Jump to content


Full Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by mus302

  1. According to the RFA we exported about 30 million gallons of ethanol in August. http://www.ethanolrfa.org/exchange/entry/august-ethanol-exports-up-18-from-july/ If ethanol prices, utilization rates and exports were all up in August it must mean that ethanol from Brazil was really expensive at that time. Otherwise they would have captured those export sales. There has been several ethanol plants sold recently or in the process now that will add to capacity as they are brought back into production.
  2. i like it. I like it too but as we all know gasoline isn't equivalent to E85 so what might be better... "can use regular gasoline in an emergency, but performance will suffer when using gasoline..."
  3. I just hope that this isn't an election year announcement that will be forgotten on Nov 3. The RFS marches on and the oil companies are going to have to push higher blends if they are going to meet their requirements in years to come. I would guess that that is why Valero announced they were adding an E85 pump at their San Antonio location and that E85 pumps would be added to all new company owned stores.
  4. The Quad-City Times posted articles asking the two candidates for the U.S. House 1st District of Illinois a list of ten questions. One of the questions was 'Do you support continued subsidies for ethanol? If so, how, if at all, would you change them?'. That question is #8. http://qctimes.com/article_c6a82ff0-d9ab-11df-bf09-001cc4c03286.html http://qctimes.com/article_ab4363d8-d9ab-11df-8240-001cc4c03286.html
  5. Propel Rewards Bay Area Drivers on National Alternative Fuel Vehicle Day, October 15 As part of National Alternative Fuel Vehicle Day, Propel Fuels, a leading retailer of clean, renewable fuels, will offer a special price of $1 off per gallon, as low as $1.49 per gallon, at five Bay Area fueling stations on Friday, October 15th from 9am to 6pm. In partnership with the National Alternative Fuels Training Consortium (NAFTC) and the U.S. Department of Energy, Propel is raising consumer awareness of the benefits of using renewable fuels by providing drivers a convenient and cost-effective opportunity to try E85 Flex Fuel or biodiesel for the first time. Propel's current Bay Area stations are located in Berkeley, Fremont, Oakland, Downtown San Jose, and South San Jose and offer E85 Flex Fuel and biodiesel. http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/Propel-Rewards-Bay-Area-Drivers-on-National-Alternative-Fuel-Vehicle-Day-October-15-1334920.htm
  6. Friday, October 15, 2010 11 am – 1 pm 85¢ off per gallon of E85* 30¢ off per gallon of E30* 10¢ off per gallon of E10 Kings Mart 3725 N. Cliff Ave Sioux Falls, SD 605.338.9433 http://www.cleanairchoice.org/events/event.cfm?EventID=301
  7. I really don't think ethanol is as much of a partisan issue as it is a regional issue. There are many corn state republicans that support ethanol and many coastal state democrats that don't.
  8. Your welcome. If you don't mind me asking, what did you use to make that screenshot? Also, along the same lines, did you see the article a few weeks ago in PickupTrucks on the new Ford F150engine choices? Here is a quote from the article. The 5.0 is rated at 360 horsepower (at 5,500 rpm) and 380 pounds-feet of torque (at 4,250 rpm) running on regular unleaded gasoline. It's positioned as the midrange, high-volume engine choice for the F-150, below the more powerful 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6 (365 hp and 420 pounds-feet of torque) and conventional large-displacement 6.2-liter V-8 (411 hp and 434 pounds-feet of torque). But the 5.0 is also flex-fuel capable. Flexible-fuel vehicles are designed to run on gasoline or a blend of up to 85 percent ethanol (E85). Burning E85 fuel boosts 5.0 engine power to 375 hp and 390 pounds-feet of torque, said Mike Harrison, Ford's program manager for V-8 engines. I am glad to see things like this starting to come out that shows that E85 has far greater performance capabilities than gasoline does.
  9. The tests were conducted by the Michigan State Police. They posted the test results on their website. They actually tested three different Chevrolet models, the Impala, Caprice and Tahoe on gasoline and E85. E85 turned in the best times in all three vehicles. http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/2011_Summary_of_Acceleration_and_Top_Speed_Testing_-_Preliminary_334551_7.pdf http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/2011_Vehicle_Dynamics_Testing_-_Sept_20_-_Preliminary_334553_7.pdf
  10. The Quad-City Times posted articles asking the two candidates for the 17th district of Illinois a list of ten questions. One of the questions was 'Do you support continued subsidies for ethanol? If so, how, if at all, would you change them?'. That question is #8. http://qctimes.com/article_199139e6-d42a-11df-ad32-001cc4c03286.html http://qctimes.com/article_426be94c-d42a-11df-98ba-001cc4c03286.html
  11. I think a lot of people blame ethanol for issues that would have happened no matter what fuel they were running on. Remember that DOE study from a couple of years ago. http://feerc.ornl.gov/publications/Int_blends_Rpt_1.pdf A portion of the results from that study. "Small non-road engine results include the following when E15 and E20 were compared with traditional gasoline: As ethanol content increased: Regulated emissions remained largely unchanged, Engine and exhaust temperatures increased; Engine performance was inconsistent, even with traditional gasoline; Commercial engines, as well as more sophisticated residential engines, exhibited no particular sensitivity to ethanol from a durability perspective; and, The effect of E15 and E20 on the durability of smaller, less expensive residential engines (e.g., line trimmers) was not clear given that a number of these engines failed regardless of fuel type." I agree that professionals adjust the settings and that is probably a part of why the have less trouble with two stroke equipment than the general public. But the other part is that the general public buys equipment that is prone to failure no matter what fuel they use.
  12. I understand what you are saying. My point is that Growth Energy, RFA, and ACE all have their own areas that they focus on. Growth Energy has chosen to focus on E85 pumps and has been out front in promoting pump openings. But that doesn't mean that ACE and the RFA has done nothing to further E85. Lobbying, providing supporting studies, and refuting critics is all part of furthering ethanol both as an additive and as E85. Afterall which is more important, installing E85 pumps or getting policy changes that stop big oil from using supply agreements to slow the spread of E85? Installing pumps is important but so is the behind the scenes work that brought about the policies that made the success that the industry is currently enjoying possible.
  13. Growth Energy didn't come out of no where. They are the old EPIC, Ethanol Promotion and Information Council. What about ACE, American Coalition for Ethanol? Any ill feelings toward them for not installing enough E85 pumps? But back to the RFA. This is what they put at the end of their press releases. "About the RFA: Since 1981, the RFA has led the fight on behalf of American ethanol producers to open markets and create sound public policies allowing for the expanding production and use of fuel ethanol. Representing the majority of American ethanol production, the RFA believes sound analysis, credible statistics, an understanding of the industry rooted in history, and a willingness to work with other groups is the key to effective advocacy." They are primarily a lobbying group. It may not be quite as endearing as installing E85 pumps but necessary all the same. BTW did you catch the Growth Energy news item from earlier today titled 'Ethanol-Blended Gasoline Key'? http://www.growthenergy.org/news-media-center/blog/ethanol-blended-gasoline-key/
  14. Both groups want whats best for the industry. They just have different views on how to get there. The problem with pulling in two different directions is that neither side get to where they want to go. It helps to remember where we came from. In 2004 we produced 3.4 billion gallons of ethanol and the goal then was to gear up enough to displace MTBE which had to been outlawed by several states. Ever wonder where the RFS requirement of 4 billion gallons in 2006 came from? At it's peak we used about 4 billion gallons per year of MTBE. This modern era of ethanol started out with it being an additive. Were it not for it's use as an additive the industry would not be what it is and we would most likely be on a different forum complaining about the oil companies screwing us by limiting refinery capacity during the peak driving season.
  15. Probably the reason that aldehydes are higher at startup is because the catalytic converter hasn't warmed up. Switching to neat ethanol wouldn't change that.
  16. fleetbut You are right somebody will sue. The EPA said as much in their reasoning for the delay in making a decision on E15. They said they were being very cautious and making sure they have science to back them up in future lawsuits.
  17. The American Coalition for Ethanol released a survey they did of congressional candidates on their stand on ethanol. They asked two questions. 1) Do you support extending the Volumetric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit beyond 2010? Why or why not? 2) Do you support legislation in Congress to require an increasing number of autos sold in the U.S. to be Flexible Fuel Vehicles and to provide incentives for gas stations to install blender pumps? Why or why not? Not all candidates responded but for those that did you can see their responses here. http://ethanol.org/magazine/index.php?id=126&parentid=126
  18. It makes less sense to use ethanol in diesel engines because we have a far greater need to displace gasoline usage. According to the EIA, on average you get 19 gallons of gasoline and 10 gallons of diesel from a barrel of oil. In an ideal world we would use 19 gallons of gasoline for every 10 gallons of diesel. But our ratio of gasoline to diesel is higher which means we end up shipping our excess diesel to Europe where their ratio is exactly opposite of ours. And of course Europe ends up shipping their excess gasoline here.
  19. Nice graphic. Didn't really realize that the spread went down in the winter. But I guess it makes sense considering that winter blend gasoline costs less than summer blend gasoline. That coupled with the lower percentage of ethanol would tend to narrow the difference.
  20. I hope that with the number of companies that are working on cellulosic ethanol that no one company could stall progress for long.
  21. I went back and reread the entire article and his comments and I think you are right. I don't know what it was that I was seeing the other night but it seems pretty clear now that he is arguing that developed countries shouldn't hold back developing countries. And to that I would agree.
  22. It was confusing. It wasn't until I read his response in the comment section that I figured out which direction he was arguing. "Without rising rural incomes, the data tells us we will have higher populations, less sustainability, and not much social justice." Social justice, economic justice, environmental justice, etc. are codewords for redistribution of wealth.
  23. Nope. I don't think that is what he is arguing in favor of. I believe that he is arguing that rich countries should pay developing countries to protect their environment. In other words, redistribution of wealth.
  24. Who am I supposed to make out the check to?
  25. They mention a 100-year-old process that was originally developed to produce butanol and acetone. I believe what they are talking about is the A.B.E. process which produces acetone, butanol and ethanol. With this process you get 3 parts acetone, 6 parts butanol and 1 part ethanol. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A.B.E._process
  • Create New...