Sounds great on the surface. doesn't it? Too bad most of it is...well..bullcrap! Let's see just how the Washington bureaucrats and administration has foisted a miserable hoax on the American people, costing us billions of dollars, not only in taxes, but also in fuel costs and repairs and added to the lousy gas mileage for our cars. And, providing 7 billion dollars in farm subsidies to grow corn strictly for ethanol fuel use, which we actually have little use for. Supporting farmers is one thing but why not grow the corn for food for impoverished people?
First, let's look at the BTU (British Thermal Units) equivalency of gasoline to ethanol. According to experts, there are 116,090 BTU's of energy in a U.S. gallon of regular grade gasoline, 76,000 BTU's of energy in a U.S. gallon of ethanol. Thus, it takes 1.53 gallons of ethanol to equal the same energy output of one U.S. gallon of gasoline.
Ethanol costs approximately 57 cents more per gallon to produce than gasoline! Add that together with the fact that it takes 1.53 gallons to equal the power of one gallon of gasoline! That alone equates to 87 cents in real energy costs for every gallon you put in your tank, using only ethanol. So, if gasoline was $3.00 a gallon in real cost in California, a guesstimated price for ethanol would be $3.57 a gallon. However, to produce the same energy of that gallon of $3.00 gasoline, you would have to fill up with 1.53 gallons of ethanol at a cost of $4.59 per gasoline gallon equivalent to drive the same miles. Now do you understand how you've been conned and screwed by the ethanol hoax?
Ethanol mileage tests showed that vehicles operated on ethanol gave exactly 2/3 the mileage of the same vehicles operated on gasoline!
"The EPA measured the gas mileage of what are called E85 (up to 85 percent ethanol) vehicles on the 2006 flexible fuel models. For the 31 models they tested the average reduction is 26% fewer miles per gallon. For example a car that gets 30 mpg on regular would typically get 22.2 mpg with E85. This is exactly what is predicted from the fact that E85 has less energy per gallon than gasoline.
For these calculations, the EPA assumes that E85 costs $2.00 and regular $2.20/gallon. Obviously they are way off on the low side, especially for ethanol, but this proportion is similar to what DOE predict for the next few years. The loss in mileage more than makes up for the cost savings, and on average the EPA predicts driving on E85 will cost 23% more than driving on regular."
Ethanol is corrosive, and damages rubber and other engine parts. When it was introduced, motorists had major problems with engines that were not manufactured to allow the introduction of ethanol into the system, and seals leaked, and parts failed, necessitating expensive repairs. Lawnmowers, chainsaws, garden and landscaping equipment, outboard motors and marine engines suffered damage because of the ethanol blend. Now they have been re-designed to run with the current 10% ethanol, but not any greater percentage! But hold on...our government is allowing even more to flow into your tank!
On October 13, the EPA allowed an increase in the amount of ethanol in your fuel from 10% to 15%. The automakers, as well as 38 other groups, including environmental and others asked for congressional hearings, but were waved off and the EPA simply went through with the okay.
Does increased use of ethanol reduce dependence on foreign oil? Hell no! In the ten year period between 1999 and 2009, U.S. ethanol production increased from approximately 100,000 barrels per day to over 700,000 barrels per day. During that same time frame, our oil imports actually increased in excess of what the ethanol production was! I have heard that during the same time period, US oil exports doubled to 2 million barrels per day. That's amazing. We import more as demand grows yet we still export oil? And then provide 7 billion of dollars in farm subsidies to grow corn for ethanol to provide fuel we don't need? Ethanol production levels obviously have had had no apparent effect on oil imports or consumption.
What about pollution? The EPA admitted back in 2007 that increased use of ethanol in gasoline would increase emissions of key air pollutants, including volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides, by as much as 7 percent. On October 20, the agency again acknowledged that more ethanol consumption will mean higher emissions of key pollutants.
On a personal note, we had a gasohol station in Florida that dispensed this wondrous concoction to the public without warning of the consequences of use. Seems that someone, somewhere, believed that high ethanol concentrations would be fine in cars. Much like a physician failing to warn you of the dire consequences of a new prescription, vehicles quickly stopped running as fuel filters clogged, rubber gaskets started leaking, carburetors became inoperative and the local repair shops were overwhelmed with repairs. Seems the gasohol was a poor fuel, but a wonderful solvent that ate everything in sight! It scoured the gas tanks so clean that all the gunk was dissolved into the fuel lines and clogged the filters. Either you had to drain the tank of 20 gallons of gas, or change the filters numerous times until all the gunk was out of the tank and lines. Then the gaskets in the carburetors needed changing, the rubber gas lines from tank to steel lines needed replacing, any under hood rubber lines containing fuel needed replacement. Lots of dollars lost here. And the gasohol station? It became a no-name regular fuel station quickly no longer selling gasohol. The end of the corn fuel history in my area.
Bend over, folks. That corn cob isn't done with you yet! The increased percentages of ethanol will obviously create problems for your cars and other power equipment. The bad noises you hear from under your hood are just your cars way of telling you that those people in Washington don't have your welfare at heart, unless you're on welfare that is. The noises will get louder and no, you can't take the repair bills off on your taxes either. Thank the EPA and the current administration for that.
2 comments:
When you buy a barrel of oil from the middle east your money goes over there and is cycled from business to business and is now in their economy. When you buy a barrel of ethanol here your money goes around our business' and stays in our economy. So even if your paying more btu vs btu the money stays in our country.
True. Even forgetting the btu vs. btu loss, US taxpayers are paying billions of dollars in stipends annually to support an industry that gives us a product that costs more per gallon to produce than it is worth. Then paying more again at the pump again.
We need to reduce foreign oil exports. Agreed. I ask why, then, do we continue to EXPORT our own US oil supplies, and import foreign oil to replace what we export? For example, in 2004, the US EXPORTED 268 million barrels of oil, roughly equivalent to what we imported from Iraq in 2001, prior to the war there.
Our own Commerce Department refuses to say where the oil goes and how much. It's a shell game with the American public being conned. Drill at home and ship it out, and then the oil companies import more, the OPEC countries tighten the supply and they all make a bundle.
And ethanol is not the answer, although some would like to think so. It's not economical to produce or burn, and damaging to both vehicles and the planet. Biodiesel would be preferable, but again, pricing holds the key to vehicle sales and affordability.
Post a Comment