Posted on 06/24/2005 2:18:04 PM PDT by mikemikemikecubed
A lot of times, trying to get something done here in Washington can get pretty frustrating. There's bitter partisanship, petty politics, and a general atmosphere that isn't always conducive to passing legislation that people actually care about.
But I'm happy to report that today wasn't one of those days.
Today, the Senate passed my proposal, which will be included in the transportation bill, that would make it easier for people to fill their cars with a cheaper alternative to gasoline.
Now, I know most of you are as tired as I am of pulling into a gas station and seeing that the prices are even higher than they were the last time you filled up. It's $2.19, then it's $2.24, then it's $2.35, and up and up. When will it stop? As long as we're dependent on oil from the Middle East, we don't know.
That's why we need to stop just talking about energy independence and actually do something about it.
If someone told you that you could fill your cars and trucks with fuel that's 50 cents cheaper than current gas prices, you'd jump at the chance. But what a lot of people don't know is that this option is already out there. It's called E-85, and it's a fuel made of 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline. It's cleaner than gasoline, it's cheaper, and most importantly, it reduces our dependence on oil from the Middle East. In fact, the Indianapolis 500 thought it was such a good alternative that pretty soon, their entire fleet will run on E-85.
Right now, there are millions of cars and trucks that can run on E-85. You might even have one yourself. They're known as "flexible fuel vehicles," and the auto industry is turning out hundreds of thousands of them every year.
Of course, the reason you're not seeing more cars run on E-85 is that we've got a severe shortage of E-85 fuel stations. While there are more than 180,000 gas stations all over America, only about 400 offer E-85.
This is where my proposal comes in. It's going to cost stations to install E-85 pumps, so we thought we'd give them a tax credit that would encourage them to do so. As more and more stations realize how popular this cheap alternative to gas is becoming, more will utilize this tax credit and install their own pumps.
That extra oxygen molecule it carries around with it adds no energy but increases its expansive power.
Methanol, which has even poorer mileage but more power than ethanol has historically been the fuel choice for race engines. Starting next year, the Indy Car circuit will switch from Methanol to Ethanol as a way to showcase its performance capabilities.
I don't recall crossing paths with you here on FR -- but, apparently, that is my loss.
I have read this entire thread, and, despite the sniping from some entrenched partisans, I find your discussions to be thoughtful and fact-filled. You definitely exhibit knowledge in areas I had not considered before (EtOH feedstocks).
Thank you for your contributions here.
Sincerely,
TXnMA
What a load!
Go to: http://www.nwicc.com/pages/continuing/business/ethanol/Module2.htm
and scroll down to the section "WHAT'S IN A BUSHEL OF CORN?" and learn something...
So, you think you have a bushel of corn, you make ethanol from it and you still have a bushel or corn? That's what "coproduct" means. And it's not what happens.
It is ridiculous to claim that ethanol production is a co-product of corn processing and therefore should only be charged with the energy that was used to turn it into ethanol. The fair "charge" would be calculated as follows: compute the value of the labor and materials and subsidies that go into growing a bushel of corn. Then add in the labor and materials and subsidies that go into converting that bushel into ethanol. Attribute that total cost to the ethanol in proportion to its economic fraction of the result. *That* is fair.
You grow corn Keith? Work for ADM or something?
>>>You grow corn Keith? Work for ADM or something?
Would that alter any of the facts I've presented?
And, for the record, no - I don't.
I'm sorry you are unable to understand what I presented. It's clear we'll not agree - so I'm going to ignore you from here on out. Please give me the same consideration.
Ethanol doesn't deserve its subsidies, it's a net social loss. The smart, practical thing is hybrid electric (maybe eventually all electric) cars that can charge from a grid powered by nukes and coal.
Which would need an order of magnitude higher power carrying capacity. The present grid could not support such a load in its slackest times, let alone during heat waves.
>>>The smart, practical thing is hybrid electric (maybe eventually all electric) cars that can charge from a grid powered by nukes and coal.
Tell me the social costs of those...and are they any less than ethanol? You get to keep the repository for nuke waste in your back yard...
BINGO!
That means that it will have only about 3/5 the energy in it, per pound, that straight gasoline will. If the price per gallon is 3/5 that of gasoline, or less, there is some benefit to be had, otherwise ol' Barak is just trying to sell blue sky.
You're right, the grid needs to be upgraded. That seemed pretty apparent a couple of years ago out west. However, electric power (nuclear and coal) is cheaper than oil power and much of the charging of autos could be done at night, off peak, and even smartly regulated. And the worst case is you might have to use a little gas anyway if you don't get enough of a charge.
However, (and we just sold 100,000 bushels of corn to an ethanol plant last week); we need to understand that these "oil" people will go kicking and screaming, hanging on by their fingernails to the "old lies" into perpetuity.
In fact, I actually believe that none of these purposely obtuse trader-types will EVER allow farmers to make any money. They have a rather bizarre hatred of us.
The IEEE recently looked at this issue. The sky line would be filled with the multi-kilovolt lines required for this. And exactly when you want the electric cars the most (high heat, high smog days) they can't be used because the air conditioning needs it 24/7.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.