Wrong. Establishing that fact seems simple enough, right? Take the price of E85 at the pump, figure in (out?) the loss of fuel efficiency (roughly 25 percent), forget about the taxpayer-supported .50 per gallon "blender's credit," recalculate the cost and compare it to the price of regular gas. If that's too much of a bother, go to the American Automobile Association's fuelgaugereport.com. Yesterday, an average gallon of regular cost $4.10. A BTU-adjusted gallon of corn juice cost $4.37. So, why is The Earth Times proclaiming "Gas Prices Got You Down? Don't Get Mad … Get Ethanol!" Because they're running The International Institute for Ecological Agriculture's press release verbatim. Oh, did I mention the "Institute" is a front for pro-E85 author (and Hawaiian shirt devotee) David Blume? Anyway, Blume writes "According to David Arkin of Arkin Tilt Architects… 'Ethanol can be part of one's path to a carbon neutral lifestyle. It costs less than gasoline, is readily available, and — when grown and produced properly — can help combat climate change through both its clean emissions and the potential to sequester carbon.'" And according to the man himself, "If everyone used 30% ethanol in their unmodified cars we would be able to cease buying any oil from the Middle East, ending our dependence, our crushing military expenditures there, and our National Guard could be brought home from Iraq. Converting completely to US made ethanol would make our economy literally bombproof to the explosive price increases we can expect oil to sustain as it runs out." Now how much would you pay?
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
This is not the Arkin of Catch22 fame, but it should be. For if ever there was a Catch22, ethanol is the best example. Spread it thin, Mr Arkin, it’s a big farm.
not only is their a 25% + loss in milage, every gallon really costs 50cents more, then the pump price, except that 50cents is paid for through tax dollars.
plus if we convert all our corn to fuel, what happens to food prices?
Starting the day with California pseudo-science.
The 50 cent a gallon ethanol subsidy to refiners was enacted by the Tom Delays of Congress to replace MBTE in oxygenated gasoline. The legislation also exempted big oil from MBTE related law suits.
The claim that ethanol production from corn is carbon neutral is really skating on thin or non-existent ice. Fuel and fertilizer use on the farm is petroleum based. Refining/distillation probably relies on coal or natural gas. Plus, ethanol is not pipeline friendly. So, it must be trucked.
For the effect on food prices, I need to check the price of my Archer Daniel Midlands stock.
Just to clarify HOW BAD ETHANOL TRULY IS, I’d like to share a little piece of true information.
Never mind E85, how about the much more commonly available E10 fuel which “can” be used in gasoline cars? How does this affect cars?
Well, I’ve tried this fuel (which does take food out of our mouths and hence raises food prices) since 1979 in virtually every car I’ve had.
I can sum it up in one example. I very recently previously accidentally put 1/2 tank of E10 in my 2008 Toyota Prius. Got about 48 miles per gallon in mixed driving; pretty good, eh? The two 1/2 tank fill-ups after that, I made sure to put in pure gasoline (only one station in my town now sells pure gasoline and I have to go 10 miles out of my way to get it).
Just got back from that gas station where I put in 4.802 gallons again this morning. The computer indicated that I’d driven 301 miles since the prior top-up. I figure my ethanol percentage was probably in the 1% range or less.
For the mathematically challenged, that is 62.7 miles per gallon.
OK go back and read it again. 48 mpg on 5% ethanol solution, or 62.7 on virtually pure gasoline. That’s a 23.5% difference, folks.
Mark my words. In school books in the future, ethanol mixed with gasoline will be a textbook case of the foolishness of mis-allocating resources in an attempt to continue an unsustainable sillivization which made poor choices (i.e. put itself into the hands of its enemies by relying upon them for its energy requirements, then trying to weasel out of the problem “the easy way” instead of the smart way).
menno, using a couple of refills to accurately judge fuel economy for E10 and ordinary fuel can be misleading. Sometimes pumps cut off early, and cut off points are different for pumps even at the same station. Further more, relying on the on board computer to measure fuel economy (especially in a Prius, where the electric motor kicks in a lot) isn’t accurate at all.
In my example, I’ve been using E10 and ordinary fuel for the past 2 years in a Mitsubishi Lancer. Usually 5 full refills on each in a row to accurately measure economy. I usually returned to the same pump and never relied on computer estimates. In my case the economy difference was 2% in favor of ordinary fuel. E10 contains 3% less energy than 100% unleaded, so I was satisfied with the result (E10 is always a bit cheaper here).
When you think about it, claiming a 23% drop in economy actually breaks the laws of thermodynamics. 3% less energy but 23% more E10 fuel required to go the same distance? Unless the Prius is leaving a trail of unburned E10 from the exhaust pipe it’s impossible. On those figures you might as well put 10% less regular gasoline in your fuel tank and still have 13% better economy than E10! I think you need to drive a few months on E10 in your Prius and then compare.
Mr. Blume hit three talking points in one sentence. Peak Oil, Global Warming, and Clean Air in one line.
Don’t believe the hype! Just because he is wearing a Hawaiian shirt doesn’t make him a hippie!
The same politicians that say drilling for oil will not increase the oil supply spend billions and billions on the ethanol boondoggle. The scary part is people are so simple they buy into this stuff.(at least 40% of the population)
Winston Churchill
“A five minute discussion with the average voter is the best argument against democracy”
“So, why is The Earth Times proclaiming “Gas Prices Got You Down? Don’t Get Mad … Get Ethanol!”
Because they are dumbasses and don’t properly research the practicality of their decisions. If it sounds green who cares. Irony at its best.
Well, Michal, I’ve tested every single car I’ve owned in the United States since 1979 on E10 and found that in every single case, I lost 7% to 25% MPG on 10% ethanol. Consistently.*
Then figure in the cost of the petroleum to make the fertilizer to grow the extra corn, which being planted for ethanol displaces food crops, raising the costs of food; take into account the run-off of the extra fertilizer required by not rotating crops but continually growing corn (increasing the size of the dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico); and take into account the fact that ethanol cannot be pipelined to market but must use diesel fuel in trucks to ship it, and you have the perfect disaster.
* thermodynamics has nothing to do with excess fuel running through a gasoline engine when E10 is used. Here’s my theory. Ethanol is an oxygenate; the oxygen sensor on the exhaust manifold upstream from the 3-way catalyst adjusts the fuel to enrich it to 14.1 to 1 (thereby enriching the mixture when oxygen rich fuel is used – i.e. E10). More fuel means more E10, and the cycle repeates – enriches and enriches again – until equilibrium is reached. Plus, ethanol (lower BTU per gallon than gasoline)(and running a too rich mixture) means less power; I believe that people “get used to” a certain amount of “oomph” from their cars and subconsciously push the go-pedal harder when it doesn’t appear (i.e. they just filled up with E10). So they push the pedal harder. Even fewer MPG.
Ethanol literally SUCKS.
Instead, we should use pure gasoline in gasoline cars, but less of it; perhaps look at BUTANOL which is a 4-carbon alcohol, which can be grown from sugar beets, pipelined, has virtually the same energy as gasoline and is pretty much a drop-in substitute for gasoline. http://www.butanol.com
Also look at making oil from garbage, offal and sewage (and therefore gasoline). http://www.changingworldtech.com
But wasting ethanol in gasoline engines is going to eventually prove to be such an idiotic move as to be, literally, criminal. I hope those responsible eventually go to prison for life. But being powerful politicians and their elite friends are responsible, I’m not holding my breath.
Menno:
You took the words right out of my mouth. While real gasoline isn’t available in my town, I did have a similar experience on a recent trip to Idaho. I couldn’t believe the gas mileage I got from two fill ups with 100% dino juice. Then driving under similar driving conditions (except I was dropping in elevation and entirely highway miles, both factors that should have been in my favor), my very next tankfull of E10 dropped my fuel economy back to what I was used to measuring, approximately 20% fewer mpg.
I used to have a similar experience over many 10’s of thousands of miles when driving from California through Oregon and switching from MTBE laced oxygenated California gas to Oregon gas. I would get about 10% better fuel mileage (don’t have my records in front of me) with the non-oxygenated gas. Don’t you love how the government improves our lives?
I’ve never consistently measured a significant difference in E-10 vs “pure” gasoline MPG.
That is not to say I think E-85 presently makes any sense at all. Turning food into fuel? Bah! Waste into fuel? Maybe. Show me and I’ll think about it.
@philbailey
“Spread it thin, Mr Arkin, it’s a big farm.”
Funniest thing I’ve read in a while.
Mileage for me dropped 10% when they shoved ethanol down our pipes. I hate the stuff and it’s everywhere.
“the Arkin of Catch22 fame”
No, that was Alan, who most recently appeared in “Get Smart”. I really enjoyed him as the Grandpa Edwin Hoover in “Little Miss Sunshine.”
Alan’s son Adam is also an actor, who has appeared in a number of TV shows and movies.
Alan’s father’s name was David, but he died many years ago.
David Blume has been on this same quest for 25 years now – talk about fanatical devotion a misguided concept.
menno: “perhaps look at BUTANOL which is a 4-carbon alcohol, which can be grown from sugar beets”
Er, shouldn’t that be BEETanol? Hey, that’d be good in a jingle, “Try our gas, it’s beatin’ all”!
Ah, but there is one twist: E85 has a high octane rating so should be compared to premium (assuming your car needs premium). The AAA site lists $4.52 for premium and only $4.38 for mileage-adjusted E85. Are there any cars that are E85 compatible and also need premium fuel?
Menno: Great info about the Butanol. That was news to me.
About the article: I wish that these folks would at least just use the time-honored tradition of trying to spin statistics into supporting their point of view, instead of just making stuff up. I find the mental exercise of un-spinning the spin entertaining. By making unsupported, and unsupportable statements, they have removed some of the fun in my life. Can I sue for that?
The best regarded study (done in 2006) about producing ethanol from corn done by the University of Minnesota showed a return of 25% more energy than was put into the process of making ethanol, from planting to production.
Ethanol is a long term solution; ethanol from corn is not. But corn is the best source the US has at this time. I say we need to produce ethanol now to encourage development in engines and infrastructure so when the time comes that we can produce cellulosic ethanol, there’s a market for it.
I thought everyone in the other thread said the Japanese car companies were smart because they thought about the long term. I suggest you do the same.
Looks to me that no one posting today actually believes that Peak Oil is here. Most think we can just go on driving like we always have with minor adjustments such as switching to smaller cars and hybrids.
The world has changed. Oil production is flat to declining. Less is available on the export market and that is the reason for the doubling of price in the last year. All the while world demand continues to increase.
While ethanol is not perfect it is the best alternative available now. It should be priced appropriately as it is here in North Iowa where gas is about $4 and E85 is about $3. At these prices it is a competive substitute of gasoline.
If your area does not have competitive prices for E-85 or E-10, do not buy it. If your car for some odd reason is unlike millions of others which use can use ethanol, do not put ethanol into the gas tank.
My cars and trucks run just fine on ethanol. I have been using E10 since it became available over 20 years ago with no problems. I use E85 in my Flex Fuel Ranger since it has become appropriately priced in the last few months.
Trouble is, 97escort,that the gummint is jamming this stuff down our throats whether we lose 20% mpg or not, is immaterial to them.
Oh yes, and not forgetting the fact that a good 70 cents per gallon or so comes out of the taxpayer’s hide, in subsidies (if I’m recalling the figure right).
In any case, let’s assume that on the AVERAGE, vehicles lose 10% MPG on E10. That means it’s virtually of NO VALUE with regards to reducing oil imports, because it’s totally WASTED?
Correct? Or am I missing something.
As for peak oil, oh yes, I do believe that.
Go back and look at my prior post re: changing garbage, offal and yes, SEWAGE – into OIL.
Talk about a game changer. I wrote to the Prez (of the United States – one George W Bush) some 5 years ago about this process and said – we the United States NEED do to this NOW and stop importing oil. It’s not like we don’t produce – quite literally – tons of garbage in our country every hour. And sewage. And offal (from food processing plants). Didn’t even get a reply.
As for Butanol, I’d call it a minor player, but ANYTHING that can be made into ethanol – as in this hoped for switch grass, etc., can be made into Butanol, too. And once again, it may be shipped through oil pipelines, unlike ethanol. Oh yeah, ethanol production plants can be converted to Butanol.
And yes, our “esteemed leaders” DID bet on the wrong (ethanol) horse too early, before this new Butanol process became available.
But hidebound thinking means we’re currently stuck with this ethanol crap.
As for Butanol replacing Ethanol, we also need to be mindful of food production and place that emphasis FIRST. (As in “well, DUH”).
CR ran a test E85 vs Gasoline October 2006.
It required 1.38 gallons of E85 to equal the mileage of 1.0 gallons of gasoline CR 150 mile test. MPG E85 was 13; MPG gasoline 18. Gasoline at AAA average price current is $4.111. CR E85 test equivalent would be $4.60 per gallon. AAA reports a BTU adjusted equivalent price of E85 of $4.385. Gasoline has about 1.53 times the BTU of E85. I believe the CR tests are closer to actual E85 performance.
I would pay a dollar a gallon extra for E85 if it were available. Ethanol isn’t about saving money for me. It’s about buying fuel that is produced in the United States.
SunnyvaleCA Says:
July 16th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
Ah, but there is one twist: E85 has a high octane rating so should be compared to premium (assuming your car needs premium). The AAA site lists $4.52 for premium and only $4.38 for mileage-adjusted E85. Are there any cars that are E85 compatible and also need premium fuel?
Only if the E85 fuel mixture has an octane rating of 91 or higher. It might or it might not. Just because ethanol has a high octane rating doesn’t mean that ethanol mixed with 15% of something else, gasoline, will have a high octane rating.
While ethanol is not perfect it is the best alternative available now. It should be priced appropriately as it is here in North Iowa where gas is about $4 and E85 is about $3. At these prices it is a competive substitute of gasoline.
The only reason that ethanol blends even look competitive is because the government subsidizes the cost of producing ethanol from corn; thereby, reducing the price at the pump. That money comes from somewhere, our taxes and inflation (due to excessive borrowing) to name two sources.
RogerB34: It required 1.38 gallons of E85 to equal the mileage of 1.0 gallons of gasoline CR 150 mile test.
This is consistent with the energy content of the respective fuels.
I am amazed at menno’s observations of 23% difference for E10 — which has only 3% less energy that straight-up gasoline. Regardless of his claims re: thermodynamics, energy must be conserved. Where is the extra 20% going?
In calculating yearly fuel costs for a 2009 Chevrolet HHR (using fueleconomy.gov), I found the difference between regular gasoline and E85 to be $0.01. I wonder how much difference there would be if the price of regular gas should have to include the costs of clean-ups such as the the recent Mississippi oil spill (E85 would be biodegradable) or the costs of a aircraft carrier task force in the Persian Gulf initiated by the Carter Doctrine.