Thank the Ethanol Hoax for higher malt prices

[wihophead]

The usage rant would be fine if supply was the driving factor of todays costs but at this time it really isn't. If we used less then they would just produce less and we would still be in the same situation. This price hike is being blamed on the weak U.S. Dollar.....dann I thought this thread was about ethanol.....

 

[david_42]

Even "funnier" are the waste wood to ethanol bunch. I live in lumber country & there AIN'T no waste wood. The mill strips the bark & sells it, trims the log rectangular and sells the slabs, cuts the lumber, then screens the shavings & sawdust and sells both products. I think they even sell the scrapings from the air filters & floor sweepings! If they could can the pine scent, they'd sell that too.

Most logging companies chip the slash (branches too small to make logs) and sell that.

With the housing down turn, companies are trucking "waste wood" from Canada to keep their "waste wood" companies running!

 

[Dr Vorlauf]

On top of the fact that producing ethanol is energy negative, don't' they make it via a fermentation ?

Doesn't this fermentation add CO2 into the atmosphere ? This whole carbon dioxide causing global warming is a hoax on a much grander scale than just ethanol.

 

[jdoiv]

Personally I think ethanol is a scam forced upon us by the large ag businesses and their Washington lobby. It's a total waste of resources. Biodiesel and hydrogen fuel cells is where we should be investing dollars.

 

[skinfiddler]

Drill, refine, repeat.

Give us the space back for hops and grain.

 

[Klainmeister]

Drill, refine, repeat.

Give us the space back for hops and grain.

I don't really think this is the answer either. I for one don't want to be always answering to the same 5 Big-Oil Businesses the rest of my life, and frankly i don't want their dirty drills in anymore pristine natural environments then they have already destroyed.

I'm not trying to be ultra liberal or enviro or something, but there is so many other options out there that don't involved doing that type of destruction. And I can't stand the profits they're turning right now too!

 

[Jesse17]

Even "funnier" are the waste wood to ethanol bunch. I live in lumber country & there AIN'T no waste wood. The mill strips the bark & sells it, trims the log rectangular and sells the slabs, cuts the lumber, then screens the shavings & sawdust and sells both products. I think they even sell the scrapings from the air filters & floor sweepings! If they could can the pine scent, they'd sell that too.

Most logging companies chip the slash (branches too small to make logs) and sell that.

With the housing down turn, companies are trucking "waste wood" from Canada to keep their "waste wood" companies running!

If you're referring to my post, I wasn't talking about waste wood on a commercial scale. I was talking about individuals fermenting and distilling their own fuel, with yard waste, etc. I mentioned sawdust, because I do wood working and have an abundance of it laying around.

 

[skinfiddler]

I don't really think this is the answer either. I for one don't want to be always answering to the same 5 Big-Oil Businesses the rest of my life, and frankly i don't want their dirty drills in anymore pristine natural environments then they have already destroyed.

I'm not trying to be ultra liberal or enviro or something, but there is so many other options out there that don't involved doing that type of destruction. And I can't stand the profits they're turning right now too!

You will be anyway. Who do you think is positioning themselves to provide any different forms of energy.

To give that dead mare another whack: There is NOTHING on the horizon that will replace the economic value of fossil fuels. New sources of oil and improvements in drilling and refinement are happening all the time, much faster than the present "alternatives." I would drill through the frakin Caribou for oil if it meant moving our dependence fromt he Bel-Arabs.

 

[PeteOz77]

The usage rant would be fine if supply was the driving factor of todays costs but at this time it really isn't. If we used less then they would just produce less and we would still be in the same situation. This price hike is being blamed on the weak U.S. Dollar.....dann I thought this thread was about ethanol.....

It wasn't really a rant.. but the point I was trying to make is that if everyone worldwide did everything they could to reduce consumption, then we would have a reason to complain. Get rid of the gas guzzling Escalade and drive a new Turbo Diesel Golf that uses less than HALF of the fuel, and your fuel prices go down by 50%. Not only do you save a lot of money, but you hopefully make the finite amount of oil that the earth can supply last twice as long.

I am no tree hugger or eco fanatic. I just don't see a reason to burn twice as much fuel as required to do the same job. It wastes my money, it wastes a non renewable resource, it puts more money in the overflowing pockets of the robber baron oil companies, and it's just not a smart thing to do.

I feel the same way about water. We live on the dryest continent, and I still see people wasting water by try to keep their lawns alive. At least water is renewable...

Back to the Ethanol discussion.

 

[adx]

I would drill through the frakin Caribou for oil if it meant moving our dependence fromt he Bel-Arabs.

That false statement is another one that people love to float around. We get most of our oil from Canada, Mexico and Venezuela. Less then 20% of all American oil imports come from Arab countries and most of that comes from Saudi Arabia.

Source: http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/...ons/company_level_imports/current/import.html

 

[fifelee]

Don't sell ethanol and American ingenuity short just yet. We are in the infancy of mass produced bio-fuel. In time after the infrastructure is built up there will be huge break throughs. Such advancements are already happening:

http://www.gm-volt.com/2008/01/13/g...kthrough-by-new-partner-coskata-inc/#more-730

Bio-fuels have the potential to be a great thing for the environment and you pocket book. Just give the bright mind is this country some time.

 

[skinfiddler]

That false statement is another one that people love to float around. We get most of our oil from Canada, Mexico and Venezuela. Less then 20% of all American oil imports come from Arab countries and most of that comes from Saudi Arabia.

Source: http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/...ons/company_level_imports/current/import.html

"I would drill through the frakin Caribou for oil if it meant moving our dependence from all foreign sources." Fixed



Better reason for singling out SA: I don't see Canadian, Mexican and Venezuelan countries funding terrorism against the west (yet).

Moreover how is it possibly a good thing to be dependent on any other nation for energy if we don't have to.

Still there is nothing out there to replace fossil fuels and if you want to see the price of fuel drop $2/g tomorrow announce today that we are making a "Manhattan Project" out of drilling and refining our own oil sources.

 

[Cookiebaggs]

I'm not trying to be ultra liberal or enviro or something, but there is so many other options out there that don't involved doing that type of destruction. And I can't stand the profits they're turning right now too!

Would you rather see them turning a loss? Many people are invested in oil companies. Incuding those that bitch about the profits.

Could it be that the record oil company profits are a direct result of increased demand and a resulting higher volume of gas produced rather than higher margins?

Example: 10% margin on 10,000 barrels vs. 10% margin on 20,000 barrels. larger profit due to volume (demand) increase but the same margin of profit.

 

[EdWort]

Don't sell ethanol and American ingenuity short just yet. We are in the infancy of mass produced bio-fuel. In time after the infrastructure is built up there will be huge break throughs. Such advancements are already happening:

http://www.gm-volt.com/2008/01/13/gm-announces-ethanol-from-renewables-production-breakthrough-by-new-partner-coskata-inc/#more-730

Bio-fuels have the potential to be a great thing for the environment and you pocket book. Just give the bright mind is this country some time.

I don't understand where the potential is. It uses more fuel to produce than it makes (net fuel loss for each gallon), it makes more pollution, it is less efficient which means you must use more to go the same distance, it wastes tons of water (literally), and it is driving up the prices of food and beer.

Who is getting rich off this scam and who is benefiting? Not ordinary Americans and not the environment. I do not see a single benefit for this scam except for lobbyists, and folks like Archer Daniels Midland, and ConAgra etc.

 

[wihophead]

Would you rather see them turning a loss? Many people are invested in oil companies. Incuding those that bitch about the profits.

Could it be that the record oil company profits are a direct result of increased demand and a resulting higher volume of gas produced rather than higher margins?

Example: 10% margin on 10,000 barrels vs. 10% margin on 20,000 barrels. larger profit due to volume (demand) increase but the same margin of profit.

You hit the nail on the head.....here is an article I received from The Motley Fool last year...you missed the margin for EXXON by .4%....LOL

http://www.fool.com/investing/gener...+oil+profits&vstest=search_042607_linkdefault

 

[EdWort]

Let's not forget the taxes local, state & federal governments extract out of every gallon. No one seems to complain about their "windfall" from increased demand.

 

[fifelee]

I don't understand where the potential is. It uses more fuel to produce than it makes (net fuel loss for each gallon), it makes more pollution, it is less efficient which means you must use more to go the same distance, it wastes tons of water (literally), and it is driving up the prices of food and beer.

Who is getting rich off this scam and who is benefiting? Not ordinary Americans and not the environment. I do not see a single benefit for this scam except for lobbyists, and folks like Archer Daniels Midland, and ConAgra etc.

Not to sound rude, but did you read the link? Also check out Coskata.com. They have perfected a better way to make ethanol and are in the process of opening plants. They don't use the corn, they will use the the corn stock, or old tires or any organic waste. There process only uses 1 gallon of water per gallon of ethanol and they claim they can get 7.7 units of energy for every 1 unit of input. Check out there FAQ http://www.coskata.com/AboutFAQ.asp. American ingenuity can make ethanol viable if we give it a chance and don't shut it down first.

P.S. I really enjoy Walter Williams and read all his articles. He makes economic understandable to the common man.
P.S. love the apfelwein

 

[EdWort]

Not to sound rude, but did you read the link?

Nope. Good info, now that I have read it. My rant is about corn ethanol and what it is doing to our economy, food prices, my wallet, and beer.

It looks like Coskata is well positioned to take advantage of the enery mandates set by congress.

 

[fifelee]

Nope. Good info, now that I have read it. My rant is about corn ethanol and what it is doing to our economy, food prices, my wallet, and beer.

It looks like Coskata is well positioned to take advantage of the enery mandates set by congress.

I agree corn ethanol is not very good on its own, but I see it is a necessary evil to get the infrastructure established and give time for invention. In ten years I predict very little ethanol will be made from corn because more economical ways will be found.

 

[Nurmey]

I agree corn ethanol is not very good on its own, but I see it is a necessary evil to get the infrastructure established and give time for invention. In ten years I predict very little ethanol will be made from corn because more economical ways will be found.

We can only hope you are correct that the junk science behind using corn will die. Here is a little geekyness on ethanol.

Corn (annual) produces 400 gallons of ethanol per acre. Switch grass (native perennial) produces 1100 gallons of ethanol per acre. To make ethanol you use 100% of the Switch grass as opposed to just the seeds of corn. Mow down switch grass and it grows back. Switch grass can be grown on land not currently used for edible plants. Now which one of this products sounds better to use in ethanol production?

 

[EdWort]

We can only hope you are correct that the junk science behind using corn will die. Here is a little geekyness on ethanol.

Corn (annual) produces 400 gallons of ethanol per acre. Switch grass (native perennial) produces 1100 gallons of ethanol per acre. To make ethanol you use 100% of the Switch grass as opposed to just the seeds of corn. Mow down switch grass and it grows back. Switch grass can be grown on land not currently used for edible plants. Now which one of this products sounds better to use in ethanol production?

yeah, and I bet you can get at least 4 harvests of Switch Grass a year to boot!

 

[wihophead]

yeah, and I bet you can get at least 4 harvests of Switch Grass a year to boot!

It also doesn't require the amount of fertilizer that corn does which is being blamed for the expansion of the Gulf of Mexico dead zone.

 

[PeteOz77]

It makes good animal habitat as well, something that seems to be dwindling more every year.

 

[pjj2ba]

A lot of research $$$ from NSF, NIH and the DOE is currently being funneled into biofuels. It is the current hot area. As a brewer, we all know we must mash to convert the starches to sugar for the yeast to consume. The technology to do this is well understood. The big goal is to be able to EASILY convert cellulose (ie switch grass) into sugars for the yeast. This is much more difficult than converting starches which is why so much corn is being used right now. In the plant sciences the focus is on developing plants that produce more biomass and are easier to break down. This is not trivial. These traits are not necessarily in the plants best interest. Lignin content is a major stumbling block. It keeps plant stems strong, but it makes it them more difficult to breakdown the cellulose. Lignin also helps a plant defend itself from pests and disease. I am also aware that a lot of work is being done with microbes other than yeast and I hear reports of losts of research $$ looking into the concentrating steps to avoid the high energy cost of distillation

 

[CBBaron]

We can only hope you are correct that the junk science behind using corn will die. Here is a little geekyness on ethanol.

Corn (annual) produces 400 gallons of ethanol per acre. Switch grass (native perennial) produces 1100 gallons of ethanol per acre. To make ethanol you use 100% of the Switch grass as opposed to just the seeds of corn. Mow down switch grass and it grows back. Switch grass can be grown on land not currently used for edible plants. Now which one of this products sounds better to use in ethanol production?

Thats great, except that the starches in corn are much more readily available and much easier to process into ethanol. Corn is used for ethanol in the US because it is a product that we produced in excess in the past, has a high yield per acre and is easily processed for alcohol. Switch grass sounds like a great biofuel resource but we do not yet have a way to economically process the grass into alcohol on a large industrial scale.
There are a number of companies and government sponsored organizations researching the processes required but we are still years away.

Our grain prices are going up for several reasons:
1. Increased cost of shipping due to rising fuel prices.
2. Increased overseas demand due to weak dollar and increased wealth in developing countries
3. Increased use of corn in ethanol plants.

The ethanol plants is actually the least of the problems and the one most likely to be cut back as grain prices increase. Even with the government incentives of corn ethanol it took the big oil price increases of the last few years to make ethanol a profitable product. If corn prices continue to increase faster than oil then the equation will change again and the ethanol plants will cut back or try to switch to other raw materials.

As for water in ethanol and pipe line problems. It is not the water in the ethanol that causes corrosion. Ethanol appears to mildly corrosive itself to some metals which makes pipelines somewhat problematic. Additionally pipeline networks tend to allow some water into the ethanol which ethanol will absorb making it less suitable as fuel. This happens to other pipeline products also but oil based fuels do not absorb water.

I'm wondering where the article in the OP gets his water usage numbers from. I can only guess the article is refering to the water used by the corn when growing. I believe most of the corn grown in the US is grown without irrigation so that water usage is natural rain fall. The water used in the manufacturing of ethanol should be easily recycled using common sewage treatment methods. My guess is that most of it is recycled in the same plant.

Does corn ethanol make economic and environmental sense? Probably not. But it is not near as evil as some are making it out to be and the alternative biofuel sources are not yet available. The only alternative that is viable currently is conservation but that isn't all that likely in a large scale either. For now I will continue to do my part by riding my bike to work and limiting our family auto usage to <10k miles a year in a compact car.

Craig

 

[wihophead]

I'm wondering where the article in the OP gets his water usage numbers from. I can only guess the article is refering to the water used by the corn when growing. I believe most of the corn grown in the US is grown without irrigation so that water usage is natural rain fall. The water used in the manufacturing of ethanol should be easily recycled using common sewage treatment methods. My guess is that most of it is recycled in the same plant.

That is plant utilization, it is not a perfect process so water in does not equal water out. It is public knowledge that the accepted industry-wide average is about 4.2 gallons of water used for every gallon of ethanol produced.

Here is some info on water usage...
http://www.agobservatory.org/library.cfm?refid=89449

 

[fifelee]

Switch grass sounds like a great biofuel resource but we do not yet have a way to economically process the grass into alcohol on a large industrial scale.

Craig

It isn't as far away as you think. First plant open 2010.
http://media.cleantech.com/2414/coskata-icm-to-build-ethanol-plant

 

[CBBaron]

That is plant utilization, it is not a perfect process so water in does not equal water out. It is public knowledge that the accepted industry-wide average is about 4.2 gallons of water used for every gallon of ethanol produced.

Here is some info on water usage...
http://www.agobservatory.org/library.cfm?refid=89449

That number sounds much more reasonable but the OP quoted

It takes 1,700 gallons of water to produce one gallon of ethanol.

Which sounds absurd to me.

Craig

 

[CBBaron]

It isn't as far away as you think. First plant open 2010.
http://media.cleantech.com/2414/coskata-icm-to-build-ethanol-plant

Sounds very promising. However like I said it is still years away. If this plant proves to be economical then I would expect it to be replicated fairly quickly but large scale production using switch grass and other resources would still be several years later.
I am always hopeful.
Craig

 

[CBBaron]

yeah, and I bet you can get at least 4 harvests of Switch Grass a year to boot!

Ed I believe the 1100 gals/acre/year quoted is based on multiple harvests. That is usually how yields are listed for agriculture products.
Still switch grass is a promising feed stock for ethanol if it can be economically processed.

Craig