Nothing good about Ethanol

Dan Luke wrote:
What experts? Employed by whom? What are their qualifications? What
peer-reviewed studies did they publish?


Think about it logically. Besides, in order to be "energy independent"
with Ethanol alone, we would haqve to plant corn on every arcre of
farmland in this country.... forget growing any actual food.

Ethanol is a pipe dream, and except as an additive to boost octane
it is not cost efective.

ktbr wrote:



Think about it logically. Besides, in order to be "energy independent"
with Ethanol alone, we would haqve to plant corn on every arcre of
farmland in this country.... forget growing any actual food.

Bah, we've got millions of acres here in Montana, any wheat producing
state will, that are not farmed right now because it won't support sweet
corn. But it will grow the field corn that you use to produce ethanol
quite nicely.

"Newps" wrote:


Think about it logically. Besides, in order to be "energy independent"
with Ethanol alone, we would haqve to plant corn on every arcre of
farmland in this country.... forget growing any actual food.

Bah, we've got millions of acres here in Montana, any wheat producing state
will, that are not farmed right now because it won't support sweet corn.
But it will grow the field corn that you use to produce ethanol quite
nicely.

And the only reason we're talking about ethanol from corn is the mighty U. S.
corn lobby. Other crops--sugar beets up North, sugar cane down South--can
give much higher ethanol yields/acre.

--
Dan

"Gut feeling"

Intestinologists concur that the human gut does not contain
any rational thoughts.

What the human gut *is* full of is moderately well known.

On Thu, 1 Jun 2006 16:01:37 -0500, "Dan Luke"
wrote:


"Newps" wrote:


Think about it logically. Besides, in order to be "energy independent"
with Ethanol alone, we would haqve to plant corn on every arcre of
farmland in this country.... forget growing any actual food.

Bah, we've got millions of acres here in Montana, any wheat producing state
will, that are not farmed right now because it won't support sweet corn.

There is a *lot* of field corn grown in Michigan and the Mid West. In
both Michigan and Wisconsin a lot of that is used to feed dairy
cattle. We also have large farms producing cattle for beef.

But it will grow the field corn that you use to produce ethanol quite
nicely.

And the only reason we're talking about ethanol from corn is the mighty U. S.
corn lobby. Other crops--sugar beets up North, sugar cane down South--can
give much higher ethanol yields/acre.

Well, we are limited to how many acres of sugar beets we can grow and
they bring a premium price compared to corn. As a SWAG I say we
might be able to come up with another 15% in acreage planted to beets
up here in the frozen north. We might get more alcohol and we might
not. I don't know what the net energy yield would be, but it most
likely would be more expensive than corn alcohol.

I don't know what the yield would be from Sorghum. Too bad, we as a
country, have such a fixation against growing commercial hemp. (not
the recreational kind)

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

The ethanol is blended with the gasoline right at the tanker truck.
Shake'n'bake with the tanker truck on the road does further mixing, so the
gasoline "stocks" are devoid of ethanol contamination right now. THe
problem is to get suppliers back to giving us straight gasoline.

Jim



The EPA has
ruled California no longer has to use it. But will be some time
before stocks no longer contain it. That's what I read anyway.

RST Engineering wrote:
The ethanol is blended with the gasoline right at the tanker truck.

I heard an interview on a financial show a few weeks back that had an
oil company executive telling a completely different story. He
explained that plants and storage facilities needed certain parts and
seals changed to switch from MTBE laced gas to a gas / alcohol blend.

Could this be a regional thing?

I know of no Homo sapiens trying to conserve himself into prosperity.
The yankee dollar reigns supreme. You pilots putting auto gas in your
planes need to think again, carefully.

You pilots putting auto gas in your planes need to think again, carefully.

Not much thinking required, you *MUST* now test each and every load of fuel
for the presence of ethanol before you put it in your plane. Ethanol free
autogas is geting much harder to find. And it is certainly not labeled at
the pump anymore like it used to be.

Not much thinking required, you *MUST* now test each and every load of
fuel
for the presence of ethanol before you put it in your plane. Ethanol free
autogas is geting much harder to find. And it is certainly not labeled at
the pump anymore like it used to be.

It is here in Iowa -- by law.

Ironic, no?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

B A R R Y wrote:
RST Engineering wrote:
The ethanol is blended with the gasoline right at the tanker truck.

I heard an interview on a financial show a few weeks back that had an
oil company executive telling a completely different story. He
explained that plants and storage facilities needed certain parts and
seals changed to switch from MTBE laced gas to a gas / alcohol blend.

Which explains why the blending is done at the truck instead of the
plant.

Could this be a regional thing?

You think it could take a while to shut down a plant and do the
conversions required?

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.