# Ethanol



## W4DRR (May 17, 2005)

I notice this month's issue of Consumer Reports has a big article on ethanol (fuel -- not the drinking kind). Already, the opposition in the media is developing a battle plan to stop it. So often, their strategy is to re-define the argument, and that is just what they are doing, and CR is going right along. They are saying ethanol will not work because, right now, it has a negative energy gain. In other words, it takes more energy to produce than what it delivers. Eventually, I think that will change with newer technologies for it's production, but that is not the point anyway. Ethanol was not meant to be an ENERGY SOURCE, but rather a viable FUEL ALTERNATIVE to petroleum based products. The energy that is currently used for it's production comes from coal, hydro, and nuclear. None of which can be used as a portable energy source (unless you have Doc Brown's Mr. Fusion). Ethanol can be. What we need is not just merely energy, but a portable energy source suitable for motor vehicles.
Usually, there is always a hidden agenda, and simply put, they don't want us continuing to drive our large trucks and SUV's, pulling our Outbacks. Ethanol would allow that to continue even with dwindling oil supplies. They want us to drive Yugo's....and they don't have much tow capacity.
Sorry to get so political, and I realize that is generally a taboo on this site, but this is an issue that will affect us all in the near future.

Bob


----------



## campmg (Dec 24, 2005)

Bob, thanks for pointing out an important issue. I often wonder about the long term energy problems and effects they will have on towing our campers.


----------



## California Jim (Dec 11, 2003)

I would burn ethanol today at any cost if it were available. Our Grand Caravan is ready for E85 now. But fat chance finding any.

As to negative energy gain, I too hope this can be resolved if it is indeed true.

This conversation might be able to continue if we can leave out the political parties / leanings, and stay focused on the issue. This is a really important issue, and the future of our great nation depends upon a resolution.


----------



## Justman (Jul 22, 2006)

California Jim said:


> I would burn ethanol today at any cost if it were available. Our Grand Caravan is ready for E85 now. But fat chance finding any.
> 
> As to negative energy gain, I too hope this can be resolved if it is indeed true.
> 
> This conversation might be able to continue if we can leave out the political parties / leanings, and stay focused on the issue. This is a really important issue, and the future of our great nation depends upon a resolution.


Word on the news is that they're going to be building an ethanol plant here in LA sometime in the next couple of years. To get rid of the negative energy gain, I propose the building of new nuclear power plants. We just have to figure out how to get rid of the waste. I reckon we could always ask our brethren in Europe how they do it, as they've built more nuclear power plants over the last 15 years than we've built in the last 40 (read that somewhere, can't remember where...). Maybe Iran would take it off our hands?










I know there are smarter people out there than me, but I don't see how chopping up weeds/corn/whatever and letting it sit in a mash and fermenting would be more expensive than processing oil... Reckon I'll have to read up on it.

By the way, I've heard of a number of folks that have bought their own stills. No, I'm not talking about photography, but the stills our great grandfathers used in the hills or bayous to make moonshine. They have the ability to make ethanol, but they have to sign some paperwork to say they're not going to drink it. Wonder how that works...


----------



## mountainlady56 (Feb 13, 2006)

Uh, Justman,
Guys in the hills and bayous didn't have the market cornered on making shine.







My grandfather used to make it in a little storage room built into his chicken house. It was IN the city, and they lived directly across from the elementary school I attended as a child. First time I saw it, grandpa said that he was soaking the corn so it would swell up and go further feeding the chickens. Well, me being a kid, I went in and told my grandma how "smart" grandpa was for doing this. She didn't seem too impressed and said something about "he's doing it again!" Next thing I knew, grandpa's going around the house saying explicatives because (unbeknownst to him) my dad had put a few boxes of salt in it to make it quit working. I had no idea about all that terminology, until then. BUT, he was pretty upset because his "buck quit working" and somebody must have put something in it. It was JUST two barrels full. Well, we had some happy chickens around there for awhile!!








Darlene


----------



## W4DRR (May 17, 2005)

California Jim said:


> This conversation might be able to continue if we can leave out the political parties / leanings, and stay focused on the issue. This is a really important issue, and the future of our great nation depends upon a resolution.


I agree, the use of political labels tends to cloud the issue, and if they offend anyone, I apologize. But I am afraid, as this whole issue evolves in our country, the two sides will line up along political boundaries.

Bob


----------



## PDX_Doug (Nov 16, 2004)

W4DRR said:


> I am afraid, as this whole issue evolves in our country, the two sides will line up along political boundaries.


Let's hope not!
I think the bottom line is EVERYBODY wants a solution to this problem. Right or Left, Up or Down.

Happy Trails,
Doug


----------



## Veek (Jul 2, 2006)

Minnesota has numerous Ethanol plants and now approximately 300 gas stations that sell E85. You will find E85 priced $.40 - $.60 less per gallon than 87 unleaded.

Our local Ethanol plant just went through a multi-million dollar conversion to change from using natural gas as their energy source (at a cost of $500,000 to $750,000/month) to using wood byproducts that they get from cabinet shops and wood processors in the area. Their new power plant produces enough energy to run the entire plant along with a little extra that they are hoping to sell back to a utility company or use for some community purpose. In addition to these benefits the new gasification process essentially eliminates the foul odor that used to be evident during a certain stage of production. I'm not certain how this affects the negative energy scenario but I know that it helps it. Especially when a byproduct is being used as the fuel source to begin with.


----------



## wolfwood (Sep 19, 2005)

W4DRR said:


> as this whole issue evolves in our country, the two sides will line up along political boundaries.


I think as long as we presume this to be the case - it will be. This country - this world - has long needed alternative fuel sources for all sorts of applications. Many people much smarter than I have tried to enable these discussions for quite awhile now - this is definately an evolutionary matter....but its by no means new. Politics (and its big money friends) repeatedly cause the destruction of any productive discussions and the very fact that non-renewable resources ARE depletable (in fact, ARE depleting) gets lost...until the next idea emerges and the cycle is repeated. ALL R&D efforts (whether for alternative fuel sources or otherwise) are expensive by nature. Its only when the "manufacturing" process can be standardized and those ole' supply/demand gears start roling, that the costs of production (of anything) and therefore, cost to consumers, can decrease. The last I knew - neither the SUN, EARTH, OCEANS, nor WIND were either 'red' or 'blue'. How is it that their protection and sustainability has become politicized. Hmmmm...ya' think maybe all of the parties involved - left, right, & middle - have hidden agendas and are simply playing with the common man's wallet & fears ? I would like to think that we, being who "we" are, can have educated, intelligent discussions and honor the respect we have for each other and for the resources which we all - by virtue of being campers - enjoy.


----------



## mswalt (Sep 14, 2004)

> Maybe Iran would take it off our hands?


I vote for that. In the form of a _bomb_, that is.

Seriously, though. I firmly believe we have the technology to solve our energy problems if the government would get out of the way and let us in the private sector do it.

Unfortunately, I'm afraid that is quite far away.

Mark


----------



## MJRey (Jan 21, 2005)

Veek said:


> Minnesota has numerous Ethanol plants and now approximately 300 gas stations that sell E85. You will find E85 priced $.40 - $.60 less per gallon than 87 unleaded.


I think CR also said that when driving with E85 you get about 25% less mpgs so the real cost is actually higher than regular gas.


----------



## W4DRR (May 17, 2005)

MJRey said:


> Minnesota has numerous Ethanol plants and now approximately 300 gas stations that sell E85. You will find E85 priced $.40 - $.60 less per gallon than 87 unleaded.


I think CR also said that when driving with E85 you get about 25% less mpgs so the real cost is actually higher than regular gas.








[/quote]

That is a down side of using ethanol. It is a matter of physics; there are simply fewer BTU's in a gallon of ethanol than a gallon of gasoline.
But it would still be far better to have fewer BTU's than no BTU's.

Bob


----------



## outback21 (Jun 17, 2006)

Don't know what it costs to produce Ethanol, however it is a fact that Ethanol gets 2/3 the fuel mileage of gasoline and it is highly corrosive to fuel plumbing. It may be a good alternative, but it and others will be as gasoline prices continue to climb, i.e., gasoline has an upper limit before there are other choices. In addition, don't forget that lubrication is also necessary and will come into play at some point.


----------



## N7OQ (Jun 10, 2006)

W4DRR said:


> I notice this month's issue of Consumer Reports has a big article on ethanol (fuel -- not the drinking kind). Already, the lefties in the media are developing a battle plan to stop it. So often, their strategy is to re-define the argument, and that is just what they are doing, and CR is going right along. They are saying ethanol will not work because, right now, it has a negative energy gain. In other words, it takes more energy to produce than what it delivers. Eventually, I think that will change with newer technologies for it's production, but that is not the point anyway. Ethanol was not meant to be an ENERGY SOURCE, but rather a viable FUEL ALTERNATIVE to petroleum based products. The energy that is currently used for it's production comes from coal, hydro, and nuclear. None of which can be used as a portable energy source (unless you have Doc Brown's Mr. Fusion). Ethanol can be. What we need is not just merely energy, but a portable energy source suitable for motor vehicles.
> Usually, with the lefties there is always a hidden agenda, and simply put, they don't want us continuing to drive our large trucks and SUV's, pulling our Outbacks. Ethanol would allow that to continue even with dwindling oil supplies. They want us to drive Yugo's....and they don't have much tow capacity.
> Sorry to get so political, and I realize that is generally a taboo on this site, but this is an issue that will affect us all in the near future.
> 
> Bob


Well stated Bob and you are so correct about the agenda, these people want to control every aspect of your lives. We have to do something and Ethanol is a good start. I would like see more use of Hydorgen as well a very clean fuel like ethanol and easer on the engine.

I have always lived by the saying:
Man who says it can not be done, should not bother man who is doing it!


----------



## JimBo99 (Apr 25, 2006)

The left and right may not line up on ethanol, but we'll sure be lined up together at the pump! Saudi Arabia's oil is peaked as well as Mexico's. Iraq is a real mess, and Iran and Venezuela hate us. $100 a barrel oil is just one event away.


----------



## PDX_Doug (Nov 16, 2004)

Straight from the *Outbackers.com Forum Rules & Guidelines*:

_*Please NOTE:* Due to the inflammatory nature of political, world news, religious and other related topics, we have deemed them inappropriate for our forums. These topics often result in heated discussions not always suitable for our younger members. We suggest you discuss these types of topics on a forum and/or site dedicated for heated debates._

Also...

_You may not make personal attacks on other users or staff members either in public forums or private messages._

Please bear in mind that roughly half the population of this country (and one would expect this forum) fall into the 'lefties' group some seem so eager to attack. My guess is that every one of them feels such inflammatory statements are offensive, and yes, a personal attack.

Let's check the B.S. at the door, and keep Outbackers the friendly and supportive place it's always been.









Happy Trails,
Doug


----------



## cookie9933 (Feb 26, 2005)

It's absurd to think that politics has anything to do with using ethanol as fuel. It's more about vested interests, like the oil companies, being opposed to alternative energies.

This is about physics and energy conversion. Weighing whether this can be part of an energy solution will take time and effort. Time will tell.

Bill


----------



## merlotman (Dec 28, 2004)

E85 is widely available here in SD. E85 is $2.20 a gallon vs $2.74 for E10 and $2.79 for regular with no ethanol added at many stations in my neighborhood. E85 is 19.7% cheaper than E10. My son-in-law just completed a "real world" test of E85 vs E10 in a 2007 Ford F150 SuperCrew. He states his mileage with E85 was 15% less than with E10. He did not test against regular gasoline without ethanol. No judgements here, just the facts. You are free to make up your own minds.


----------



## egregg57 (Feb 13, 2006)

PDX_Doug said:


> I am afraid, as this whole issue evolves in our country, the two sides will line up along political boundaries.


Let's hope not!
I think the bottom line is EVERYBODY wants a solution to this problem. Right or Left, Up or Down.

Happy Trails,
Doug
[/quote]

Words of wisdom.....


----------

