write your congress-critter - increased ethanol in gasoline
in [Technical]
|
Prev: 1992 Dodge Grand Caravan Alternator removal
Next: Toyota drags down new-vehicle quality average; Ford leads Detroit3 gains, J.D. Power says
From: dsi1 on 25 Jun 2010 17:57 On 6/25/2010 9:43 AM, jim wrote: > > > "C. E. White" wrote: >> >> "jim beam"<me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message >> news:5PqdnaaS2JY7cYLRnZ2dnUVZ_v-dnZ2d(a)speakeasy.net... >>> On 06/21/2010 12:53 PM, C. E. White wrote: >>>> A few counterpoints: >>>> >>>> 1)Ethanol has value as an oxygenate that helps lower HC emmisions. I'd >>>> rather they use ethanol for this purpose instead of MBTE. >>> >>> it increases the "oxygen content" of exhaust, simply because there is >>> oxygen in an ethanol molecule. but that oxygen doesn't help combustion >>> because it's already chemically combined. >> >> OK. I buy that, but if the choice is MBTE or ethanol, I'd rather have >> ethanol. If the choice also includes neither, I am for that. > > Use of ethanol as fuel for the most part has nothing to do with oxygen. > Most of the ethanol is being added as an octane booster. MTBE was the > first choice of the refiners to replace lead in gasoline when the phase > out of lead started in the mid 70's. After most of the states and > finally the EPA banned the use of MTBE because it was showing up in > drinking water all over the country, ethanol took off because it is > really the only viable octane booster available. Everything else has > environmental ot economic disadvantages. > And the main reason an octane booster is used is it saves petroleum at > the foundry. The refiners can meet the octane requirements without > ethanol but it would require about 3% more petroleum input. We use a 10% or so mix in our gas. The dumb thing is that we have to ship the stuff here to Hawaii to do it. It's nutty but somebody must be getting some dough for this crazy caper. We do get a drop in mileage but the good part is that I can use the cheapest grades without knocking. > > The EPA also claims an oxygenate must be added in the winter in some > urban areas in the country where smog is a problem. > > >> >>>> 2) While the sort of corn used to make ethanol is food, it is mostly food >>>> for livestock. And after you use it to make ethanol, the stuff left over >>>> is >>>> actually still usable as high protein animal feed, so the loss to the >>>> food >>>> chain is much much less than the anti-ethanol people claim. >>> >>> isn't livestock classified as "food"? feeding corn to cattle makes a >>> damned sight more sense than burning it. especially when that corn >>> consumes more energy during cultivation and processing than it yields in >>> energy output. >> >> See references further below regarding the "energy balance." And of course >> there is a whole different discussion rearding the use of corn to feed >> animals, instead of using corn (or other crop grown instead of corn) to feed >> people directly. I raise around 50 head of cattle. I don't feed them any >> corn at all. They eat grass, with limited quantities of oats and stored hay >> as a winter supplement. But most Americans prefer beef with high fat contnet >> and that means "grain fed" beef. > > That is right. The more corn that goes into ethanol the less diabetes > and heart disease. > >> Think how many Mexicans we could feed if we >> stopped diverting all that corn to cattle, hogs, and chickens. > > Mexicans had no problem growing enough corn to feed themselves before US > dump surplus grain on Mexico in the 90's. Destroying rural economies is > not feeding people it is wiping out their livelihood through greedy > predatory marketing. > > >> >> Actaully I am against the ethanol subsidies paid to oil companies. >> > > The stated purpose of the subsidy when passed by congress was to > compensate the oil companies for closing down their MTBE production > facilities. The ethanol producer organizations say they can do without > the subsidy as it won't affect ethanol usage, but eliminating it will > raise the cost of gasoline.
From: jim on 25 Jun 2010 20:14 dsi1 wrote: > > On 6/25/2010 9:43 AM, jim wrote: > > > > > > "C. E. White" wrote: > >> > >> "jim beam"<me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message > >> news:5PqdnaaS2JY7cYLRnZ2dnUVZ_v-dnZ2d(a)speakeasy.net... > >>> On 06/21/2010 12:53 PM, C. E. White wrote: > >>>> A few counterpoints: > >>>> > >>>> 1)Ethanol has value as an oxygenate that helps lower HC emmisions. I'd > >>>> rather they use ethanol for this purpose instead of MBTE. > >>> > >>> it increases the "oxygen content" of exhaust, simply because there is > >>> oxygen in an ethanol molecule. but that oxygen doesn't help combustion > >>> because it's already chemically combined. > >> > >> OK. I buy that, but if the choice is MBTE or ethanol, I'd rather have > >> ethanol. If the choice also includes neither, I am for that. > > > > Use of ethanol as fuel for the most part has nothing to do with oxygen. > > Most of the ethanol is being added as an octane booster. MTBE was the > > first choice of the refiners to replace lead in gasoline when the phase > > out of lead started in the mid 70's. After most of the states and > > finally the EPA banned the use of MTBE because it was showing up in > > drinking water all over the country, ethanol took off because it is > > really the only viable octane booster available. Everything else has > > environmental ot economic disadvantages. > > And the main reason an octane booster is used is it saves petroleum at > > the foundry. The refiners can meet the octane requirements without > > ethanol but it would require about 3% more petroleum input. > > We use a 10% or so mix in our gas. The dumb thing is that we have to > ship the stuff here to Hawaii to do it. Doesn't the petroleum have to be shipped in also? I believe the state of Hawaii is trying to encourage a local ethanol industry. -jim >It's nutty but somebody must be > getting some dough for this crazy caper. We do get a drop in mileage but > the good part is that I can use the cheapest grades without knocking. > > > > > The EPA also claims an oxygenate must be added in the winter in some > > urban areas in the country where smog is a problem. > > > > > >> > >>>> 2) While the sort of corn used to make ethanol is food, it is mostly food > >>>> for livestock. And after you use it to make ethanol, the stuff left over > >>>> is > >>>> actually still usable as high protein animal feed, so the loss to the > >>>> food > >>>> chain is much much less than the anti-ethanol people claim. > >>> > >>> isn't livestock classified as "food"? feeding corn to cattle makes a > >>> damned sight more sense than burning it. especially when that corn > >>> consumes more energy during cultivation and processing than it yields in > >>> energy output. > >> > >> See references further below regarding the "energy balance." And of course > >> there is a whole different discussion rearding the use of corn to feed > >> animals, instead of using corn (or other crop grown instead of corn) to feed > >> people directly. I raise around 50 head of cattle. I don't feed them any > >> corn at all. They eat grass, with limited quantities of oats and stored hay > >> as a winter supplement. But most Americans prefer beef with high fat contnet > >> and that means "grain fed" beef. > > > > That is right. The more corn that goes into ethanol the less diabetes > > and heart disease. > > > >> Think how many Mexicans we could feed if we > >> stopped diverting all that corn to cattle, hogs, and chickens. > > > > Mexicans had no problem growing enough corn to feed themselves before US > > dump surplus grain on Mexico in the 90's. Destroying rural economies is > > not feeding people it is wiping out their livelihood through greedy > > predatory marketing. > > > > > >> > >> Actaully I am against the ethanol subsidies paid to oil companies. > >> > > > > The stated purpose of the subsidy when passed by congress was to > > compensate the oil companies for closing down their MTBE production > > facilities. The ethanol producer organizations say they can do without > > the subsidy as it won't affect ethanol usage, but eliminating it will > > raise the cost of gasoline.
From: dsi1 on 25 Jun 2010 20:29 On 6/25/2010 2:14 PM, jim wrote: > > Doesn't the petroleum have to be shipped in also? I believe the state of > Hawaii is trying to encourage a local ethanol industry. Unless I'm misinformed, oil is shipped here and all the gas in the state is supplied by one refinery. I have not heard of any state effort to mass produce ethanol here. I think Brazil is heavily invested in making fuel out of sugar cane. We could do that too on a smaller scale, I guess. > > -jim
From: Tegger on 25 Jun 2010 21:09 dsi1 <dsi1(a)humuhumunukunukuapua'a.org> wrote in news:XC9Vn.199$R87.191(a)newsfe12.iad: > > We use a 10% or so mix in our gas. The dumb thing is that we have to > ship the stuff here to Hawaii to do it. It's nutty but somebody must > be getting some dough for this crazy caper. And you get just one guess as to which "somebody" is /supplying/ the "dough". Bonus points for guessing who that "somebody" got their "dough" from. -- Tegger
From: jim beam on 25 Jun 2010 21:21
On 06/25/2010 05:29 PM, dsi1 wrote: > On 6/25/2010 2:14 PM, jim wrote: >> >> Doesn't the petroleum have to be shipped in also? I believe the state of >> Hawaii is trying to encourage a local ethanol industry. > > Unless I'm misinformed, oil is shipped here and all the gas in the state > is supplied by one refinery. I have not heard of any state effort to > mass produce ethanol here. I think Brazil is heavily invested in making > fuel out of sugar cane. We could do that too on a smaller scale, I guess. > >> >> -jim well, if any state /could/ produce sugar for ethanol, hawaii is it. but you don't because you're not politically important. and this is all politics. -- nomina rutrum rutrum |