On Wed, 10 May 2006 22:06:57 -0400, email@example.com wrote:
I'm pretty sure that the BATF requires you to poison
(err... "de-nature") any alcohol that's not intended
and stamped for human consumption, but you shouldn't
then be subject to the 26 USC 5001 taxes on
spirits, which IIRC, is about $13.50/gallon.
And if we'd drill in ANWR and the Gulf for oil,and process oil-shale,it
would not be $50 a bbl.
OPEC would have to lower their price because of supply and demand
changes,and we would not be paying adversaries(hostiles) large sums of
When compared to gasoline, you won't get an argument that ethanol can't give
you the energy output that gasoline can. But, it does have sufficient
energy output to drive a vehicle and, when added in amounts around 10%,
ethanol has beneficial environmental effects and the mix is not as energy
inefficient as pure ethanol because of the improved burning of the gasoline
portion of the mix.
Nature, left to it's own devices, came up with a fantastic process to
capture energy from the sunlight. We've been deriving benefits from that
process for years as we pump crude oil from the ground, crude oil that the
photosynthetic process enabled natural earth processes to store away.
Eventually, that storehouse will be depleted. Can we replace it with some
renewable fuel source? We'd better be able to. Will it be fuel ethanol
derived from grain? Definitely not completely. Could it be fuel ethanol
derived from cellulosic materials? Yes, if that process is sufficiently
perfected. More likely, it will be replaced by a mix of technologies.
There's a lot of concern that the use of corn for manufacturing fuel ethanol
primarily benefits the corn producer. I think that the folks who voice this
concern miss that fact that every form of energy that we use benefits some
more that others, i.e., OPEC, the crude producers, drilling equipment
manufacturers and the people who drill wells, oil companies, coal producers,
natural gas suppliers, electricity producers, and on and on.
You can bet that the fuel ethanol plants currently operating aren't losing
money. Those on the drawing boards, and there are a considerable number
planned, will never be built if it looks like they'll lose money.
Again, let the marketplace decide if it's weak and wasteful. The
marketplace in this country is very efficient at ferreting out inefficient
It is a valid alternative to gasoline. We can grow it, so it won't ever run
out. It can be produced here start to finish, so we don't have to depend on
the whims of unstable countries that don't like us. Really, gasoline
doesn't come from the ground either. Did you know that Iran actually
IMPORTS gasoline? Gasoline also has to be made from raw material (crude
The politics are really more about what crop gets to be turned into ethanol.
Sugar cane is a better source than corn, etc.
The real question with ethanol is whether it's cost effective. I agree
with Rich, all I ever hear on the news is more political rant, rather
than true facts. For example, 60 mins did a story about a town in Iowa
that built a corn to ethanol plant. They went on about how successful
it was, the farmers are getting more money, etc. What I'd like to see
is the total economics picture of what it costs, start to finish,
including govt subsidies, taxes, etc. Then you could do a reasonable
comparison. As I recall, the only study that I saw that appeared to be
relatively complete showed that ethanol came in at $3-4 a gallon.
Then, there are other issues. Some of the same people who herald
ethanol as a miracle fuel, also run around complaining about
environmental issues. Well, growing lots more corn takes lots more
land, fertilizer that produces run off, etc. So it;s not free from
it's own issues either.
On 10 May 2006 04:15:39 -0700, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
I wouldn't trust anything 60 Minutes said unless I also heard it from
a reliable source. It's a trash show afaic and it frightens me that
so many people who could make money elsewhere are willing to work for
it. Details omitted unless someone asks.
Well to each of us, we have varying opinions on 60 Minutes.
Folks over 50 place a GREAT deal of trust in most things that are shown
on 60 Minutes as they have shown themselves to be EXTREMELY reliable in
what they say over the decades that they have been on TV. No, they are
not infallible, and they do have bias that shows from time to time in
their reporting. However, among news folk, they represent very nearly
the BEST available.
That said, Politicians and News People share many common
characteristics. They BOTH love making mountains out of molehills and
they will both do almost anything to gain public attention.
This previous statement is as bad as the Illegal Immigrant discussion,
we paint all illegal immigrants with the same paint brush, we paint all
politicians with the same paint brush and we paint TV news people all
with the same brush.
No not all illegals have done anything wrong OTHER than cross the border
illegally, no not ALL politicians are immoral, corrupt money and
attention grabbing idiots, and not all news people will do ANYTHING
possible to INVENT a news story when there is none.
The problem is there isn't much chance of increasing US sugar cane
production. It only grows in the sub-tropics and Florida is trying to
throw the cane farms out. They an an ecological disaster ... as wouild
any farming effort large enough to replace oil would be. Brazil is
destroyng the rain forest to make ethanol. That is worse than the "oil
It seems most estimates come in the range of it taking 3/4 to 1.25
(sometimes up to 3)gallons of gas or diesel to produce a gallon of
ethanol, & the most favorable studies show it a wash AT BEST.
THEN you have to figure in the lower energy of ethanol on top of that...
a 28 mpg(on gas - highway) Taurus(Taurus FFV - the ones with the little
green leaf front fender badges) becomes something like 20 mpg on E85(15%
gas, 85% ethanol).
It's been a while since I've done it, but you can do a web search for
"E85 Taurus" to get some of the empirical data from these tests.
For many weedwackers, the test makes sense. If they run 90% gas and
105 ethanol, they've left out the oil. What's the mix, 1:32? If so,
you should have about 3% oil. Shouldn't the mix be 9.7% eth, 3.1% oil
and 87.2% gas?
Am I being too literal (and cynical) here?
Never underestimate the ability to make a study say what you want.
Our OIL driven economy is being held hostage to the middle eastern
terrorists dont like us because we meddle there
So I say build the plants and convert the cars as fast as possible, and
let them drown in their own oil....
growing corn or vegetable waste for conversion into ethanol might help
reduce global warming, as the plants clean the air.
Ih yeah make all ethanol TOTALLY TAX FREE FOR 10 YEARS TO ENCOURAGE THE
just this alone will save about 50 cents a gallon on the pump price
Its odd that you don't hear anything about research on using water,
Which contains the ingrediants for combustion, Hydogen and Oxygen. Is
it because its so plentiful that the fat Cats couldn't milk the public?
Politics is dirty stinking dirty.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.