Posted on 03/06/2006 11:00:00 AM PST by kellynla
Washington, DC [RenewableEnergyAccess.com] The Renewable Fuels Association (RFA) announced that the U.S. ethanol industry set annual production records in 2005, producing just less than 4 billion gallons (3.904 billion gallons) and averaging nearly 255,000 barrels of ethanol production daily, according to data released by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).
"These figures represent not only the tremendous growth our industry is experiencing, but also the future growth that will occur," said RFA President Bob Dinneen.
"Demand for ethanol will only continue to grow as refiners remove MTBE from the marketplace and more Americans switch to this clean burning, renewable fuel," said Dinneen. "The U.S. ethanol industry, with 2.1 billion gallons of capacity currently under construction, will continue to expand to meet this soaring demand."
Currently, 95 ethanol plants have a combined production capacity of more than 4.3 billion gallons a year.
(Excerpt) Read more at renewableenergyaccess.com ...
Oh please. There is nothing funnier every 4 years than watching all the presidential hopefuls suck up to corn farmers in Iowa.
Volatility in the oil market is hurtful because it is so fundamental.
How does adding more expensive ethanol to the mix help reduce the volatility of the oil market?
Finally, economic efficiency, while very, very important, cannot be our only criterion. We are funding governments whose interests are inimical to us.
I agree, we should reduce money going to these regimes.
If an application of US techology to the energy sector could render oil unimportant, that is worth some subsidy.
I would love it if ethanol made sense economically and if it added to instead of subtracting from our energy supply. I don't think it does at this point. I think a better idea would be more nukes, ANWR, offshore CA and FL drilling and perhaps a program to turn coal into liquid fuel.
I'm drinking some right now.
But in SE Wisconsin, we cannot purchase anything but e10. This is a Federal mandate by the EPA. Over the barrel we are.
Tish tosh. You never enlightened us as to why this is "your" thread.
who posted the article?
Thought so...
A true Marine would NEVER address a civilian this way - completely devoid of respect for the citizenry you purport to protect.
Your credentials are now extremely suspect. I'll bet you had problems with insubordination.
It's a big country 14 hours away by air and has it together when it comes to education. Let's just say their middle class becomes upper middle class when they come here. And I taught a very nice lady how to speak English in a short period of time:)
The only problem with ethanol is the oxidation of steel and aluminum. Build everything that comes in contact with ethanol out of another alloy. Stainless would be just fine. Titanium steel also. Mass-produced the cost will come down. And the engine block can still be steel.
There is so much waste laying around that can be fermented into alcohol it would make Jack Daniels blush endlessly; because it can become 99.9% pure Anhydrous Ethyl Alcohol. It has the same high blue flame as Anhydrous Ethyl Ether. A little compressed air mixed in and you are there!
We already are to some extent and it will definitel increase in the near future.
There are two things preventing large scale importation of fuel grade ethanol. First, ethanol is regulated by BATF so it faces additional obstacles for importation; and second, the oil companies only blend ethanol in the gasoline to the extent they are forced to do so by the Fed. Gov.. The oil companies have little interest in weaning the US from is use of oil/gasoline.
>>>Oh please. There is nothing funnier every 4 years than watching all the presidential hopefuls suck up to corn farmers in Iowa.<<<
Watching you on this thread is funnier. :)
And doesn't cost millions in subsidies ;^)
That is a complete falsehood.
From: http://www.ethanol.org/pdfs/msu_ethanol_study.pdf
The net energy associated with ethanol in the system expansion approach is 0.56 MJnet/MJ of ethanol in the base scenario, including ethanol transportation to consumers. Therefore, the available energy from ethanol is much higher than the input energy for producing ethanol. In other words, using ethanol as a liquid transportation fuel would significantly reduce domestic use of petroleum even in the worstcase scenario.
Great. So when will you stop stealing my money?
Come back and complain about ethanol subsidies when you factor the costs expended by the government by the DOD, etc. to keep oil freely flowing into the price of producing oil.
""Unfortunately, they use more oil than they save."'
Not.
So stealing my money is okay? Glad you straightened me out on that one.
Straw man argument. You lost the ethanol argument.
You mean there is no taxpayer subsidy?
see post #174.
So 2 wrongs make a right?
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.