Will ethanol E85 catch on in the US? Will we Live Green and Go Yellow?

marmil1

E-85 is an ADM rip off of America. They get huge tax breaks to make it get close to the price of gas(can you say very good lobbyist), it takes more energy to make E-85 than we get out of it, and cars get significantly worse gas mileage on the stuff. Also I understand it cannot be transported through typical gasoline pipelines but rather must be trucked (more energy use). This will only add to our energy problems. We need to raise the gasoline tax as well as increase CAFE to improve efficiency. Perhaps we could apply the tax to paying down our huge national debt. Terrorism doesn't scare me however Bush's fiscal policy does!

jerrymcshane1

Boy, are you "on the money." You're one smart individual. ADM is the outfit that had it's 2 biggest "germs" sent to prison years back. One was the founders kid. Real bunch of scums to say the least. What goes on behind the scenes with these whore lobbyists would turn ones' stomach. look at this Abramoff crook. I think E-85 has a place in our society however but ONLY after the price differential is relevant. Until then it's just political BS. Bush who?

turboshadow

I just think that ICE's will not survive this century.

That was said many times at the beginning of the last century as well as many times during it.

Don't write off the ICE so easily.

snakeweasel

With shrieking reserves and increasing demand of fossile fuels, increasing technology and 95 years left in this century I would bet that the ICE will be gone or on the way out by 2101.

Even the most optimistic forecasts give us 75 years worth of oil left. Ethanol and biodiesel cannot replace it, only extend it. Add to that the rapid pace of technological advancement (compare 2001 with 1901) we should be able to replace the ICE by centuries end.

gagrice

Ethanol and biodiesel cannot replace it

That is not exactly true. Is it feasible would be more the case. The University of New Hampshire says we can produce enough biodiesel with growing algae in the desert south west, to supply our vehicle needs.

we found that to replace all transportation fuels in the US, we would need 140.8 billion gallons of biodiesel, or roughly 19 quads (one quad is roughly 7.5 billion gallons of biodiesel). To produce that amount would require a land mass of almost 15,000 square miles. To put that in perspective, consider that the Sonora desert in the southwestern US comprises 120,000 square miles. Enough biodiesel to replace all petroleum transportation fuels could be grown in 15,000 square miles, or roughly 12.5 percent of the area of the Sonora desert (note for clarification - I am not advocating putting 15,000 square miles of algae ponds in the Sonora desert. This hypothetical example is used strictly for the purpose of showing the scale of land required). That 15,000 square miles works out to roughly 9.5 million acres - far less than the 450 million acres currently used for crop farming in the US, and the over 500 million acres used as grazing land for farm animals.

UNH study

jae5

Unfortunately I don't frequent those areas enough to justify the distance to get there. Plus there's only one, so if I even go there, have to find out where it is, so going out of the way just to find an E85 station is a bummer. I don't want to drive as it is!!

Even going to the station near Wrigley Field is out, I'm a south-sider so driving is out. Plus it's baseball season too; I don't have to tell you how traffic is over there.

stevedebi

"I just think that ICE's will not survive this century. All stuff like E85, biodiesel and hybrids will do is, at best, be a temporary solution."

Don't forget that the ICE can run on hydrogen. BMW is pursuing this option. And hydrogen can be made from nuclear, wind or solar energy.

jae5

Ethanol Shortage?

snakeweasel

I don't know, I would have to research that. I do remember reading some commentaries on algea producing biodiesel and the issues with that, but I can't quote it right now.

snakeweasel

Well I wouldn't advise going to them even if you lived next door. Even with the lower price you are still paying more per mile due to loss of mileage.

boilermaker2

Hi Gagrice,

I'm glad that they think that ethanol cannot be moved by pipeline. That's all I'll say about it.

In addition, the "markets" have already adsorbed the anti-oxygenate additive problem...twice.

Boiler

gagrice

excerpts from the above "Ethanol Shortage" link.

But EIA, in a report last month warning of shortages, said that "new (ethanol) facilities will not start soon enough to meet 2006 demand." That, EIA head Guy Caruso told the committee, "could cause temporary supply dislocations and may cause price volatility.

"Ethanol mainly is made in the Midwest. But demand should be heaviest in the Northeast and Texas because of special clean-air fuel requirements there. Shipping alcohol costs more and takes longer because ethanol attaches to any moisture present and could contaminate petroleum pipelines — the cheap, fast way to ship

What happens if we buy FFV and no E85? It is back to burning nasty old inefficient gasoline. No thanks I will buy a diesel vehicle and wait for biodiesel.

lostworld2420

I think ethanol will catch on but only as a short term solution until hydrogen power vehicles kicks in. :lemon: :shades:

gagrice

We conclude that the NEV [net energy value] of corn ethanol is positive when fertilizers are produced by modern processing plants, corn is converted in modern ethanol facilities, farmers achieve normal corn yields, and energy credits are allocated to coproducts. Our NEV estimate of 16,193 Btu/gal can be considered conservative, since it was derived using the replacement method for valuing coproducts, and it does not include energy credits for plants that sell carbon dioxide. Corn ethanol is energy efficient, as indicated by an energy ratio of 1.24, that is, for every Btu dedicated to producing ethanol, there is a 24-percent energy gain. Moreover, producing ethanol from domestic corn stocks achieves a net gain in a more desirable form of energy. Ethanol production utilizes abundant domestic energy supplies of coal and natural gas to convert corn into a premium liquid fuel that can replace petroleum imports by a factor of 7 to 1.

Ethanol NEV

gagrice

Same study using Switchgrass.

Ethanol from Cellulose (e.g. switchgrass or corn stover)
The energy balance from corn, then, is slightly positive. However, ethanol can also be derived from another source, namely, cellulosic feedstocks such as corn stover or switchgrass. In this case, the energy balance is much improved, as shown in Table 1 of this paper by McLaughlin and Walsh. Their data show that while the energy gain from corn grain is 21%, the energy gain from converting switchgrass to ethanol is 343%! The downside, of course, is that conversion technologies are not ready for primetime yet, as shown in the the USDA-DOE study mentioned above--the cost per gallon of ethanol from cellulose fermentation is about $1.50.

The main worry here is that corn stover will be promoted as the cellulose source, rather than perennial grasses, and that's a big concern. Growing corn is already an environmental problem, but removing all stover (analgous to harvesting corn silage--but that's another topic!) will really leave the land open to wind and water erosion. All this adds up to the fact that using perennail grass crops, such as switchgrass, makes environment sense. More work on conversion technologies is needed, but when it is available, it will mark a substantial advance over the current corn ethanol industry.

gashauler

It can't be truck to most terminals because the demand is too large. It must come in by railcar. Down in San Diego Ca. they had a major problem when the state outlawed MTBE. Now we're only talking about the oxygenate used in winter gasoline and not E-85. A terminal that's loads a few million gallons a day would need 10% of that in ethonal. A truck can only haul about 9,000 gallons so you's need lots of trucks. If I remember correctly the truck number was like 33 trucks a day. Now that does sound like many but add 20 minutes to unload and it would be hard to keep up with demand. That's a perfect world when the trucks get there on time and are ready to unload right away which happens like never. Raisinf tax might help but who wants to pay more. The only solution is reduction.

tpe

I agree that the ICE's days are numbered and I think it will be gone a lot sooner than the end of the century. Not necessarily because we will be forced to by limited fuel supplies but because it will become an archaic method of propelling a vehicle.

An electric car of average size can go approximately 3 miles per kilowatt-hour. In this country the typical price for electricity is around 9 cents per kilowatt hour. That comes out to 3 cents a mile. There's no gas, biodiesel, ethanol, etc. ICE solution that will approach that. The obstacles are finding a method of storing enough electricity to provide reasonable driving distances and the ability to re-charge quickly. While its impossible to schedule technological advances my guess is that these problems will be overcome a lot sooner than the end of the century. When this happens people that generate their own electricity through solar, wind, or whatever will no longer be dependant on an industry to provide the energy to power their vehicle. I hope to live to see this happen because the shake-up in the status quo will be amazing and gratifying.

gagrice

It is a problem and not well thought out by the people that mandate these exotic gas formulas. Now with shortages in the ethanol supply, it will cause shortages at the pump and higher prices. No wonder San Diego has high gas prices. Ethanol may be some people's idea of wonderful. It ain't so for us on the East and West coasts. Before we only had Exxon in our pockets. Now we have ADM and the AG mob sucking us dry.

snakeweasel

I am not sure electric cars are the solution, at least not ones that don't generate their own electricity. However I can see some enterprising person coming up with a small commuter car that can run for 30 or so miles that can recharge using a solar system.

tpe

I think electric cars are inevitable, but I've been wrong before. It might start out as the commuter car you describe that evolves over time into something more mainstream but I believe that it will more likely begin as a plug-in hybrid. As battery technology advances these cars will eventually be able to shed there ICE supplemental drive system. If/when that happens we will have a lot of corn on our hands.

snakeweasel

I do think that the electric car is inevitable, but it won't be a battery powered plug in type. What will most likely happen is that there will be another fuel that would be used to generate the electricity.

hfish1212

Toshiba's nano lithium batteries will be a big deal for electric cars. They can charge 60x faster than current batteries. That reduces a 8 hour charge to just 8 minutes.

gagrice

Sounds promising....

Toshiba battery

snakeweasel

It does sound promising but it raises some questions. The question I have is can current electrical systems deliver that much energy to recharge the battery that fast?

gagrice

I wondered the same thing. No free lunch. Takes a big charger to charge a battery that fast. You cannot get out anymore than you put in.

big_prize

Nuclear energy is not in unlimited supply. Some suggest that there is only 20-50 years of fissile uranium fuels available, although breeder reactors would significantly add to this. Also those estimates are further blurred by doubts as to the known extent of uranium deposits, as nuclear energy is not in style right now. As for wind and solar energy, I seriously doubt that these will be able to supply enough electricity for hydrogen generation in the forseeable future.

Those would keep pushing for coal gasification seem to ignore the fact that this does nothing to aleve releases of CO2 and the whole spectre of global warming. Biomass fuels essentially recycle CO2 from the atmosphere (except for energy expenditures during bio-fuel production).

gagrice

Nuclear energy is not in unlimited supply.

If that is true, Hydrogen fuel cells are a dead deal. No other source of energy comes close to a model that will be needed for hydrogen production. Wind and solar will be lucky to keep some lights lit.

rockylee

GM is the leader in this fuel source. I hope everyone else jumps on board eventually to help us get of foreign oil and clean up our enviroment.

Rocky

rockylee

Nuclear Energy is the best alternative if we continue to keep a power grid. You can reuse spent fuel by
re-enrichment. Reprocessing uranium like they do in Europe, will prevent us having to put it in Yucca Mountain. It's a huge upfront cost, but isn't it worth it ?????

Cold Fusion is the best alternative for cars. I probably won't get to see this fuel source in my lifetime, but feel someday it will be used unless something better comes along.

Rocky

Mr_Shiftright

well I understand it is possible to use coal gasification not to make fuel directly (as you say, the amount of C02 produced in that process is disastrous) but to use another process wherein a fuel is produced to spin turbine generators---apparently this latter process produces a form of C02 that is more easily captured than the direct coal to fuel process. I'm only just reading up on this so I don't know much about it yet.

RE: "MIDDLE EAST OIL" -- America doesn't get most of its oil from the Middle East...only I think 18%....

It would help if the US had a real energy policy but it doesn't.

todd59

Exactly, I have a flex fuel engine.....gets about 20% lower mpg on E85. But E85 is only $0.20 cheaper per gallon.

Mr_Shiftright

Another thing...you can't currently run an engine on pure ethanol, so it will never be a wholly alternative fuel like Biodiesel 100 or hygrogen can be.

Problem is the automakers won't invest the huge sums necessary to come up with new engine technology and the government won't invest in a crash program like the Manhattan Project in WWII to bring alternative fuels into an economically viable reality.

Looks like it will take a massive shock to our economy to spur industry and gov't to really get serious about all this.

rockylee

Another thing...you can't currently run an engine on pure ethanol, so it will never be a wholly alternative fuel like Biodiesel 100 or hygrogen can be.

Well this very site showed a 100% pure ethanol car built in Brazil.

Rocky

Mr_Shiftright

yeah, yeah, we've all seen that but it isn't entirely workable and buildable and sellable. They're running cars on hydrogen, too but that doesn't mean they're ready for the market place by a long shot.

If the vehicle isn't something someone will buy, it can't be treated like a "real" car. Case in point, the first series of electrics marketed in California by Chevrolet and Honda. Big flop.

seniorjose

I don't think they will. Maybe in the corn growing states. Even with a big subsidy it is more expensive than unleaded. It is also about 25% less efficient. If people think it is hard to find Diesel.

Gee, 10 percent Ethanol is subsidized and here in Iowa Middle grade (89 octane) sells for at least 10 cents a gallon cheaper than just 87 octane gas without Ethanol.
Gas mileage is the same with or without Ethanol. walmart sells all grades with 10% Ethanol and there does not seem to be any complaints. I agree that Ethanol will probably be sold only in corn and grass (forgot the name) producing states.

California will never use Ethanol, according to their US Senator Finestein, until either the corn producing states or the federal government pays for Ethanol storage, mixing and distribution...at least that is what she says. Great...let them ue just gas and pay the higher taxes that will be put on gasoline only states.

Let's face it, the days of the V-8 in autos are done and the high HP gas guzzling V-6s will be killed off by new taxes, effcient V-6s will be tolerated. I think we can expect a lot of Ethenol using hybrids and a lot more I-4s that are now challenging the hybrids in open road mileage.

Corn is a lot more of an earth friendly crop than the million of dinosaurs that created the finite supply of oil. Mega-Agriculture companies and subsidies will help us wean our dependence on Mega-oil companies and their government subsidies!

snakeweasel

Gas mileage is the same with or without Ethanol.

I beg to differ, E85 will result in a very noticeable drop in mileage, as much as 30+% in some vehicles. A 10% ethanol blend usually drops mileage by 1 to 3 MPG.

Corn is a lot more of an earth friendly crop than the million of dinosaurs that created the finite supply of oil. Mega-Agriculture companies and subsidies will help us wean our dependence on Mega-oil companies and their government subsidies!

The growing of corn is not very earth friendly plus we don't have the land to grow enough corn to replace the gas we use. As far as weaning us off of mega-oil companies and their government subsidies all ethanol will do is switch us to mega-companies like ADM and their government subsidies.

buildintechie

I've been reading everybody's comments, so I'd like ya'lls suggestion.

I'm going into the construction industry, and need to get a truck in the next couple of months. I've been planning on getting a chevy silverado partly b/c I like chevy's and aprtly because they have an option to get a flex fuel engine, at no extra cost. The way I see it, since the engine can operate off regular unleaded, without any efficiency loss, shouldnt I get the e-85 capable engine, in the hopes that e85 goes down in price in the future?

thoughts?

snakeweasel

Just remember that the Silverado you will lose 4-5 MPG with E85. That may not seem like a lot but the truck only gets 16 MPG in the city with E85 you will only get 12 MPG.

Secondly I wouldn't place bets on E85 going down in the future.

gagrice

There may be some tax incentives for FFV in your state. You do have the option to go with whichever fuel you choose. As was pointed out the FE is much lower for E85. If unleaded is $2.50 per gallon you will have to get E85 for $1.87 or less just to break even. I can tell you that 5.3L engine is the best GM has ever built. I love the one in my GMC Sierra Hybrid. I think it is just a computer adjustment that allows you to use E85 in that engine.

gagrice

The Big 3 are offering E85 FFV in several cars and trucks. Nissan is offering the Titan with E85 capability. Where is the supposedly "green" Toyota and Honda on this move to cut GHG & fossil fuel usage? For companies that claim to be on the leading edge of cleaner cars & trucks, they seem to be lagging far behind. The Big 3 have at least a 6 year lead on Toyota & Honda.

oregonboy

I guess they don't by into the alcohol boondogel. They've been busy developing hybrids. :P

james

Mr_Shiftright

Could you permit me to be a real pain and make one small commment on "dino" oil? This oil comes from plants, not dinosaurs of course....I know it's nit-picking and I apologize, but it bothers me when I see that

rockylee

Oil comes from neither, it's made from methane and pressure. If Dinosaurs/Plants, made the oil over millions of years then explain to me why here in West Texas, we have wells that were dried up 20 or 25 years ago, and they are plum full of brand new oil ?

Faux Science 101 :P

Rocky

jta

Toyota and Honda have both announced that they decided NOT to jump on the E85 "bandwagon" because they are both offering their Hybrid designs instead of the E85 option.

They both claim a lack of infrastructure, and greater consumer savings with their hybrid designs. Which I somewhat agree with... :confuse:

If you take out the fact that the hybrids cost more....You will achieve greater savings with a Hybrid. Based on the fact that you get less MPG with E85, and it currently is only $0.20 less than regular in my area, and I'm in the "Corn belt". So, E85 will "reduce" the need for oil, it will not currently save the consumer any money. The higher fuel costs go ($2.69/Gal today outside Chicago), the faster a Hybrid will pay for itself.

E85 does nothing currently other than offer an alternative to fossil fuel....and the average consumer needs more motivation than that to care.

It will take some time and motivation ($$$) to get people "en Mass" to move to E85. My suggestion is to get the Gov to subsidize E85, so it becomes an "attractive" alternative. This will help get the distribution and infrastructure quickly developed. Then, say 10 years down the road, when people have become comfortable and accept E85, the Gov can start gradually eliminating the subsidy over a period of time. This would achieve the ultimate goal of weening the US off of Fossil Fuels.

snakeweasel

They both claim a lack of infrastructure, and greater consumer savings with their hybrid designs.

I will agree with the lack of infrastructure but not the savings.

If you take out the fact that the hybrids cost more....

Only if you take out the fact that hybrids cost more, but the fact is the will always cost more and are more complicated pieces of machinery.

Anyway a driver of an FFV can save money over E85 fuel just by using regular gas.

jta

Here is a link to a case study on the use of corn to produce ethanol and be used as an alternative fuel.

Points out a lot of the shortcomings of growing and processing.

It a pretty interesting read....

Ethanol From Corn

jta

Anyway a driver of an FFV can save money over E85 fuel just by using regular gas

Thats my point...Most American consumers even won't consider E85 if it won't save them any money. Without a significant # of people migrating to E85, it will falter, and we are no better off.

I think most of the Auto Manufacturers are using E85 as an "easy" way into the "alternative fuel' market. All the manufacturers can easily adapt current engines to utilize E85 without significant engineering and cost. That is why GM was the first to jump on the bandwagon in the US. They have no production ready Hybrid to offer. Plus, they have been offering "flex Fuel" cars in Brazil since 2003. Flex fuel vehicles account for 30% of new car sales there.

Here is a link to one of the stories: Brazil FlexFuel

They note a savings of 40% over regular fuel. I am seeing a savings of only 12% here in the Midwest, and that gets negated by the decrease in fuel economy.

Also Brazil uses "Ethanol" only. They do not use E85.

Mr_Shiftright

and the methane comes from......? Plants!

There is an alternative theory to where oil comes from, however, called the abiotic theory of oil formation. There are some problems with the plant theory of oil formation that is true.

As for "new" oil, well it takes a long time for oil to migrate to present strata.

In any event, whatever it is that is making oil, it ain't dinosaurs.

chillin669

I pretty much agree, Ford vehicles have been flex fuel for YEARS, and now Chevy just came out with the whole flex fuel thing to try to save their butt, and make people thing their cars are sooo enviromentaly green. In Califonia where i live there is 1(yes 1) ethanol station in the whole state. Pretty weak for such an enviromentally progressive state. I do think there is something to be said about fuels that can be grown from crops(ethanol, biodiesel etc.,) Our farmers are hurting, and it could reduce our need for petro. Hell, tons of cars in Brazil run on ethenol, and the extract it from all the suger cane they produce.

gagrice

Transporting Ethanol is expensive and hazardous. CA farmers are not going to raise corn at 2 bucks a bushel. Corn was $3 a bushel 28 years ago when I was farming. And we were going broke at that price. At $2 per bushel E85 is just slightly less than unleaded regular. So unless oil gets twice what it is today it will not pay farmers to jump into corn. That is said to say that right now we are not keeping up with Ethanol production required to take the place of MTBE, as an oxygenator. Nothing wrong with owning a FFV to give you the option if E85 ever gets priced right.