Some Facts About Ethanol

Ethanol as a fuel? Wonderful on the face of it, but not cost efficient.

Problem with it is that it costs more in fuel to make it, transport it and distill it than you get out of it. Not practical.

I hold more hope for the Chinese Tallow Tree (a common non-native tree-weed back home) than I do for any corn based ethanol product. But, you don't hear anything about "China Berry Trees" from the so-called environmentally conscious left. FWIW, those same China Berry trees were imported to the South antebellum to provide for cheap candles (using the berry tallow) in slave quarters, and then they just went wild. Now they are a large, noxious weed. I know that the University of Houston was doing a feasability study on it back in the '80s (I often drove past their test "weeds"), but haven't heard anything more about it since.

First -- the waxy tallow from the berries is capable of being used as reactor feedstock, a direct replacement for crude oil. Yes, it is a heavy wax, but it is capable of being refined into conventional gasoline, albeit at higher cost than using conventional crude. But it IS possible, and renewable.

Second -- they produce large amounts of pulp wood of the sort that is suitable for use for making methanol, also a viable motor fuel.

Third -- they are ever increasing in acreage and are not useful for anything else. Why not make use of them?

Best I remember, back in the '80s, they said that the break-even point for tallow tree based energy was at about $45 per bbl crude, in '80s dollars. Seems like that is also about what the cost of oil sand and oil shale production is, which seems to get much more attention these days. It also turns out to be about what the price per barrel of crude is these days. Of course, since it costs more to make than what you get out of it, ethanol will never be cost efficient.

Ah -- but ethanol has the backing of Big Corn Agri-Business who have big spokesmouths and political clout. Who ever heard of growing trees for fuel?
 
Problem with it is that it costs more in fuel to make it, transport it and distill it than you get out of it. Not practical.
Click to expand...
Even if you factor in the costs of another oil embargo?
 
Even if you factor in the costs of another oil embargo?
Click to expand...
Yes, even if one takes into account the costs of another oil embargo.

I'm not talking about costs in the monetary sense. I'm talking costs as in an energy expenditure vs energy produced expense.

Problem is that it takes more energy expenditure to produce than is recovered, for a net LOSS in energy. That energy expended has to come from somewhere, and CAN'T come from ethanol itself, since it requires more than is recovered. The converse of that principle is natural gas, where a portion of the gas itself is tapped and burned to run the compressors that moves the gas down the pipelines, etc. Since less gas is expended than is recovered, the economics work. Not so with ethanol, you don't get out of it enough to make it worth while, energy-wise. You don't gain energy, you lose it.

Care to guess where that extra energy has to come from? Uh, oil, that's where. Let's say, for the sake of discussion, that it costs a gallon of petroleum distillates in fuel (which has considerably more energy per volume than ethanol) to produce a gallon of ethanol. (actually, it isn't even that good, it takes more, but...) Do the math. Aren't you just better off using oil in the first place? You betcha.
 
I say we import the ethanol from South America. Sending the money to some poor farmer in Brazil sounds better than funding the House of Saud in the Middle East. I know it isn't a 100% solution, but if we can reduce the demand for oil even a slight amount and comtinue to develope renewable energy sources. I have been ridng my bike all summer and have cut my fuel use alot.
 
Other than ethanol being a possible cleaning fluid (not my first choice) I fail to see the need for such an item in this forum. Being a supplier of a part of ethanol plant I did not expect to be confronted with this in my precious spare time.

Ethanol, like it, drink it, do not like it, go bore someone else.
Perhaps Kennedy was killed from 5 miles distance with a bb gun by someone who just had a bottle of ethanol. Maybe apollo never got to the moon and the government had secretly mixed ethanol in the drinking water so you would not notice Kubrick giving directions to Armstrong.

Take a lighter and check how much ethanol there is left in your gastank.
 
I'm not talking about costs in the monetary sense. I'm talking costs as in an energy expenditure vs energy produced expense.

Problem is that it takes more energy expenditure to produce than is recovered, for a net LOSS in energy. That energy expended has to come from somewhere, and CAN'T come from ethanol itself, since it requires more than is recovered. The converse of that principle is natural gas, where a portion of the gas itself is tapped and burned to run the compressors that moves the gas down the pipelines, etc. Since less gas is expended than is recovered, the economics work. Not so with ethanol, you don't get out of it enough to make it worth while, energy-wise. You don't gain energy, you lose it.

Care to guess where that extra energy has to come from? Uh, oil, that's where. Let's say, for the sake of discussion, that it costs a gallon of petroleum distillates in fuel (which has considerably more energy per volume than ethanol) to produce a gallon of ethanol. (actually, it isn't even that good, it takes more, but...) Do the math. Aren't you just better off using oil in the first place? You betcha.
Click to expand...

Although your premise is false for any viable source of ethanol (not to mention an unviable source like corn), why are people still after the Strawman of corn based ethanol production?
 
Car and oil companies love Ethanol, because like stated earlier it will never fully replace petroleum. Car and Oil Companies are scared to death of Electric and Hydrogen. Why are Hybrids in such limited supply even with the high demand and why are auto companies discouraging people from making their hybrid Plug-ins? Simple, someone figures out that you can charge an electric or Hybrid car with solar power, or with that the right equipment hydrogen could be made from water and some electrical current (solar again). Sure Ethanol is a renewalable source and ,makes the hippie feel better, but big business can still make a profit with it. A hydrogen burning Hybrid car that can burn Hydrogen you make from rain water, and uses electricity from batteries that you charge by plugging the car to solar panels on your garage, it is already possible, but you will never see it, because big business cannot make money, beyond the initial purchase of the vehicle and equipment.
 
Last edited:
Crosshair- Great idea

I saw in the paper today that Brazil creates ethanol from sugar cane at a cost of about $1.00 per gallon

Since I assume that the cost of corn based ethanol is somewhere far north of that number we should immediately drop all the subsidies and import all our ethanol from Brazil.

But we won't ....because ethanol use is all about propping up American farmers and corn production.....not about cheap energy/gasoline.

Maybe we could trade Brazil corn for Ethanol:confused:
 
Although your premise is false for any viable source of ethanol (not to mention an unviable source like corn), why are people still after the Strawman of corn based ethanol production?
Click to expand...
False? I think not. Corn? Most economically viable way, but still not economical.

Fact is, if it were economical, it would be able to stand on its own 2 legs. But it can't, hence it needs those subsidies -- our tax dollars in other words.

Fact is, I really don't care all that much except for that 1 thing. I mean, if ethanol were able to be produced at a net gain (monetarily as well as energy expenditure), I'd be tickled to death. Ain't gonna happen anytime soon, but that's beside the point. What really chaps me is that it is being used as a ploy to extract more of my tax money from, well, me.

If it's going to work, let the businesses who stand to profit from it pay for the R&D and thereby quit ripping off the taxpayers.:mad:
 
Last edited:
Please pardon the double-tap. I have no idea how that happened, I was SUPPOSED to be just doing an edit.:o
 
Last edited:
Jim, from everything I can find, producing ethanol from wood products is more efficient than producing ethanol from corn. Corn is one of the least-effective feedstocks for an ethanol plant. Obviously, if producing ethanol from wood products by any process were more expensive than producing ethanol from other sources, nobody would be pursuing the wood product processing methods.
 
False? I think not. Corn? Most economically viable way, but still not economical.
Click to expand...
I know you don't, but that's the way it is. Corn is not viable because of its requisite land use, not economics. What studies have you been looking at? Not any of Pimentel's work I trust.



Fact is, I really don't care all that much except for that 1 thing. I mean, if ethanol were able to be produced at a net gain (monetarily as well as energy expenditure), I'd be tickled to death.
Click to expand...
Start laughing.
http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aer721/aer721.pdf
 
gb_in_ga, when you make your claim about ethanol production being a net energy loser you are making the distinction between 200proof(100%) ethanol and ethanol that is at less than 190proof(95%) aren't you?

If you fail to make that distinction then you might have a real problem finding factual basis for your statement. Was shown 25 years ago that Scientist/Engineers who failed to make that distinction were wrong.
 
The first response pretty much simplified my answer. I run ethanol in my car even when it's more expensive than gasoline. Why?
Because I'm doing my part to burn homegrown hydrocarbons right here instead of sucked out of the sand in the middle east.
15% nationwide reduction is all it takes to completely eliminate our dependence on middle east oil. 15%. That's peanuts! A few less weekend cruises, a little less stop-light drag racing, a few minutes checking the tire pressure...
I parked my gas-guzzling (but highly entertaining) street rod and started grannying around town in a 2.5L Celebrity that's so rusty I feel like I need a tetanus shot just for looking at it.
This leaves me with more money to spend on ammo polluting the environment with lead. :cool:
 
Alright...

so it seems that ethanol is in too deep of an argument. What about HEMP SEED OIL?! They say only 3% of arable land is needed to meet America's fuel, textile, and paper needs with hemp! Don't know if that's true but it sounds like something worth investigating.


Epyon
 
so it seems that ethanol is in too deep of an argument. What about HEMP SEED OIL?! They say only 3% of arable land is needed to meet America's fuel, textile, and paper needs with hemp! Don't know if that's true but it sounds like something worth investigating.
Click to expand...

Where did you heard that?? High Times?? Pot smokers would say that hemp can cure cancer to make it legal:p
 
...What about HEMP SEED OIL?! They say only 3% of arable land is needed to meet America's fuel, textile, and paper needs with hemp!...
Click to expand...
Don't know about the 3% bit. But hemp is a very energy dense plant. As an added bonus it grows like a weed and will grow in soil that is very poor for other crops.
 
Crosshair...

would you say that hempseed oil is the way to go? High energy from less oil compared to petroleum am I right? If that's the case then hemp should not be banned, anything to give the oil companies the middle finger and tell them we're sick of their bull$417 excuses to be force to pay more while they get rich tapping politically unstable regions and destroying vital ecosystems for wildlife. Yeah, I'm a firm believer that once we can stop this stupid oil addiction we can still have all the fuel we want AND keep our wild lands.


Epyon

P.S: I'm an outdoorsman at heart as I'm sure many firearms owners are, especially if they hunt. Therefore it is the responsibility of our capable sentience to preserve what's on our planet for the long run.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top