The scam of corn ethonal

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The scam of corn ethonal

I love this idea.

http://www.startribune.com/opinion/otherviews/123952734.html

Americans support corn ethanol through a variety of state and federal mandates, as well as with a 45-cent-per-gallon tax credit.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office recently noted that this tax credit is redundant. Eliminating it would save taxpayers nearly $6 billion per year but not reduce the amount of ethanol produced.

Yet this week the U.S. Senate voted down a bill to end the credit, and last month it voted down a bill to end subsidies to the petroleum industry that would have saved another $4 billion a year.

Now imagine that, instead of giving these tax credits to the ethanol and petroleum industries, we used these funds to accelerate the adoption of more fuel-efficient vehicles.

If we were to give an average credit of $1,000 and achieve an average gain of 3 mpg above current standards for all vehicles purchased this year, we would save more fuel than all the ethanol we produce.

 

[Bakunin]

Re: The scam of corn ethonal

If we're going to push for more efficient vehicles, I'd rather it be done in a revenue neutral way (or in a way that is a net gain).

Rather than handing out tax credits for every god**** thing, just raise the gas tax. It's failing to generate enough revenue to merely maintain our aging infrastructure, so there's already a valid reason to do it. The increased demand for more efficient vehicles that would follow the tax increase (and higher gas prices) would simply be a bonus.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The scam of corn ethonal

If we're going to push for more efficient vehicles, I'd rather it be done in a revenue neutral way (or in a way that is a net gain).

Rather than handing out tax credits for every god**** thing, just raise the gas tax. It's failing to generate enough revenue to merely maintain our aging infrastructure, so there's already a valid reason to do it. The increased demand for more efficient vehicles that would follow the tax increase (and higher gas prices) would simply be a bonus.

I agree. When I first read it I didn't think of some of the negatives. However, the corn subsidy has to go. Ethanol is worse for the environment. I can't wait for algae.

 

[unh_hockey]

Re: The scam of corn ethonal

I agree. When I first read it I didn't think of some of the negatives. However, the corn subsidy has to go. Ethanol is worse for the environment. I can't wait for algae.

best guess, 10 years tops if it happens. keep your eye on synthetic genomics. Large scale production is the big question, but I think there are solutions out there. Not yet though...

 

[Tundra]

Re: The scam of corn ethonal

Looks like Senate actually passed to remove the 45cents subsidy for mixing ethanol after failing to pass it 2 days earlier.

Did some of the GOP actually make an argument in this debate that removing subsidy is like raising taxes. At least both R/D from Idaho agreed in bi-partisan mutual love fest on extending the ethanol subsidy for their state.

 

[unh_hockey]

Re: The scam of corn ethonal

Looks like Senate actually passed to remove the 45cents subsidy for mixing ethanol after failing to pass it 2 days earlier.

Did some of the GOP actually make an argument in this debate that removing subsidy is like raising taxes. At least both R/D from Idaho agreed in bi-partisan mutual love fest on extending the ethanol subsidy for their state.

Here is the article:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/editorialsopinion/2015352780_edit19ethanol.html?prmid=op_ed

Nothing new in this article that isn't discussed here. The tariff on imported ethanol is unfair, and the subsidy for a zero net energy product is foolish- glad to see some politicians see this and act upon it. Gives me some faith..

 

[unh_hockey]

Re: The scam of corn ethonal

http://detnews.com/article/20110621/AUTO01/106210427/1478/rss

I think I mentioned this earlier, but EPA set to cut ethanol mandate significantly:

This is the third consecutive year the EPA slashed the amount of cellulosic ethanol required. The targets set by Congress were 100 million gallons for 2010 and 250 million for 2011; EPA reduced them to 6.5 million gallon for both years.

The EPA is starting to get it. Maybe I spoke too soon about axing them. Of course the scammers will push E15, but they won't survive without government money.

 

[Almington]

Re: The scam of corn ethonal

http://detnews.com/article/20110621/AUTO01/106210427/1478/rss

I think I mentioned this earlier, but EPA set to cut ethanol mandate significantly:



The EPA is starting to get it. Maybe I spoke too soon about axing them. Of course the scammers will push E15, but they won't survive without government money.

Cellulosic ethanol and corn (sugar) ethanol are NOT the same thing. We just have not perfected the method to mass produce cellulosic ethanol yet. The problem is that congress, in their infinite wisdom, set standards that we could not technologically meet.

At the end of the day, ethanol isn't the solution. Science types know this, someday politicians will realize this in spite of the ethanol lobby.

 

[unh_hockey]

Re: The scam of corn ethonal

cellulosic ethanol and corn ethanol are NOT the same thing. We just have not perfected the method to mass produce cellulosic ethanol yet.

true, but corn ethanol is under that category and they cut it....significantly.

 

[Almington]

Re: The scam of corn ethonal

Thought that some of you may be interested in this. This week, the journal nature published a full supplement on biofuels: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v474/n7352_supp/index.html#out


Considering our discussion of the value of corn ethanol vs other biofuels:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v474/n7352_supp/full/474S09a.html?WT.ec_id=NATURE-20110623

[Excerpts from]

Fuel options: The ideal biofuel

by Neil Savage

Nature Vol 474, Pg S9–S11, (23 June 2011) doi:10.1038/474S09a

“Our goal really is to come up with methods to make all the same molecules found in gasoline, jet fuel and diesel,” says George Huber, a chemical engineer at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst, who is working on ways to turn plant organic matter, or biomass, into transport fuels. Like petrol (gasoline), an ideal biofuel should drop into today's infrastructure and carry enough juice to get any vehicle where it's going.

Ethanol, long the focus of the biofuel industry, doesn't meet those requirements. Compared with petroleum-based fuels, it's much less dense in energy: a litre of ethanol takes a car only about 70% as far as a litre of petrol, and ethanol cannot provide enough power for heavy trucks or aircraft. What's more, ethanol mixes with water from the environment, resulting in a more dilute fuel. It's also corrosive and so cannot easily be used in today's engines or be shipped cheaply through existing pipelines.

To overcome those limitations, researchers are trying to turn biomass into more complex alcohols than ethanol, as well as into hydrocarbons that more closely resemble those in petroleum, which is a mixture of different lengths of hydrocarbons. These scientists are developing processes — both biological and chemical— to produce substances that can be either placed directly in the fuel tank or slotted into the processing chain in existing refineries. And they want to use as much of the available biomass as possible, not just the simple carbohydrates that can be derived from sugarcane or kernels of corn, but also the harder to break down cellulose and lignin of corn stalks, wood and switchgrass (Panicum virgatum).

Huber doesn't foresee a single technology emerging as the king of biofuel processing. Instead, he says, there will be a mix that makes the best use of available resources and fits in with the various demands for fuels. “The future biorefinery is going to be like the petroleum refinery today,” Huber predicts. “You're going to have a series of different units that all make different products.”

But fuel will continue to be made of the same compounds that it is now. There's no reason to try to invent some new liquid, says George Church, a geneticist at Harvard Medical School in Boston, Massachusetts, because “alkanes are still a pretty good fuel”. There's no better way to store energy for transport; petrol is “like a battery that's 50 or 100 times higher in energy density”, says Church, whose synthetic biology research has contributed to LS9's technology and that of other biofuel companies.

Regalbuto is optimistic that biomass-derived, hydrocarbon-based fuel will soon slip seamlessly into everyday use. “I wouldn't be surprised if we're putting 'green gasoline' in our gas tank in five to seven years,” he says. “And we won't even know it, because it will be a drop-in replacement.” Longer term, he expects conventional cars, with their tanks of liquid fuel, will give way to battery-powered vehicles that depend on electricity generated from a mix of nuclear and renewable energy sources. Heavier vehicles — boats, aircraft, tanks and trucks — will rely on biofuel. Such a strategy, he says, could enable oil-dependent economies to end their reliance on imported petroleum. “Electricity for the light vehicles, biomass for the heavies, and we're energy independent in two decades,” he says.

Liao, who thinks the most promising feedstock will be algae, says a biofuel will be successful only if it can be made affordably and in large volume. “It has to be something that can be produced at the rate that we currently dig out oil from underground,” he says. “Then we can talk about replacing petroleum.”

 

[Almington]

Re: The scam of corn ethonal

true, but corn ethanol is under that category and they cut it....significantly.

No it isn't. Corn ethanol is sugar based, not cellulosic based.

From the article you posted: http://detnews.com/article/20110621...ulosic-ethanol-mandate-for-2012#ixzz1Q7J0ygEN

Under a 2007 energy law, the U.S. was suppose to use 500 million gallons of cellulosic ethanol in gas tanks. Cellulosic ethanol comes from renewable sources like switchgrass, waste products, biomass and woody pulp, but hasn't been made in significant quantities.

Currently, about 10 percent of the nation's fuel comes from corn-based ethanol. Nearly 40 percent of the nation's corn goes into gas tanks and critics say that's driving up food prices and has some environmental downsides.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The scam of corn ethonal

Best part of the article.

Liao, who thinks the most promising feedstock will be algae, says a biofuel will be successful only if it can be made affordably and in large volume. “It has to be something that can be produced at the rate that we currently dig out oil from underground,” he says. “Then we can talk about replacing petroleum.”

 

[unh_hockey]

Re: The scam of corn ethonal

No it isn't. Corn ethanol is sugar based, not cellulosic based.

From the article you posted: http://detnews.com/article/20110621...ulosic-ethanol-mandate-for-2012#ixzz1Q7J0ygEN

I stand corrected. My expertise on cellulosic ethanol is limited.

I guess it wouldn't make sense to cut the requirement for ethanol when the demand is stuck at 10% - currently the mandate for blending.