Corn lobby's response to all our ethanol threads

8ninety8 said:

from what I remember about ethanol production in my state, tax supported ethanol plants were constructed over the last several decades, hundreds of millions, probably well into the billions by now, and then run by, one would guess, well politically connected buddies of whatever party happened to be in power? It's the reverse Midas touch.

Click to expand...

Hmm........sounds just like the

BMW plant in SC
Mercedes plant in AL
VW Plant in TN
etc, etc...

The locals get what they pay for..........it costs tax dollars to give free land, buildings, access roads and permanent tax credits to corporations.

In this world, a community has a choice.........pay companies to locate in your area or deal with a dead economy. Hopefully, the company stays..............

36654 said:

Hmm........sounds just like the

BMW plant in SC
Mercedes plant in AL
VW Plant in TN
etc, etc...

Click to expand...

Competing with other locations, who want the same factories which will produce a viable product, by allowing them to pay reduced taxes is not the same as the ethanol industry subsidies at all.

milo said:

Competing with other locations, who want the same factories which will produce a viable product, by allowing them to pay reduced taxes is not the same as the ethanol industry subsidies at all.

Click to expand...

A subsidy is a subsidy..........

Just because is comes from a state vs the federal government.........it's the same thing

In the third world, these things are called bribes

36654 said:

A subsidy is a subsidy..........

Click to expand...

And a tax credit is a subsidy and Big Ethanol gets them. Huge difference. Of the auto companies you listed are any of them receiving tax credits or payment from any government? (Other than GM of course)

Interesting explanation here from an economists perspective. http://theweek.com/article/index/247596/its-time-for-america-to-end-ethanol-subsidies

What I'm suggesting is that when the history of any boondoggle is finally written by competent impartial historians fifty years down the road, if any of us are still alive, what ethanol was really about will then be revealed. IMHO it likely will have little if nothing to do with air pollution, global warming or the toxification of carbon related compounds. And lots to do about money, who's got some, and who gets more, and the use of raw power so related. And motorcycling merely gets in the way.

milo said:

And a tax credit is a subsidy and Big Ethanol gets them. Huge difference. Of the auto companies you listed are any of them receiving tax credits or payment from any government? (Other than GM of course)

Interesting explanation here from an economists perspective. http://theweek.com/article/index/247596/its-time-for-america-to-end-ethanol-subsidies

Click to expand...

When they get the land for free because a public development fund purchased it, the building is built with public funds/gov't issued bonds, the access roads are built with public funds and they get permanent tax credits, you tell me?

In order for any community to compete within this environment, they have to offer subsidies to industry. The Corn industry does it within their existing federal and state level political networks. The auto industry is leveraging a group of states that are willing to access public funds to attract the relocation of assembly plants. Other states do the same same thing with NG or Pharmaceuticals.

The scary question is..........what happens when your community has no more money for these subsidies?

BTW - when you eliminate the ethanol from gas........what are you going to use as an oxidizer to improve combustion performance?

Just a few random thoughts coming from a rider who lives in an area where it's E10 "all the time", with an engineering background (2 engineering degrees in college):

1. The reason the "non-E10" fuel types are cheaper at the pump, are due to the prices being government subsidized.

2. Ethanol has a lower specific energy per unit volume, than gasoline, Hence the reason why pure, or ethanol blend fuels provide poorer MPG ratings, than pure gasoline fuels. So pick your poison, burn less of a dirtier fuel, or more of a "sort of" cleaner fuel (more on that later). I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the amount of "bad emissions" for both, per unit mile of riding or driving, are pretty much the same.

3. Ethanol isn't as clean burning as you may think it is. Some of its byproducts are as nasty as the combustion products from burning gasoline. Can you say aldehydes (as in formaldehyde, ethanaldehyde, etc.)? Sure you can? I knew you could!

4. Yes, diesel cars in Europe get better mileage than gas cars, but due to the ignition cycle for diesel engines making it harder to control ignition timing (remember, diesels ignite via very high compression of the fuel/air mixture, instead of the spark used for a gas, or natural gas engine), they're not as clean burning as gas engines have been made to be. Yes, by using techniques like high pressure direct injection of the fuel into the cylinders, quite a bit has been done to clean up the diesel emissions. But, in general they're still not as clean as the gas engine cars sold in the US. That's why hardly any of the high mileage (50+ MPG) diesel burners are sold in the US - they don't meet emission standards.

5. Besides, taking a percentage of food providing crops out of the system, ethanol production requires a lot of water (not cool), and the waste generated by its production also isn't very eco-friendly.

6. Yeah, ethanol makes a good oxidizer (especially in high power applications), but IMO, the biggest improvement in oxidizing/cleaner burning, comes from combustion chamber design, and changes the to combustion cycle (higher compression, different ignition timing, etc.)

I've gotten the impression that the majority of people here in Wisconsin (I live in the southeastern part of the state), hate ethanol fuel. All of the "we know what's best for you" intentions, of movers and shakers who mandate its use (who are either greatly mistaken about the benefits, due to a lack of a technical background, or who are letting the money do the talking for them) doesn't change this.

ellengtrgrl said:

Just a few random thoughts coming from a rider who lives in an area where it's E10 "all the time", with an engineering background (2 engineering degrees in college):

Click to expand...

Don't think you're special. A number of the folks on this forum have a few engineering degrees.

36654 said:

Don't think you're special. A number of the folks on this forum have a few engineering degrees.

Click to expand...

Geesh.

36654 said:

Don't think you're special. A number of the folks on this forum have a few engineering degrees.

Click to expand...

Easy...no need to get personal.
OM

36654 said:

Don't think you're special. A number of the folks on this forum have a few engineering degrees.

Click to expand...

Sorry. I guess that was a poor way of stating that I have a technical background. My bad.

ellengtrgrl said:

Sorry. I guess that was a poor way of stating that I have a technical background. My bad.

Click to expand...

Many of us do and our opinions reflect that...........Or, so we feel.

In other words, if you say you have these credentials and opinions, don't be surprised if the next guy says I have better credentials and I really understand the problem and, therefore, have these opinions. Then, the next guy, with more degrees, from a better school........

Just saying.....many of us aren't approaching this issue from a casual perspective.

Ellen, I too many years back heard info about the chemical compounds released when ethanol is burned, and the lack of interest in said compounds because it wasn't a pleasant topic, aldehydes that is, where they end up and how they stack up against straight unleaded gas. So, thanx for the info.

another consideration for motorcyclists is the small amount of mileage racked up by the small numbers of motorcycles being ridden over the period of any given year. Ergo, it would make sense to grant a waiver to two wheeled vehicles. Just a thought, I don't think the numbers are there, i.e., if miles traveled are below a certain number the cost required makes little sense.

Straining to think outside the box. If CO2 is a toxin, then where is the case of aldehydes as a byproduct of ethanol combustion?

Non ethanol gas:

Good Morning Ellengtrgrl: You are in the "five county area" with the extra special blend. In Jefferson County I can buy Non-ethanol gas at Kwik Trip and Citgo stations. I look for pumps with a hose for each type, not a single hose per pump. Other brands may have it too. It is usually about 40 cents more per gallon than the regular price. If you plan to take a trip to the area, hwy 36 to Waterford, hwy 83 out of town to Mukwonago. Follow ES to county J, by the Elegant Farmer, Heading west on J will take you to county N in the town of Troy (being west of East Troy). Turn right on N, Bluff rd. will branch off to the left. This is a good BIMBLE road. Be careful because the curves are deceptive at the start of it, this will take you to Whitewater through the Kettle Moraine Forest and farmland. If you head up to Fort Atkinson, the Citgo station on the east side (single hose) has the gas as well as Kwik trip on the northwest side (dedicated hose- recreational fuel). State 106 east out of Fort to state 59 or 59 out of Whitewater (there is a Citgo station as you get in to Witewater, but I've not stopped there for awhile, so I don't know the pump grades) For your return trip, take 67 north out of Eagle and cut into the Forest. Look for Waterville rd (another good bimble road). It starts a little northeast of Eagle, works it's way through the forest and ends up at I94 on the east side of upper and lower Nemahbin Lake. About a mile west is the on ramp for the freeway, so you can do a quick ride back to Metro Milwaukee. You might want to look the route up on the maps as it's not totally connected as I described it, but does make a nice ride to try the non-ethanol gas. frank

I appreciate all the higher perspectives this conversation has brought to the table. I honestly comprehend just about all the economic and technical aspects of the whole issue- and the politics of corn as well.

My perspective, however, is vastly less complex.

Corn, in many of its usages, is far more bad than good.
One may find corn, and its over reaching by-products, in places one would
A: never expect to find it, and
B: never want to find it.

I personally have taken a stance against corn by-products in my food.
I wish it were as easy when it comes to fueling my various machines.

8ninety8 said:

...another consideration for motorcyclists is the small amount of mileage racked up by the small numbers of motorcycles being ridden over the period of any given year. Ergo, it would make sense to grant a waiver to two wheeled vehicles. Just a thought, I don't think the numbers are there, i.e., if miles traveled are below a certain number the cost required makes little sense...

Click to expand...

My first reaction is that if a waiver (to use non-ethanol gas) is granted, it won't be cost effective for any gas station to reserve a hose for such a minuscule market as ours. I'd be surprised if a busy gas station on a primo weekend afternoon sells 1% of its gas to bikers. Way less than that during the week and when it's too hot/cold/rainy/windy/cloudy/dark and most riders park their bikes. Generally the only time I see a bike at a gas station is when I ride in. So there would be no practical effect; to the gas station owner it'd just be a license to lose money. Are we saying the same thing?

Hi Wbrownell9: I'm not trying to saying motorcycles should be treated differently than cars. I only want to point out that the gas stations where I live started out with just one selling non ethanol gas and now there are several. I can find them across the state now. The people I see using this gas run the spectrum. Collector cars, newer high performance cars, construction companies( use this fuel for Wakkers, Parker saws and such) boaters, ATVs, lawnmowers, weedeaters, snowblowers, snowmobiles. etc. I think what two of the things that these have in common is older fuel systems with its problems(fiberglass tanks, gaskets, hoses, etc) and unplanned times of storage. With the non ethanol fuel being thought of as having a longer time before it goes bad has created a market for it. Once a station starts selling this gas, I have not seen it stop. So I believe there is a market for it. Just a random thought. frank

Agree with Franko, the no ethanl pump at my local station, MN, is always getting used. I use it in lawn mower, sno-blower, any small engine and /6. It keeps longer with a stabilizer, has more BTUs per amount, should be cheaper to supply, is less complex, returns more MPGs, sort of like a no-brainer. Motorcyclists didn't politicize this product, someone else did, and scooter/motocycles got dumped into the collective experiment of hoping ethanol is the magic bullet. I routinely pay over 4 bucks a gallon for non-ethanol, 91 octane. Would be cheaper, I guess, if a greater volume were sold? My old car loves the stuff.

36654 said:

Many of us do and our opinions reflect that...........Or, so we feel.

In other words, if you say you have these credentials and opinions, don't be surprised if the next guy says I have better credentials and I really understand the problem and, therefore, have these opinions. Then, the next guy, with more degrees, from a better school........

Just saying.....many of us aren't approaching this issue from a casual perspective.

Click to expand...

bmwrider88 said:

I appreciate all the higher perspectives this conversation has brought to the table. I honestly comprehend just about all the economic and technical aspects of the whole issue- and the politics of corn as well.

My perspective, however, is vastly less complex.

Corn, in many of its usages, is far more bad than good.
One may find corn, and its over reaching by-products, in places one would
A: never expect to find it, and
B: never want to find it.

I personally have taken a stance against corn by-products in my food.
I wish it were as easy when it comes to fueling my various machines.

Click to expand...

I agree with you on the nutritional concerns surrounding corn, corn by-products and the antibiotic laced corn diet used in modern beef, pork and poultry production. Does every single food need to be laced with dirt cheap fructose syrup? It's a cheap sugar substitute that anyone with depression era parents remembers from the tragic Karo syrup substitutes. Cut it with water, maple flavoring and vanilla to get pancake syrup.....tastes just like real maple syrup.....if you never had maple syrup.

We've created bizarre animal breeds whose soul purpose is weight gain on a corn based diet. When the animal gets to the point they can barely stand due to the body mass......then they are processed by folks living under threat of deportation. How's that for a dark vision of the circle of life...

Considering all that, burning the stuff in an engine is of much less concern to me.