Gasoline???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beachbum

Currently, the process to create Ethanol uses almost as much petroleum product as the ethanol replaces, at least in the US. You have to consider the fertilizers (petroleum based), the equipment to plant and harvest, and the cost of conversion. The other issue is that it currently uses products that are also used for food. Make more ethanol, have less food. It is as much a political and marketing ploy as any real energy savings.

While there are efforts to make the processes more efficient, so far they haven't been very successful. But it sounds "green"

---

You forgot the pesticides they used are petroleum based, too.

Also, the reason the government subsidizes corn is for food security. The subsidy is proportional to production - the more that is produced, the greater the profit. THEN they sell it or convert it and make even more money. If ethanol producers had to pay the actual costs of producing the corn, add a couple dollars a gallon. Instead, they are also subsidized.

A little public outrage could put an end to this quick. It's a PR nightmare waiting to happen.

Even with all the subsidies, Brazil produces ethanol from sugar cane for less, but are shut out of the U.S. market. The economies of countries such as Haiti are in such dire straits because their #1 export, cane-based sugar, is also shut out of the U.S. market. There's a solution there, isn't there?

Still, ethanol alone can only replace a small amount of our petroleum use. A small increase in fuel efficiency would be more significant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beachbum

Currently, the process to create Ethanol uses almost as much petroleum product as the ethanol replaces, at least in the US. You have to consider the fertilizers (petroleum based), the equipment to plant and harvest, and the cost of conversion. The other issue is that it currently uses products that are also used for food. Make more ethanol, have less food. It is as much a political and marketing ploy as any real energy savings.

While there are efforts to make the processes more efficient, so far they haven't been very successful. But it sounds "green"

---

1. We have a surplus of food. We're subsidizing corn and we're still fat.
2. I'm willing to live with out petroleum fertilizers. Call me crazy, but I'm not sure why we're applying petroleum to soil in the first place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BoilerIMS

Correct... My point was that methanol could be produced without petroleum if the raw materials are grown and the extra energy available in the methanol product is sufficient for the harvest/production steps.

---

Well of course you can make methanol without petrolum. We did that in 8th grade. I'm more interested in what source the IRL and Champ Car bought/buys fuel from.

I am not a chemist so pardon my ignorance but I was born and raised on a farm and am not aware of any pertoleum based fertilizer. Would someone inform me please.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by call_me_andrew

1. We have a surplus of food. We're subsidizing corn and we're still fat.
2. I'm willing to live with out petroleum fertilizers. Call me crazy, but I'm not sure why we're applying petroleum to soil in the first place.



Well of course you can make methanol without petrolum. We did that in 8th grade. I'm more interested in what source the IRL and Champ Car bought/buys fuel from.

---

They buy from local suppliers in the area of the race that is usually arranged by the promoter but what process is used to produce it I can't help you with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coolhand

I am not a chemist so pardon my ignorance but I was born and raised on a farm and am not aware of any pertoleum based fertilizer. Would someone inform me please.

---

Methane(Natural gas) is used in the production of many Nitrogen fertilizers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZzZzZz

You forgot the pesticides they used are petroleum based, too.

Also, the reason the government subsidizes corn is for food security. The subsidy is proportional to production - the more that is produced, the greater the profit. THEN they sell it or convert it and make even more money. If ethanol producers had to pay the actual costs of producing the corn, add a couple dollars a gallon. Instead, they are also subsidized.

A little public outrage could put an end to this quick. It's a PR nightmare waiting to happen.

Even with all the subsidies, Brazil produces ethanol from sugar cane for less, but are shut out of the U.S. market. The economies of countries such as Haiti are in such dire straits because their #1 export, cane-based sugar, is also shut out of the U.S. market. There's a solution there, isn't there?

Still, ethanol alone can only replace a small amount of our petroleum use. A small increase in fuel efficiency would be more significant.

---

Off topic, but this is why we drink Coca-Cola sweetened with Corn Syrup instead of sugar. :dozey:

Really off-topic, the Mexican stores here are importing Coca Cola bottled in Mexico (and made with real sugar) for the burgeoning hispanic population. Now many gringoes are discovering this and going in and buying the Cokes too. Some local bottlers are complaining about the situation due to distribution agreements etc. I say quit complaining, because you just might have discovered a new market of people willing to pay a premium for pure cane sugar based Coca Cola! :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alexamateo

Off topic, but this is why we drink Coca-Cola sweetened with Corn Syrup instead of sugar. :dozey:

Really off-topic, the Mexican stores here are importing Coca Cola bottled in Mexico (and made with real sugar) for the burgeoning hispanic population. Now many gringoes are discovering this and going in and buying the Cokes too. Some local bottlers are complaining about the situation due to distribution agreements etc. I say quit complaining, because you just might have discovered a new market of people willing to pay a premium for pure cane sugar based Coca Cola! :)

---

We wouldn't need as much corn if sugar wasn't so damn expensive here.

You could also sell Coca-Cola Kosher.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starter

ANYTHING you burn is going to have undesirable consequences. Until solar or fusion is practical that's the way it is.

---

The key thing with burning ethanol and all biomass is the carbon was absorbed recently by the plants recently unlike the carbon in fossil fuels which was absorbed over millions of years. The carbon in petroleum would be better off still in the ground whereas plants just reuse the same carbon.

Drifter, if you could not build a methanol plant in Canada where one third of world's fresh water exists, then it cant be done anywhere. Barrie might have water issues because they are on a well system, as Simcoe is too over used right now, but I suspect Midland or some place on Georgian Bay would be ideal and in the same local more or less. Plus, you would never run out of water THERE.

Midland, great idea! Georgian Bay is at its lowest level in many years. Matchedash Bay is so low people cannot get their boats out. Low water is being studied by assorted groups. So what else is new. We study as the water goes down. Ships on Huron and Mich. are having trouble in several ports because of low water. Marinas are going broke because of low water and the cost of dredging if, and it is a big if, they can get approval from Oceans and Fisheries Canada to dredge. You also forget that most munincipal water systems are fairly close to capacity. With all the movement north from the GTA and tougher water requirements Georgian Bay communities have no money to expand their plants. Sure the manufacturer would have to contribute but we are back to low water tables.
Methanol/Ethanol may be good ideas but they have their drawbacks. One might include the new price for eating corn at say $10 a doz. instead of $3 to $4.