Is ethanol ready for its big break?
This
could be the summer of reckoning for ethanol fuel, according to a recent AP article. After a year of increased
hype brought out by a congressional mandate to double biofuel output by 2012, a presidential endorsement during the
State of the Union and aggressive marketing campaigns by automakers like GM with its “Live Green, Go
Yellow” ads, ethanol stands at the precipice of mainstream acceptance. But is this country’s ethanol
industry ready for primetime?The article cites distribution as the industry’s worst enemy. Ethanol can’t be pumped through pipelines as easily as gasoline due to its highly corrosive nature, which means the burdon of bringing the fuel to refineries will be placed on this country’s rail, truck and barge infrastructure, any one of which could bottleneck the production process and drive up the fuel’s final cost.
One interesting footnote in all of this is the recent ban of MTBE, an oxygenate that when added to gasoline enables it burn more cleanly. MTBE has been found to pose health risks, so when it becomes phased out completely by May 5th, the refining industry will be looking to ethanol to take its place. Time will tell whether or not the ethanol industry can cope with its product's newfound popularity.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Ian 4:11PM (3/21/2006)
Not only is distribution a problem put the processing into ethanol isn't done in the USA to any degree. Surprised? Then be more surprised that the USA is a net importer of ethanol to meet it's needs. SO if distribution is remedied expect more importing of ethanol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Currently the largest ethanol processing plant in the USA is being undertaken bya FRENCH company. Get the feeling the Petroleum industry isn't behind this effort???? SOmebody should be...soooooon.
Reply
zverg 4:11PM (3/21/2006)
Are we to assume that this "corrosive nature" that isn't good for the pipelines is just fine for our cars? I really want to like an alternative fuel source, why did ethanol have to be ruined for me. I would be willing to pay 10-30% more per gallon to drive on biofuel, like a 100% ethanol.
Reply
mega 4:30PM (3/21/2006)
Another issue is that most ethanol in the US is processed from corn. This is inefficient, since corn has to be converted to a sugar and then into ethanol. Brazil makes theirs from sugar cane in a single step. They are on track to energy independence within a few years.
Reply
Phil L. 4:30PM (3/21/2006)
Actually, ethanol's corrosive nature has posed significant challenges for automakers. For example, this is one of the reasons only a limited number of vehicles can handle E85 today (see www.e85fuel.com for a list).
But new cars can come on line fairly quickly. Large -scale petroleum piplines are a huge investment and are expected to last a long time, while carrying a wide variety of products (yes, such pipelines are designed to be able to carry different products sequentially). Just saying "I want to pump ethanol today" doesn't change what hundreds of miles of pipe is made from, as well as pumps, valves, etc.
I find it hopeful that this potentential stumbling block is being identified now. If ethanol is to be a big part of our future, we need to get be looking for solutions today.
Reply
MikeW 4:42PM (3/21/2006)
Since no new cars use carburetors, isn't it about time to remove the oxygenate from the gasoline.
Oxygenated fuels were an important step to cover carburetors flaws in fuel metering.
Since new cars have wideband air/fuel meters that work far quicker than heated O2 sensors, and direct injection gasoline engines may show up in the next corolla. It isn't necessary to dilute gasoline with 10% ethanol.
I am not looking forward to $3-$4 a gallon this summer for gas.
Reply
DKB_SATX 4:51PM (3/21/2006)
zverg: Since ethanol has less energy per gallon than gasoline, you need it to cost LESS than gasoline to make it price competitive. Of course, there's more going on here than just price, but there's an economic factor to it as well. Lots of people never think of the environment, so they're not going to spend MORE to drive something cleaner. Most people won't even spend money to make their current vehicle run cleanly unless they're forced to by the government.
Reply
Mick 5:05PM (3/21/2006)
I did a 3000+ mile trip last week. In the south central states (Texas, Arkansas) I got mileage ranging all the way to 40-43 mpg in my Honda Civic. In the midwest, though, (Indiana, Illinois, Iowa) I was bucking high winds and only getting 32-33 mpg on the highway. However, unless I'm mistaken, it wasn't only those high winds that reduced my mpg; I think the winter gasoline formulation had something to do with it, even though 87 octane should be the same everywhere, right?
Reply
dna 5:05PM (3/21/2006)
we have reformulated gas in Northern KY because of EPA. This stuff uses Ethanol. And it S-U-C-K-S! BIG TIME! gives cars here fits! bad performance! bad milage! up to 30% less. and it cost$ more!
makes my ford focus go nuts during summer months. don't know why any one would want it. i would rather ride a bus! and i do every summer.
Reply
jrhmobile 5:23PM (3/21/2006)
Much of the U.S. supply of ethanol currently comes from corn, but it doesn't have to.
Our current ethanol program props up Big Agribusiness and subsidy prices by processing corn. Bush caught lots of flak in his State of the Union address by advocating switch grass, but fallow and crop waste actually are more efficent for extracting ethanol than corn.
Ethanol can work, and it can wean us from our dependence on foreign oil. Not today, but starting right now if we want it. It took Brazil a generation to convert to ethanol. That's where we'll be importing ethanol from this summer.
Reply
Matt B 5:57PM (3/21/2006)
#7: "even though 87 octane should be the same everywhere, right"
No, the EPA requires (stupidly) that each region have a specific formula of gas. This is one of the reasons gas costs so much (other than taxes and other useless environmental regulations). Instead of being able to make one type of gas and ship it everywhere, gas companies have to make a bunch of different types. This raises the cost as different materials and facilities are needed to make all the different types.
Too many people blame the oil and gas companies for high prices, and their blame is misplaced. Its the government that forces prices so high. Get rid of the taxes, and the stupid and useless environmental regulations like the one above; and open up ANWR(a desolate area with very few wildlife) and allow other oil exploration. Prices would be in the $1.00 range for premium if not for these restrictions.
Reply
JIm 6:46PM (3/21/2006)
MBTE is known to cause cancer. It also stays in the ground longer than DDT. We've knonw this for years, but are just getting around to getting rid of it. Why?
#1. Ian, I live in San Diego but own 400 acres of Iowa farmland. I go back 3-4 times a year. As the saying goes, you can't swing a dead cat without hitting a half dozen Ethanol plants, either producing or under construction. I'm not worried about about our ability to produce enough Ethanol for our needs - if the government stays out of it and market forces are allowed to work. Transportation is clearly an issue, but this too will be worked out.
#8. Sorry dna, your comment just isn't true. In Iowa it is very difficult to even buy gas without Ethanol (10% Ethanol blend). It's been that way for at least 10 years. I've never heard of one single case of anyone complaining their car ran worse, and believe me farmers are the complainingest bunch you'll ever be around. In fact, since Ethanol is an alcohol and adsorbs moisture (just like cold weather starting fluid), cars tend to actually run better. It does have less energy (fewer BTUs) than an equal amount of gas, but it also has higher octane. As a result 91 octane is the same price, or a penny or two CHEAPER than 87 octane. Part of that is due to the tax structure however. Your comment echos those which were all over the place when lead was taken out of gas and converters were installed. Chicken little the sky is falling.
Reply
lesdecq 6:51PM (3/21/2006)
You are already spending 25% more per mile to drive an E85/ flex fuel vehicle. In northwest Ohio we are seeing a discount of 30 cents per gallon of E85 but as a percent of the cost of a gallon of fuel it does not offset the loss of fuel mileage.
Ethanol can be produced from a variety of sources including corn saw grass, wood chips and any other bio-mass that can be fermented. There is on going research to develop the necessary catalyst needed to aid in the fermentation process.
The E85 fuel delivered in this area is blended at the ethanol plant were a tanker with 1500 gallons of gasoline adds 8500 gallons of ethanol to obtain the correct fuel mix. The 5 or so ethanol plants under construction within 150 miles of here will have the gas tankers come to them negating the need for pipelines, at least short term.
The issue of less energy per gallon of fuel can be overcome by raising the compression ratio of the engines. This will not happen anytime soon as that would remove the possibility of burning any fuel that does not have an octane rating of 105. The gas readily available is at most 93 octane.
I have driven an Impala for the last 2 months on both E85 and regular gas. Both fuels delivered the same acceleration but the fuel mileage was 25% less with E85 as explained in the information in the owners handbook.
Reply
Andrew 8:59PM (3/21/2006)
Jim;
You say "if the government stays out of it and market forces are allowed to work"
But without huge subsidies ethanol could not compete. The feds chip in 51 cents per gallon of taxpayer dough for blending, and most states have generous tax benefits (that is less money for roads). Finally a lot of the "demand" is create by federal mandate.
Ethanol usually cost more and gives 25-30% worse mileage. Right now it cost much much more and still gives worse mileage. Once the factories catch up it will go back to simply costing more and giving worse mileage.
Also note that Brazil can make ethanol much more efficiently and cheaply, but there is huge tariff on ethanol imports. Not surprising, the purpose of the program is not to replace gas but to subsidize farmers and ethanol producers.
I say really get the government out of it. Heck the industry has gotten billions in subsidies to get started, time to leave the taxpayer teat.
Reply
MadScientistMatt 9:44PM (3/21/2006)
Not to mention that ethanol production requires a considerable amount of energy. You need diesel fuel to drive the tractors, heat to fire the distillation plant, petrochemicals to make the pesticides, and the like. There's a considerable debate as to whether you have to put in more energy to produce the ethanol than you can release by burning it. Sort of like hydrogen, except that in theory you may be able to come out ahead. The fact that it's even possible to argue about whether we spend more energy than we get suggests that it's, at best, not far from breaking even.
Reply
thorn 10:07PM (3/21/2006)
There is no requirement for ethanol:
EPA lifts requirements for states to add ethanol, MTBE to gasoline
(Washington-AP, Feb. 15, 2006 8:05 PM) _ States no longer will have to add ethanol or MTBE to gasoline to fight pollution under rules announced today by the Environmental Protection Agency.
They eliminate a mandate from the 1990 Clean Air Act that gasoline used in metropolitan areas with the worst smog contain two percent oxygen by weight. Most refiners use either ethanol or methyl tertiary butyl ether, known as MTBE.
California, New York and Connecticut unsuccessfully had asked the E-P-A for a waiver because they had banned MTBE after finding it polluted the groundwater. The states were forced to use ethanol, which they contend worsened pollution problems.
The rules announced today put in place a part of the energy bill the president signed in August that did away with the 2 percent oxygenate requirement.
http://www.wtnh.com/Global/story.asp?S=4509484&nav=3YeX
Ethanol is a bad choice any way you look at it.
Just not mandated.
Reply
E85 10:15AM (3/22/2006)
One E85 station in Colorado Springs (population 400,000+) and it costs more than regular gas.
Good job E85 industry.
Reply
MikeW 10:20AM (3/22/2006)
I haven't seen the price of gas drop by $0.50 yet.
I would have even been okay with keeping 10% ethanol in 87 AKI fuel, 5% in 89 AKI, and 0% in 93 AKI ((R+M)/2)
Free at last, free at last...
Reply
Steve Lang 3:04PM (3/22/2006)
It will never be as efficient as gasoline, but it is at least a sustainable resource that uses sunlight to create it. Vs. oil which has been created slowly over millions of years, and has a finite supply. Even if all our farmland were converted to producing ethanol (through corn whatever better crop), I don't think we could produce enough energy for all our needs.
I think in the long run, nuclear fusion is the only potential source of renewable energy to replace oil and coal in terms of efficiency and price. Fission might be too, but is more expensive due to radioactive waste products.
Reply
ukexpat 4:30PM (3/23/2006)
Other problems with ethanol:
Low vapour pressure and hydrophilic tendencies make it hard to distribute by pipeline. Requires extensive investment at refineries or has to be blended at the gas station. Energy return per acre or corn is pathetic. Folks, ethanol is not the answer and don't let the ethanol lobby tell you otherwise...
Reply
Stew 3:32PM (3/31/2006)
Engines can be made to be as efficient and powerful if not more so with ethanol compared to regular gas. Studies have shown that engines can be made as much as 5% more efficient with ethanol. Ethanol burns more slowly, has a higher octane rating. Todays engines are not made to burn such a high octane fuel, compression ratios need to be raised considerably for ethanol. 14.7 to 1 is about right for ethanol compared to around 9 or 10 to 1 for a conventional gas engine. So untill e-85 is common at the pump manufacturers can't make an engine specifically for it.
It does take diesel to put tractors in the field, bio diesel could make that a mute point as the crop the tractor is cultivating could be fueling it. Newer ethanol plants I believe can take chopped corn or whatever crop and actually burn the stalk and by products to power the plant. Considering farmers can sell corn for around $2.00 a bushel or more I don't know if you can get more fuel out of 30 bushels of corn or 1 barrel of oil as a barrell of oil is around $60.00 normally. Does anbody know?
Reply