got ya, we are on the same page now, sorry for mix up.

 

it's ok just helpin u out

 

Here in Wisconsin the DNR did a study on corn and alcohol. It actually takes 2 to 2.5 gallons of energy to produce i gallon of alcohol from corn. Corn is the most inefficient commodity to make alcohol, sugar cane being the most efficient at 0.8 to 1.1 gallons used to produce 1 gallon of energy. Corn does reduce some of the bad emissions you get from gas but it produces some other chemicals out the tailpipe that are worse than the ones from gas. Adding alcohol to gas is not a bad idea as long as it is produced from the right crop, and corn is not the right crop.

 

Makes sense to me, and i'm definitley switching back to good ol 87 octane dino fuel. I'm down to about 12.8 mpg vs 19.6

 

I have run E85 in my 2010 5.4 Harley, Definately a drop of 3-4 MPG but also notice the additional torque off the line. Will be adding a K&N intake system soon and will try to monitor the MPG with both fuels. Here in Florida the E85 was about .40 cents a gallon cheaper so it seems worth while. Only problem id availability of the stuff, I have to go out of my way to fill up on it.

 

Its better to use algae to produce ethanol and biodiesel than it is corn. For many reasons, first, corn is FOOD, when we start using our FOOD for fuel, we have less FOOD to go around, not a good thing, there are people starving, that could use corn to be cheaper. Algae gets much more fuel out of much less, and we don't eat it either, so we aren't using up our food supply for fuel. The downside of algae is we have not found a great way to produce enough of it cheaply, there are a lot of people working on it, its just something we haven't been doing/haven't done, therefor it takes some effort to figure out a method. With corn, we have been growing it for centuries, so not much involved there.

The amount of space corn takes up and the fact we use it for food makes it a bad choice for ethanol production when there are other things out there with much smaller space requirements and we don't eat...

 

Theres several varieties of corn. The corn used for ethanol production is mostly used for livestock feed

 

This is from Autoblog... It is not an endorsement just another way to look at this subject..... the author is John McElroy he is host of the TV program "Autoline Detroit" and daily web video "Autoline Daily".

I will say that "if" it is priced right I will use E85 when I can. But when it is only .10 .15 cents cheaper than normal gas it is not worth it.

Ethanol Booming, Despite the Drawbacks

Just a couple of years ago American-made corn ethanol was vilified in the media. It was blamed for soaring food prices, and for causing food riots in Mexico. The UN even accused the U.S. of depriving the world of food.

What a difference a couple of years makes!

Today food production is soaring, especially corn. In fact, it's up so much that farmers now worry about a price crash. And all this happened despite the fact that ethanol production is booming.

Back in 2007 when criticism of ethanol started to reach a fever pitch, the U.S. produced 5.5 billion gallons of ethanol at 110 refineries. This year the U.S. is on track to produce 13 billion gallons from 187 refineries located in 26 states. In other words, ethanol production more than doubled at the same time that food prices declined. Too bad the media doesn't follow up on these things.

Let the ranting start Before you do... here is the full article
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/06/22/a...h-john-mcelroy

 

one thing wrong on the above story is that the alcohol plants are not increasing in numbers, they are closing at an astonishing rate. Can't make alot of money. Even with the federal govt. kicking in 50 cents per gallon on the subsidey. the cost per bushel of corn is to high. The planted corn crop of 2009 was the most acreage planted since world war 11. because the price per bushel for corn was at its highest level in many years. because of the alcohol production.

 

Using food for energy is foolish.

Subsidizing people to grow the food, then turn that food into energy is double foolish.

Using tax money to artificially have a product be cheaper on the market than a competing product is triple foolish. Especially when the subsidized product is actually less efficient than the one it is trying to displace.

Don't get me wrong, I am all for farmers. I know a few personally. However this E85 stuff is the wrong way to go... but then so are battery powered cars. I guess that makes me against coal miners and new nuclear power plants too. I can't win.