Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

E85 (85% Ethanol) a loser for reduced miles/gallon
The Fargo Forum ^ | 03/04/07 | By Jack F. Carter and John D. Nalewaja

Posted on 03/04/2007 8:01:09 AM PST by Uncle Miltie

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 201-203 next last
To: Wonder Warthog
Right below where you enter your post, you will find the words NO profanity, NO personal attacks

Stop the profanity and name calling. It only points out how weak your arguments are.

Your report, which I've read times you posted before and re-read again, has no support for the numbers it claims. Just some numbers posted on the Internet without the supporting documentation supporting the claim. It has no validity.

I've worked in refineries and I understand how much energy it takes. Nothing near this claim. Do you know that gasoline was originally a waste product? Producing Kerosene resulting in gasoline there originally was no market for. It doesn't take a huge additional amount of energy.

101 posted on 03/05/2007 6:21:41 AM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog
"No, what the report says is that it takes 0.73MM BTU of fossil fuel to produce 1MM BTU of ethanol, and 1.23MM BTU of fossil fuel to produce 1MM BTU of gasoline. LEARN TO READ."

I will try and make it simple and easy for you to understand. Your article included the delivered BTU of the gasoline in the BTU cost of producing the gasoline, because all the BTU's are from a fossil source. It did not include the BTU's from the delivered Ethanol because Ethanol is not a Fossil fuel. If the article was honest it would indicate that it takes 1.73MM BTU's to produce 1 BTU of Ethanol and 1.23MM BTU's to produce 1MM BTU of Gasoline.

I can see why you are confused, because the article was intentionally confusing. Additionally your article took the best case scenario for Ethanol production and the worst case scenario for gasoline production (heavy crude). In many instances the production of Ethanol can actually consume more BTU's than it creates.

Why don't you try reading this.

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2007/01/mit_analysis_co.html
102 posted on 03/05/2007 7:06:29 AM PST by LeGrande (Muslims, Jews and Christians all believe in the same God of Abraham.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog
Uh, you might try reading the report at the link.

Your link? Maybe you'd learn how to make your links active?

103 posted on 03/05/2007 7:07:43 AM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Why are protectionists (and goldbugs) so bad at math?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Brad Cloven

More happy horse manure from big oil. They would rather continue sending dollars to the Arabs, Persians and Chavez.


104 posted on 03/05/2007 7:13:48 AM PST by hgro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga

Even though I think they're wrong, let's just take your calculations at face value.

Would you rather buy 91,000 BTUs from people who will use the money to buy materals to build bombs and entice others to carry them to our shores and kill us, or would you rather spend that money to buy 75,000 BTUs from American farmers and factory workers who support our country and are willing to send their young men to die defending our country from the bombers?


105 posted on 03/05/2007 7:16:06 AM PST by Balding_Eagle (If America falls, darkness will cover the face of the earth for a thousand years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande
It did not include the BTU's from the delivered Ethanol because Ethanol is not a Fossil fuel. If the article was honest it would indicate that it takes 1.73MM BTU's to produce 1 BTU of Ethanol and 1.23MM BTU's to produce 1MM BTU of Gasoline.

Excellent point. Also, unless ethanol plants use crude oil to make and transport their product, they should also include the extra energy needed to create the diesel to move the ethanol to the end user. If they wanted to be honest. LOL!

106 posted on 03/05/2007 7:16:23 AM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Why are protectionists (and goldbugs) so bad at math?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: Balding_Eagle
Would you rather buy 91,000 BTUs from people who will use the money to buy materals to build bombs and entice others to carry them to our shores and kill us,

If we no longer bought it, would they no longer have money to do these things? Why don't we use the money we save by using the cheaper energy to build bombs and kill them?

107 posted on 03/05/2007 7:18:39 AM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Why are protectionists (and goldbugs) so bad at math?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Balding_Eagle
Would you rather buy 91,000 BTUs from people who will use the money to buy materals to build bombs and entice others to carry them to our shores and kill us, or would you rather spend that money to buy 75,000 BTUs from American farmers and factory workers who support our country and are willing to send their young men to die defending our country from the bombers?

You just don't get it do you. That 75,000 BTU requires that you buy 91,000 BTU of foreign energy (worst case). Best case it requires that you buy 71,000 of foreign BTUs. Those tractors to do all the corn planting, the fertilizer plants all run on fossl fuel that has to come from someplace. The ONLY way that the 75,000 is all American is if you get it ALL from domestic coal, and if you're getting it from coal, then you're a lot better off using Fischer Tropsch. Ethanol fuel is nothing but a fat corporate welfare program to make ADM and similar companies grow fatter from the rest of us. Oh and you can skip the jingoist bullsh.t I'm trying to have a rational discussion here.

108 posted on 03/05/2007 7:35:41 AM PST by from occupied ga (Your most dangerous enemy is your own government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
Excellent point. Also, unless ethanol plants use crude oil to make and transport their product, they should also include the extra energy needed to create the diesel to move the ethanol to the end user. If they wanted to be honest. LOL!

What some people don't understand is that we aren't facing an energy shortage. Our energy problem is that the ME countries can produce energy cheaper than we can, it is almost free for them. Until their cost of production rises substantially we won't be able to be energy independent, because they can put any alternative source of energy out of business at will.

109 posted on 03/05/2007 7:42:28 AM PST by LeGrande (Muslims, Jews and Christians all believe in the same God of Abraham.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga

I do get it.

You don't want to answer my direct, and simple question because it doesn't serve your interest.

So much for your rationality.


110 posted on 03/05/2007 7:52:17 AM PST by Balding_Eagle (If America falls, darkness will cover the face of the earth for a thousand years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Balding_Eagle
You don't want to answer my direct, and simple question because it doesn't serve your interest.

What was the direct question stripped of its jingoistic bs? Was it do I want to buy ethanol from fat cat ethanol producers who use more foreign oil to produce ethanol than I would just buying gas because (wave the flag here) they're A-mucan and it's better that I spend more and they pocket the differenc before they pass the rest of my money on the the Arabs? Because near as I can tell that's what you're asking.

111 posted on 03/05/2007 8:00:12 AM PST by from occupied ga (Your most dangerous enemy is your own government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga

It must be tough to be educated beyond your wisdom.

I'm asking;

Would your rather give money to those who would use it to kill you?

OR

To those who are willing to die defending you AGAINST those who would kill you?


112 posted on 03/05/2007 8:04:17 AM PST by Balding_Eagle (If America falls, darkness will cover the face of the earth for a thousand years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog
the rough cut simple distillation you did to get the energy to run the oil well doesn't comprise nearly all the energy necessary to produce gasoline on a production scale

You at least are learning a little. You now recognize that up to the initial simple distillation does not take even a small part of the number you are claiming. Let me help you on the rest.

The US refines over 6 million barrels of gasoline every day.

US Refinery Net Production

1 Gallon Gasoline = 124,000 BTU

Calculators for Energy Used in the United States, EIA

A little math and we have the US refining
11,590 Trillion BTU's of gasoline per year.

The entire industrial sector of the US used 1,019,156,065 Megawatthours (MWH) of electrical energy. That includes everything: refineries, automotive manufacturing, everything industrial.

US Direct Use and Retail Sales of Electricity

Converted to BTU's
3,480 Trillion BTU

1 megawatthour = 3,412,141 BTU

So you claim we consume 14,260 Trillion BTU's in fossil fuel to produce the gasoline we refine. And you attribute most of this consumption in the final stage of refinery process after the simple distillation. That is Quadrupole the entire electrical energy the entire industrial market in the US consumes. Where do you claim this power is coming from?

Just do a little math, it is obvious how ridiculous this claim is. We use petroleum products because they contain a large ratio of energy available for the cost. Also, gasoline is less than 40% of the petroleum products we refine, where does the power for the rest come from?

The entire world uses more petroleum products as an energy source than any other source. If it took more energy to produce those products than they contained, where would the power come from?

World Consumption of Primary Energy by Energy Type

113 posted on 03/05/2007 8:49:06 AM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande; Toddsterpatriot; nh1
It takes 1.23MM BTU of fossil energy to produce 1MM BTU of gasoline.

A little math shows how ridiculous this claim is.

Post #113

114 posted on 03/05/2007 9:05:30 AM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: Brad Cloven

But think about the "feel goods" per gallon.


115 posted on 03/05/2007 9:23:29 AM PST by Old Professer (The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, and writes again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brad Cloven

You should have moved 25 feet to the right; that left image fence line keeps getting caught on my ear.

Nice moment, great symbolism.


116 posted on 03/05/2007 9:25:52 AM PST by Old Professer (The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, and writes again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: stboz

Costs twice as much to make.


117 posted on 03/05/2007 9:28:31 AM PST by Old Professer (The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, and writes again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: thackney

I have to disagree; most people hate to pump gas so it would be necessary to double the tank size to make people think they are only using half a tank of fuel as before while not realizing they used 11/2 times as much.


118 posted on 03/05/2007 9:30:51 AM PST by Old Professer (The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, and writes again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: P-40

"Form: colourless liquid
Stability: Stable
Melting point: -89 C
Boiling point: 118 C
Water solubility: high
Specific gravity: 0.81"

MSDS info


119 posted on 03/05/2007 9:33:14 AM PST by Old Professer (The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, and writes again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Old Professer

I like that depth and structure on the left, it keeps it from being too flat. My main failure, I think, was to use too much dark ground; I should have moved the frame up to show more sky and less black foreground.

I have a whole series from that evening, and several are just as spectacular. One is facing north, with a main cross (the father) and a dozen small crosses in two rows of 6 (the children) with telephone poles replicating the cross theme and a thunderstorm in the background.


120 posted on 03/05/2007 9:35:01 AM PST by Uncle Miltie (McCain / Feingold - 2008 ... "Shut Up or Go To Prison")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 201-203 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson