks. Those newer double wall tanks cost less to convert over to E85.

Anyway, E85 infrastructer has to be built out- more terminals for distribution purposes, and more stations encouraged to convert. Georgia, for example, has grown from 1 station , to 22 stations in the last six months.

Of course, $1.50 gasoline doesn't help demand for E85. Perhaps now that gas is climbing again, demand will pick up for E85 again.

 

[CountryBoy]

I have a "flex fuel" SUV and that is a JOKE! There's no where near me to purchase it!!

Sure Happy, just about every Alt. fuel has some major drawback, infrastructure being one of the major ones. It'll take years for us to change over from gasoline to an Alt fuel for vehicles and transporting and disitribution, nationally, are the 2 biggies. But ya gotta start somewhere and the automotive industry would be remiss if they didn't start planning and developing these vehicles.

When I purchase my next PU, hopefully in about 10 years, I'll look a the flex fuel just for the flexibility of running on 2 different fuels. But a lot can change in 10 years.

CB