I have heard of a few studies claiming this, but if the engine is properly tuned for it, the emissions are not a problem. As far as health concerns, I haven't heard that moonshine was toxic any more than whiskey. It won't happen yet, but if you saw motors that were set up specifically for ethanol usage, instead of gasoline, you would find the emissions are cleaner than gasoline. The mileage also improves as well. Ethanol needs higher compression to capitalize on ethanol's burning properties. Now if you could show me the studies claiming higher health risks, and environmental damage, I would be interested is seeing if they dislose how they found this to be true. Gota read between the lines any more, the truth isn't right up front, and slants are put on everything. On the environmental side, ethanol is biodegradeable, gasoline is not...
In regards to the prices of everything, corn is FINALLY a profitable crop, rather than a break even crop. Wasn't too long ago that we had $1 a bushel corn, and is now $4. Pretty expensive, huh? Compared to soybeans at $10 a bushel, it's still a deal. Costs for the farmers are up too, with fuel and fertilizer costing more, then the price of the seed corn is up, but seed corn has nothing to do with ethanol, other than demand for it. The price should go up to cover costs the farmers incur, even without ethanol We as a nation are used to the lower prices, and historically, grain prices have been low, this is the first time that it has made it to $4. If you check into distiller's grain, you will find that ethanol production does not keep the cows from having feed. The distilling process has byproducts, which is what is called distiller's grain, which the cattle eat. Hogs apparently don't do so well with it, nor chickens, so that isn't a good thing there. But I do know that there generally isn't enough storage for the grain we produce now, and there is no shortage of it, I can find plenty of it around here still, and harvest is about a month away.Simple economics, more demand, more price, but yet, there still remains a surplus of the actual product. Speculative markets are more why the higher prices, rather than actual demand. Same story for oil, while demand is steady, the price jumps wildly, due to speculative markets, not true demand. If our markets were truly based on demand, it would be more steady, and wars and political tensions in areas with no oil would not change the price until the supply actually became tight.

 

A member on another forum offered that he had been told that there are additional modifications available to improve efficiency should someone elect to run E85 exclusively. Come to think of it, I've read some stuff in the F150 2004-2007 forum, too.

The following is not a reply to White Shadow, but generalized discussion:

Anyway, I don't want to get into the market/economic factors, because that analysis supports the status quo. At present, there simply is no short-term financial gain from using E85 (to the consumer). As for the long-term benefits, the jury is still out.

My conversion is based on my local experience. I don't believe that current evidence supports man-made global warming; however, mother-nature doesn't make the air-quality in Nashville unbreathable (Nashville for Pete's sake!!). So for the price of a few dollars more, including higher grocery bills, I'd rather not be confined to the house (and increased usage of the A/C during peak power hours) because of poor, man-responsible air quality.

Finally, could we kindly desist with culture-bashing the Arabs? All Ford owners regardless of race, blah blah blah, should feel welcome here.

 

Question for all you guys talking about 'sticking it to' the people we buy oil from. What do you have against Canadians and Mexicans?

 

Ok, I'll stop using e85 and start using imported oil from countries who like to cut off our soldiers heads and show it on the web, or using Hugo Chavez's Dictator Citgo crap. It's people who don't want to develop new sources of energy that let's the oil companies have us by the *****!!!! Right now e85 is the only alternitive that we have. If you have the ability to **** out a million barrels of oil, then I'll be your best friend, until then I'll embrace something that will help out our farmers. Oh by the way-e85 is now being traded like oil in the market, that's why it shot up in price-Plus you are already using it, you just don't know it. It isn't required to post the 10% that you are using due to federal mandates because of the MTBE ban. Last year I was paying $1.80 a gallon for e85 when gas was $2.50, but because of futures traders wanting to get rich, is has shot up. And also I got 17mpg this week due to me not getting on the gas as hard-15% difference-not bad. Beef, milk, cereal ect... have gone up due to the increase in oil prices-tractors don't run on e85, but diesel-an oil product(we put filter systems on these too to burn used cooking oil-biodiesel-I suppose we're bad for that too!). Please talk to a farmer and tell him your point of view and he or she will laugh you off thier property. On second thought, I'll keep on using e85 and ignore naysayers-it's a free country and we Americans have always had to fight for what we believe in. Most of us who have converted or bought flex fuel vehicles that I know are as follows: mechanics, clergymen, US servicemen, police, secretarys, and nurses. We are not tree huggers, we are not radicals just grass-roots Americans, if you don't like e85, dont use it. GO USA, GO FARMERS. Look up how much crap the Whiting, IN refinery plant dumps into Lake Michigan, and wants to increase this, and than tell me how dirty e85 is to produce. Compare EPA discharge data from an e85 plant, to an oil refinery-FACTS THERE BROTHER. Look-we both love and drive Fords, so you burn what you want and I'll burn what I want.

 

I like tacos and back bacon Hozer!!! Hold it!!! Hard tacos at the Taco bell are made from CORN and the prices haven't gone up in 2 years!! I'll keep an eye on this and let you know(I did some research and found that hard taco shells used at our Taco Bell are MADE IN AMERICA). Kinda blows the increased food prices due to ethanol production right out of the water-sorry. I will take a cross section of food made of corn, record prices. and in 1 year compare-if they are way more than normal inflation raises, then I'll rethink-NOT!!

 

On the contrary. I am quite aware of the 10% ethanol mandated in my local fuel supply. And I resent being forced to use it.




I will. And what I WANT to be able to buy is 100% pure, uncut gasoline. Unfortunately, that is not available in my area. So I'm compelled to use the inferior fuel they are selling.


My point about Canada and Mexico is that we import much more oil and gasoline from those two countries than we do from all middle eastern countried combined.

 

Shadow; I appreciate your position. Especially for supporting the troops. I recently retired after 21 years in the military, with a few trips to the "Sandbox". 76Supercab2 is correct however that we get a lot of oil from places other than the middle east. Canada, Mexico, and the USA to name a few. Also, just because we do get some oil from OPEC doesn't mean it's all supporting terrorism or policies against the United States.

As far as advertising goes on the E10, it is not mandatory that all gas have 10% ethanol in it. The Exxon stations, Stag, and a few others here in Wyoming "PROUDLY" advertise "NO ETHANOL" at many of their stations. I can tell without a doubt the difference in mileage and performance between E10 and straight 85-87 octane gas. And considering the difference in mileage, even with E10, you wind up using about the same amount of "Oil" as with the straight stuff, but spending more to do it.

As far as E85 goes, granted it uses less oil and more grain product. That doesn't necessarily mean however that it's a great thing. Unless our goal, which it should be, was to get away from petrolum products all together to help the environment, then using E10-E85 doesn't really make sense. When you consider that the combines, tractors, production, distilling, transportation (Ethanol can go into the same pipeline as conventional petrolium), etc... then how much fossil fuels are being used to produce the Non-fossil fuel ethanol. I know that the big rigs, combines, etc... aren't running on ethanol. Same with things like Hybrids. If you only knew what it took to make the batteries and such for the vehicles, most people wouldn't buy them. The point is, any monetary shift you are creating by using ethanol is mainly going to the large producers like Archer Daniel Midland. There isn't that many of the small time Mom and Pop farmers that you are helping.

So, what are the benefits here? Not really a cost savings when you consider the inefficiency of ethanol. Profits mainly go to big corporations like Archer Daniels Midland. Environmentally, you use quite a bit more petroleum products planting, cultivating, distilling, and shipping the ethanol, as you are supposedly saving.

I would like to see alternative means of energy. Mainly for the factories and large consumers if not for the automobile. This alternative fuel source however has to be something that is not only more economical and better for the environment, but local, national, and international economics have to be considered. I don't think Ethanol is the answer. later... Mike....

 

Has anyone forgotten that shortly before this whole ethanol for fuel kick, there was a big concern about falling water tables, shortages of fresh water and over irrigation of crops? Corn is a VERY water intensive crop.

Also, what do we do for our energy needs when all our fertile farmland is spent and played out? what about our food needs?

 

As a farmer - I have been running B5 to B20 biodiesel in our farm equipment for several years which is made from soybeans. Case/IH farm equipment has just came out and stated that if B100 is ASTM D-6751 certified it will warranty certain engines.
We are a smaller family farm and the corn prices have gone up about 30% since the ethanol plant has come to our section of the country. So it has helped our bottom line a lot.
Ethanol cannot be shipped via pipeline from what I was told from the ethanol plant mgr. It has to be sent via rail or truck.

 

Tell me how water intensive corn is, please! Not a single bit of irrigation on this farm, and not much of it done around here, just the high buck operations that have to get max yield to make the bills each year. Also, what about all of the acres not in use, that farmers are being PAID to not produce on? Ever heard of the CRP program? AS stated, the tractoprs and combines don't run on ethanol, they do run on bio diesel or veggie oil if properly equipped. I won't argue that our current sources of feedstock are not the end result, but they will help us get there. If not for corn ethanol, would anyone even be considering cellulistic ethanol? I don't think so.

 

I hated ethanol when it first came into "gasohol" in the early 80's. It ate up just about anything-especially fuel lines. Now that technology has changed, I have changed. Same for biodiesel-when it first came out about 2 years ago in northern Indiana,we had problems. Both e85 and biodiesel have a solvent effect. Also biodiesel swelled up our older engine's rubber fuel seals. Once these were taken care of, they run great with a visibly less soot output under heavy load. Plus it smells like french(excuse me-FREEDOM)fries-and mechanics like all kinds of grease. So e85 smells like vodka and biodiesel smells like a deep fryer when cooking. Rather smell that than the piece of crap no catalytic converter junk running around here in Northern Indiana. We don't have emissions testing yet, so people don't care. Biofuels help-period.

 

So, you live in Iowa where there's enough rainfall (usually) to produce corn. How about if I want to put in a crop of corn in Arizona? Utah? How about Wyoming?

Iowa, Minnesota, Illinois, and Nebraska are the top corn producting states in the US. Why?

I've heard of the CRP plan. How much land is held idle in that program?

How much more corn can YOU and your farm produce if you had to make maximum production?

Here's what you're up against.

Last year the US produced 6,200,000,000 gallons of ethanol. Sound like a lot?
If the entire country was using E100 that would last all of 19 days.
If the entire country was using E85 you could extend our usage out to 22 days.
Falls just a little bit short of an entire year. Doesn't it? (That's about 5% of what we'd need)


The US land mass is 3,537,438 square miles (counting Alaska and Hawaii, the Rockies, the Mojave Destert, Death Valley etc)
We would need 2,185,950 square miles just for corn. Doesn't leave a lot for cities, parks, houses AND PRODUCING OTHER FOOD!!!!

The number of acres needed to produce enough E100 to run our country is 13,990,080,000
The number of acres of harvested farmland is 295,940,000 (total farmland. Corn acrage averages around 70,000,000 acres)
Falls short by about 4 times. (about 200 times more cornland than there is now)
The total number of US cropland acres is 435,370,000 (about 100 million more acres than what's being farmed now)
That falls short by 3 times. IE you would need 3 times more cropland than exists just to make our fuel. (I still like to eat though)

So, can your farm produce 19 times more corn than it's making now?
If we were all using E85, you'd need to produce 18 times what you're making now. Possible? For how long?

In short, while this idea might make some people FEEL good (especially those profiting from it) it is NOT a viable alternative to our long term energy needs. BTW, my calculations were assuming that the ENTIRE US production went into ethanol. If you want to continue feeding this country, you'll need to add the increased production to what we're making now.

Sources:

http://www.gravmag.com/oil.html
http://www.iowacorn.org/ethanol/ethanol_3a.html
http://www.corn.org/web/uscprod.htm
http://www.ers.usda.gov/StateFacts/US.HTM

 

Wow my head hurts after reading all of this. One thing for sure,, "EVERYONE SHOULD BE WELCOME HERE REGUARDLESS OF NATIONAL ORIGON OR RELIGION"


Now after reading all this lets build more nuclear power make hydrogen and have water come out of the tail pipe. We can advance spark increase compression change valve timing and go racing.

Best to all of ya. This means "EVERYONE" who reads this thread. Ya'll have a nice day.

 

I think everyone will agree with this.... We ALL should do our part to EXTEND the remaining world fuel resourses for the generations to come.

 

Actually Bigred; if it wasn't for the environmental reasons; which are still debatable, then running out of fossil fuels wouldn't be of concern for quite a while. We should however be looking for cleaner fuels. As much as some were joking, nuclear is a very practical means of energy. Everyone has a hard on about 2 accidents that happened more than 20 years ago. People don't want to realize that technology has changed a lot. You do know that a lot of our military's navy is run on nuclear power. A typical sub or ship can go 20+ years on 1 "tank" of nuclear energy. It CAN be handled safely. It CAN be disposed of safely. If more of our grid power was changed to nuclear power, our energy issues would almost become non-existent.

But, this is a car and truck forum, so nuclear is not what we are aiming at. Unless of course we went to electric cars that could be recharged at home. And if our home electricity, from the grid, was from nuclear, wind, hydro, and solar power, we would be as clean as it comes.

Sorry, but ethanol is not the right answer. It isn't good for the environment. It uses way too much water. It seems to be causing other problems. It has too much of an impact on our ecology and economy. Later.. Mike...