KU Pheasant Hunter
New member
Any drop of gas created here and not from oil out of the middle east, is worth the headaches to me! Give it some time, we have some smart folks working on the switchgrass and other alternatives!
Ethanol = Big Pollution Problems
- Thread starter tmrichardson
- Start date
kansasbrittany
Banned
I like the thought of taking $ from the Arabs as much as the next guy, but the price of my burgers, steaks, and pork chops had better not increase much b/c of it. I'd rather have to worry about how I'm going to pay for gas than worry about how I'm gonna pay for dinner!
Yes, I also agree that someone out there is intelligent enough to make this thing work, but unfortunately that guy is not likely a politician that is calling the shots right now. In fact, I can't remember it at the moment but there is a word that describes this feeling that if we're technologically advanced enough to cause problems, we're technologically advanced enough to fix those problems. Who has been to college most recently and is able to recall that word/label for this thought process?
Last edited:
And here I sit, a pretty fresh Management/Finance major with a fairly technical background, knowing the exact term your thinking of, but I cannot come up with the word for some reason. There is a term for this, but it was covered in one of my soph or junior classes. That was 2 or 3 years ago.
Uncle Buck
New member
I don't know why you call yourelf old and new---there really isn't anything new, just thesame old crap--I agree with you!
tmrichardson
Banned
You may want to think about putting it in your cars, too....
It's sadly not widely understood, but MPG is much lower with ethanol than gasoline. The price of gas with ethanol has to be much cheaper than the price of gas without in order to make it make sense to your checkbook. Plus you'll be filling the tank more often.
In MN they actually give us NO choice. The only non-ethanol blended gas at our pumps is high octane (i.e. higher priced) and required by law to only be sold for use in small engines, sled and atv's, and collector cars.
And part of the price of our mandatory ethanol blend gas goes right back to the industry in the form of direct payments, so not only is it more expensive, the industry is still not self-supporting--we all subsidize it!
Shadow
Banned
well said-
it's not the sweet corn we eat- it's the junk crap that farmers have found they can plant- let stay till it's just about no good- harvest- claim a loss- combine- and sell at a grain elevator at the highest bidder-
I doubt you could find 1 in 15 corn fields that was planted with the intent it was corn for the table- sweet corn-
it's not the sweet corn we eat- it's the junk crap that farmers have found they can plant- let stay till it's just about no good- harvest- claim a loss- combine- and sell at a grain elevator at the highest bidder-
I doubt you could find 1 in 15 corn fields that was planted with the intent it was corn for the table- sweet corn-
Please tell me you are not this ignorant! You do know the corn that is used to make ethanol is the same corn that is made into Corn Syrup, Cornstarch, livestock feed and numerous other products and uses. One of the reasons the people of the USA use so little disposable income on food is "junk crap" as you call it. Educate yourself - food doesn't magically come from the grocery store.
moellermd
Super Moderator
What in the world are you talking about?
KU Pheasant Hunter
New member
Let's not forget the military cost, financial and personal that goes into protecting that oil supply we are buying from the Middle East. I am for letting them work out the kinks in ethanol or any other replacement fuel to replace oil from the Middle East. And yes, even if it cost a little more! USAF
Ethanol enthralled
I'm all for alternative fuels, bio diesel makes reasonable sense, and can be made effcient to produce. Ethanol's problems are not "kinks" to be worked out unless you believe you can change the laws of physics! I decry the cost of petroleum in human terms, have family members who serve currently. But use the KU library and do some research before embracing ethanol. Remember this thread 10 years from now, I guarantee you ethanol production will be non-existent, or limited to science project status and use. From every point of reason it should be now. Would be if the politicians hadn't figured out a way to enrich themselves with this silly adventure. Look who owns these plants. All this bile about the american farmer, tell that to the livestock guy who's trying to raise a hog, calf, or feed a dairy heifer with $4.50 corn. When your hamburger is either imported, ( 1/3rd is now), or $7-8 dollars a pound, your milk even subsidized at 7 dollars. sleep well knowing you have ethanol in your tank. Want a real life today example? What is the cost of bacon in the store? How much was it 3 months ago? Check the value of pork bellies, ( at all time high), = ethanol production competing with food for corn. Ethanol is even more expensive about 75% of the time as an additive, as opposed to fossil petroleum, actually raising the cost of a gallon of gas, as a nice little double whammy to the consumer, delivers less energy, BTU's, environmentally the pits, and increases your cost of food. Last I looked our troops are still nation building in harm's way, so it fails as foreign policy too. Class dismissed.
I'm all for alternative fuels, bio diesel makes reasonable sense, and can be made effcient to produce. Ethanol's problems are not "kinks" to be worked out unless you believe you can change the laws of physics! I decry the cost of petroleum in human terms, have family members who serve currently. But use the KU library and do some research before embracing ethanol. Remember this thread 10 years from now, I guarantee you ethanol production will be non-existent, or limited to science project status and use. From every point of reason it should be now. Would be if the politicians hadn't figured out a way to enrich themselves with this silly adventure. Look who owns these plants. All this bile about the american farmer, tell that to the livestock guy who's trying to raise a hog, calf, or feed a dairy heifer with $4.50 corn. When your hamburger is either imported, ( 1/3rd is now), or $7-8 dollars a pound, your milk even subsidized at 7 dollars. sleep well knowing you have ethanol in your tank. Want a real life today example? What is the cost of bacon in the store? How much was it 3 months ago? Check the value of pork bellies, ( at all time high), = ethanol production competing with food for corn. Ethanol is even more expensive about 75% of the time as an additive, as opposed to fossil petroleum, actually raising the cost of a gallon of gas, as a nice little double whammy to the consumer, delivers less energy, BTU's, environmentally the pits, and increases your cost of food. Last I looked our troops are still nation building in harm's way, so it fails as foreign policy too. Class dismissed.
When the anti ethanol people say it takes more energy to produce ethanol than what it gives off do you know they are including all the energy it takes to raise the corn itself. The corn is going to raised either way so is it really fair to count that against ethanol because even without ethanol production the corn is going to be raised. They also don't count the distiller's grain which makes very good feed for cattle. It doesn't make great feed for hogs.
Here is a link to a pamplet from the other side. Please take the time to read it and get both sides of the story.
http://www.ethanol.org/pdf/contentmgmt/Issue_Brief_Ethanols_Energy_Balance.pdf
I know what your thinking, why waste my time on an industry slanted piece. It is supported and show a lot of university research so take the time read it.
Here is a link to a pamplet from the other side. Please take the time to read it and get both sides of the story.
http://www.ethanol.org/pdf/contentmgmt/Issue_Brief_Ethanols_Energy_Balance.pdf
I know what your thinking, why waste my time on an industry slanted piece. It is supported and show a lot of university research so take the time read it.
Wirehairs
Distillers grains are such a wonderful feed, that lambs develop liver tumors after being fed for 60 days. Incidence of afflitoxics increases with distillers grains in all livestock. Cattle rations must be carefully managed to limit Distillers grain, which is a protien substitute. You can feed cattle urea, dead dried chickens and chicken @#%^, and melamine from China too! and they won't die, immediately. Your calculations also assume water is exceptionally cheap or free. Still have no defense for the pollution issues or the poor efficiencies of ethanol in BTU conversion. Not to mention most cars, don't like it. I've read all about it. I have fed it, made it, (on a small scale), and tragically burn in my car for lack of choice. Research by University's sponsored by the industry, and written with such narrow perameters to allow only for the desired result don't convince me. Want to convince me? Try eliminating exhorbitant tax credits and outright cash government incentives for ethanol, and lets see how many are left in 2 years. They are going broke now, with government subsidies. If you want to sacrifice financially, environmentally, food security wise, to subsidize a failing industry in the hope they will find a way to create independence. Read about how many acres of corn it would take to create enough ethanol to make a serious dent in the petroleum consuption in the US. if you like pheasants and waterfowl, it's not good for them, competes for ground for crops, no room for waste areas, wetlands. Unfortunately the first and best option is conservation, use less fossil fuel, walk, car pool, ride a bike, goes against the American way, more, bigger, faster, but facts of life.
Distillers grains are such a wonderful feed, that lambs develop liver tumors after being fed for 60 days. Incidence of afflitoxics increases with distillers grains in all livestock. Cattle rations must be carefully managed to limit Distillers grain, which is a protien substitute. You can feed cattle urea, dead dried chickens and chicken @#%^, and melamine from China too! and they won't die, immediately. Your calculations also assume water is exceptionally cheap or free. Still have no defense for the pollution issues or the poor efficiencies of ethanol in BTU conversion. Not to mention most cars, don't like it. I've read all about it. I have fed it, made it, (on a small scale), and tragically burn in my car for lack of choice. Research by University's sponsored by the industry, and written with such narrow perameters to allow only for the desired result don't convince me. Want to convince me? Try eliminating exhorbitant tax credits and outright cash government incentives for ethanol, and lets see how many are left in 2 years. They are going broke now, with government subsidies. If you want to sacrifice financially, environmentally, food security wise, to subsidize a failing industry in the hope they will find a way to create independence. Read about how many acres of corn it would take to create enough ethanol to make a serious dent in the petroleum consuption in the US. if you like pheasants and waterfowl, it's not good for them, competes for ground for crops, no room for waste areas, wetlands. Unfortunately the first and best option is conservation, use less fossil fuel, walk, car pool, ride a bike, goes against the American way, more, bigger, faster, but facts of life.
oldandnew
I never metioned lambs being fed distillers at all did I? It makes a great cattle feed there is no question about it in the entire cattle industry. Beef producers love distiller's grain.
Source: http://www.ksgrains.com/ethanol/DDGSFacts.pdf
The Advantages of Using Corn Distillers Grains with Solubles
in Finishing Beef Cattle Diets
Wet corn distillers grains with solubles (WDGS) is an excellent feed for finishing cattle
Research at Iowa State University as well as other universities has shown that WDGS can be
added to corn-based rations for finishing cattle at levels ranging from 10 to 40% of total ration
dry matter. WDGS is palatable and readily consumed by cattle. Because the concentration of
starch is less than corn grain, WDGS is less likely to cause subacute acidosis in cattle fed lowroughage
rations. Quality and yield grades of carcasses from cattle fed WDGS are similar to those
fed corn grain. Feeding WDGS did not change sensory values of steaks. When added at levels
ranging from 10 to 25% of ration dry matter, WDGS has greater apparent energy value than corn
grain. When used to replace part of the corn and supplemental protein, WDGS improves feed
conversion and reduces feed cost of gain when cost of WDGS (including transportation and
storage) is equal to or less than cost of corn on a dry basis. For each $0.25 increase in corn
price/bu, the value of WDGS (30% dry matter) as a feed for finishing cattle increases $3.75/ton.
Dry distillers grains with solubles (DDGS) can be fed to finishing cattle to replace protein
supplement and corn
DDGS has an apparent energy value equal to corn grain when fed to finishing cattle at levels
ranging from 10% to 20% of total ration dry matter. DDGS also is palatable and readily
consumed by cattle. Feeding DDGS does not change quality or yield grades of carcasses. Feed
cost of gain will be reduced if the cost of DDGS is not greater than cost of corn grain on a dry
basis. For each $0.25 increase in corn price/bu, the value of DDGS (90% dry matter) as a feed for
finishing cattle increases $9.50/ton.
Condensed distillers grains with solubles (CDS) has a value as a feed for finishing cattle
CDS is a liquid that typically contains 30% dry matter. When CDS is fed to finishing cattle at
10% or less of ration dry matter, its apparent energy value is equal to or somewhat greater than
corn grain.
Feeding at levels greater than 10% of ration dry matter might reduce feed intake. Feeding CDS
has lot changed quality or yield grades of carcasses. For each $0.25 increase in corn price/bu, the
value of CDS (30% dry matter) as a feed for finishing cattle increases $3.00/ton.
Corn distillers grains (DG) as feeds for other classes of cattle
Less research has been done with other classes of cattle, but the coproducts are excellent feeds to
supplement energy and protein of lower quality forages. Because of the low starch content of DG,
these feeds have fewer negative effects than high starch feeds on fiber digestion in the rumen.
When fed to supplement low phosphorus forages, the phosphorus in DG will be of value.
Potential uses of coproducts include creep feed for calves, supplements for grazing cattle, and
supplements for low quality forages such as crop residues that might be fed to growing calves,
wintering beef cows or developing beef heifers.
Now for you banging against subsidies, and I hate having to share this tree hugging crap but you are to short sighted to admit all energy sources are getting government money.
Source http://cleantech.com/news/node/554
Greenpeace believes Europeans spend about $10 billion or so (USD equivalent) annually to subsidize fossil fuels. By contrast, it thinks the American oil and gas industry might receive anywhere between $15 billion and $35 billion a year in subsidies from taxpayers.
Why such a large margin of error? The exact number is slippery and hard to quantify, given the myriad of programs that can be broadly characterized as subsidies when it comes to fossil fuels. For instance, the U.S. government has generally propped the industry up with:
â?¢Construction bonds at low interest rates or tax-free
â?¢Research-and-development programs at low or no cost
â?¢Assuming the legal risks of exploration and development in a company's stead
â?¢Below-cost loans with lenient repayment conditions
â?¢Income tax breaks, especially featuring obscure provisions in tax laws designed to receive little congressional oversight when they expire
â?¢Sales tax breaks - taxes on petroleum products are lower than average sales tax rates for other goods
â?¢Giving money to international financial institutions (the U.S. has given tens of billions of dollars to the World Bank and U.S. Export-Import Bank to encourage oil production internationally, according to Friends of the Earth)
â?¢The U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve
â?¢Construction and protection of the nation's highway system
â?¢Allowing the industry to pollute - what would oil cost if the industry had to pay to protect its shipments, and clean up its spills? If the environmental impact of burning petroleum were considered a cost? Or if it were held responsible for the particulate matter in people's lungs, in liability similar to that being asserted in the tobacco industry?
â?¢Relaxing the amount of royalties to be paid (more below)
While it's easy to get bent out of shape that the petroleum industry "probably has larger tax incentives relative to its size than any other industry in the country", according to Donald Lubick, the U.S. Department of Treasury's former Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy, remember that subsidies are important across all sectors of the energy industry. Even yours (I'll bet you work in cleantech/greentech!)
For instance, nuclear power wouldn't be viable without subsidies - most governments pay between 60 and 90 percent of the cost of construction of new plants. Solar wouldn't be what it's become without significant German, Californian, U.S. federal and other incentives. Ethanol and biodiesel in the U.S. enjoy large subsidies (details, if interested, here), but let's resist getting into the rat-hole of agricultural industry subsidies.
Subsidies, per se, aren't a bad thing.
I never metioned lambs being fed distillers at all did I? It makes a great cattle feed there is no question about it in the entire cattle industry. Beef producers love distiller's grain.
Source: http://www.ksgrains.com/ethanol/DDGSFacts.pdf
The Advantages of Using Corn Distillers Grains with Solubles
in Finishing Beef Cattle Diets
Wet corn distillers grains with solubles (WDGS) is an excellent feed for finishing cattle
Research at Iowa State University as well as other universities has shown that WDGS can be
added to corn-based rations for finishing cattle at levels ranging from 10 to 40% of total ration
dry matter. WDGS is palatable and readily consumed by cattle. Because the concentration of
starch is less than corn grain, WDGS is less likely to cause subacute acidosis in cattle fed lowroughage
rations. Quality and yield grades of carcasses from cattle fed WDGS are similar to those
fed corn grain. Feeding WDGS did not change sensory values of steaks. When added at levels
ranging from 10 to 25% of ration dry matter, WDGS has greater apparent energy value than corn
grain. When used to replace part of the corn and supplemental protein, WDGS improves feed
conversion and reduces feed cost of gain when cost of WDGS (including transportation and
storage) is equal to or less than cost of corn on a dry basis. For each $0.25 increase in corn
price/bu, the value of WDGS (30% dry matter) as a feed for finishing cattle increases $3.75/ton.
Dry distillers grains with solubles (DDGS) can be fed to finishing cattle to replace protein
supplement and corn
DDGS has an apparent energy value equal to corn grain when fed to finishing cattle at levels
ranging from 10% to 20% of total ration dry matter. DDGS also is palatable and readily
consumed by cattle. Feeding DDGS does not change quality or yield grades of carcasses. Feed
cost of gain will be reduced if the cost of DDGS is not greater than cost of corn grain on a dry
basis. For each $0.25 increase in corn price/bu, the value of DDGS (90% dry matter) as a feed for
finishing cattle increases $9.50/ton.
Condensed distillers grains with solubles (CDS) has a value as a feed for finishing cattle
CDS is a liquid that typically contains 30% dry matter. When CDS is fed to finishing cattle at
10% or less of ration dry matter, its apparent energy value is equal to or somewhat greater than
corn grain.
Feeding at levels greater than 10% of ration dry matter might reduce feed intake. Feeding CDS
has lot changed quality or yield grades of carcasses. For each $0.25 increase in corn price/bu, the
value of CDS (30% dry matter) as a feed for finishing cattle increases $3.00/ton.
Corn distillers grains (DG) as feeds for other classes of cattle
Less research has been done with other classes of cattle, but the coproducts are excellent feeds to
supplement energy and protein of lower quality forages. Because of the low starch content of DG,
these feeds have fewer negative effects than high starch feeds on fiber digestion in the rumen.
When fed to supplement low phosphorus forages, the phosphorus in DG will be of value.
Potential uses of coproducts include creep feed for calves, supplements for grazing cattle, and
supplements for low quality forages such as crop residues that might be fed to growing calves,
wintering beef cows or developing beef heifers.
Now for you banging against subsidies, and I hate having to share this tree hugging crap but you are to short sighted to admit all energy sources are getting government money.
Source http://cleantech.com/news/node/554
Greenpeace believes Europeans spend about $10 billion or so (USD equivalent) annually to subsidize fossil fuels. By contrast, it thinks the American oil and gas industry might receive anywhere between $15 billion and $35 billion a year in subsidies from taxpayers.
Why such a large margin of error? The exact number is slippery and hard to quantify, given the myriad of programs that can be broadly characterized as subsidies when it comes to fossil fuels. For instance, the U.S. government has generally propped the industry up with:
â?¢Construction bonds at low interest rates or tax-free
â?¢Research-and-development programs at low or no cost
â?¢Assuming the legal risks of exploration and development in a company's stead
â?¢Below-cost loans with lenient repayment conditions
â?¢Income tax breaks, especially featuring obscure provisions in tax laws designed to receive little congressional oversight when they expire
â?¢Sales tax breaks - taxes on petroleum products are lower than average sales tax rates for other goods
â?¢Giving money to international financial institutions (the U.S. has given tens of billions of dollars to the World Bank and U.S. Export-Import Bank to encourage oil production internationally, according to Friends of the Earth)
â?¢The U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve
â?¢Construction and protection of the nation's highway system
â?¢Allowing the industry to pollute - what would oil cost if the industry had to pay to protect its shipments, and clean up its spills? If the environmental impact of burning petroleum were considered a cost? Or if it were held responsible for the particulate matter in people's lungs, in liability similar to that being asserted in the tobacco industry?
â?¢Relaxing the amount of royalties to be paid (more below)
While it's easy to get bent out of shape that the petroleum industry "probably has larger tax incentives relative to its size than any other industry in the country", according to Donald Lubick, the U.S. Department of Treasury's former Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy, remember that subsidies are important across all sectors of the energy industry. Even yours (I'll bet you work in cleantech/greentech!)
For instance, nuclear power wouldn't be viable without subsidies - most governments pay between 60 and 90 percent of the cost of construction of new plants. Solar wouldn't be what it's become without significant German, Californian, U.S. federal and other incentives. Ethanol and biodiesel in the U.S. enjoy large subsidies (details, if interested, here), but let's resist getting into the rat-hole of agricultural industry subsidies.
Subsidies, per se, aren't a bad thing.