There are 15 comments - Display All Comments
SirWinsto
n
Rochester, MN
Posted on 11/4/2009 at 1:11:06 PM
YEAH!!!! Lets BURN our FOOD and waste 3 gallons of WATER to make one gallon of Ethanol!!!! WoooooHOOOOO Brilliant! Have we lost our collective minds??? We have the biggest Oil find in the history of our nation off the coast of Teaxs and we are allowing the BP company to drill our resources and pillage it because of the “Green” movement!?!?! How about more Nuc power? Obama says no! What a joke…
Atilla
Rochester, Mn
Posted on 11/5/2009 at 7:57:31 AM
According to the latest congressional report, we have more energy resources than any country in the world:
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Files.View&FileStore;_id=f7bd7b77-ba50-48c2-a635-220d7cf8c519
There is no energy crisis.
There IS a SELF-INFLICTED energy crisis.
Instead of listening to public school teachers, professional politicians, nobel prize winners, state run media and “journalists”
NONE OF WHICH HAVE ANY EXPERTISE OR ENGINEERING BACKGROUND IN ENERGY,
just listen to somebody that does:
http://blog.energytomorrow.org/2009/11/did-you-know-report-us-tops-in-energy-resources.html
LoveRoche
ster
des moines, Io
Posted on 11/5/2009 at 11:19:43 AM
For all those who voted NO, please plan to purchase an electric car, stop protesting and WELCOME DM&E;’s planned coal train expansion and plan to pay for your municipal powerplant’s upgrades. Then wait for the mercury, particulate and SO2 to be deposited west of town. Come on people use your heads!
OnlyTheTr
uth
MN, MN
Posted on 11/5/2009 at 11:53:43 AM
Duhhh...people forget that corn based ethanol production cannot produce enough for even a NATIONWIDE 10% mix.
But MN politicians want it higher? Repubs and Dems are both guilty of this farce.
Keep it 10%, period. Except for E85 flexfuel cars (few), we’d still have to redo all the others. DUMB!
I like ethanol, but this is totally dumbed down stu*d.
BillChris
topher
Olmsted County, MN
Posted on 11/5/2009 at 1:38:38 PM
If
a) the vehicles can handle it and
b) we can get the straight scoop on whether or not its heavily subsidized or just gets tax breaks similar to what other forms of energy also get and
c) they can drastically curb the water usage
then this would be one of the least painful renewable energy programs we could implement.
Flex fuel vehicles are still selling and the corn prices are near rock bottom so this argument loses a little steam.
OnlyTheTr
uth
MN, MN
Posted on 11/5/2009 at 6:24:39 PM
I could be wrong, but the last time I looked, “flex fuel” (handle E85) vehicles are usually larger, more expensive, and less fuel efficient vehicles. Many are SUV’s.
PeaceLady
Fountain, MN
Posted on 11/5/2009 at 7:41:14 PM
You all seem to think that our personal gasoline-powered vehicles must be preserved at all cost. When I visit other countries, I welcome being able to use a public bus or train… and watch the motorcycles and bicycles and walkers manage very well without the burden of finding a parking space, quarters, and worrying whether the car will be 1)Gone 2)Stripped 3)Broken into 4)drained of fuel 5) Dented...and on and on… Insurance, license plates, garage, and oh, yes, gas and oil… All for the isolation and self-importance of going to a specific place at a specific time. To say nothing of the life altering (and ending) results of crashes.... We need to reissue the WWII cab card that said, “Is This Trip Really Necessary?”
BillChris
topher
Olmsted County, MN
Posted on 11/5/2009 at 10:46:08 PM
What other countries? Can the US effectively have the same means of transportation at 3.7M square miles as Germany 138K sq. miles, France 213K sq. miles, Japan 145K, England 50K and Sweden 173K.
We’re gonna need lots of busses.
sciguy
Cambridge, MN
Posted on 11/5/2009 at 11:20:00 PM
Been using 30-40% ethanol blended into gasoline for many months now in a non-FFV 2006 Impala. No problems. Acceleration is great, and fuel economy has decreased barely, but it’s lower priced than the mpg loss. Most people don’t realize that Ford’s Model T was made to run on ethanol, and that decades ago they phased out any components that weren’t ethanol compliant from modern vehicles. Biggest difference between an FFV and non-FFV is the computer program to adjust for octane. Corn ethanol is a good start until we get to advanced biofuels. Today, Poet is turning plant material into ethanol. Coskata is turning landfill waste into ethanol. Watch out imported petroleum—ethanol has your number!
Patriot
Mazeppa, MN
Posted on 11/6/2009 at 12:04:11 AM
From Wikipedia:
Fuel economy
In theory, all fuel-driven vehicles have a fuel economy (measured as miles per US gallon, or liters per 100 km) that is directly proportional to the fuel’s energy content.[40] In reality, there are many other variables that come in to play that affect the performance of a particular fuel in a particular engine. Ethanol contains approx. 34% less energy per unit volume than gasoline, and therefore in theory, burning pure ethanol in a vehicle will result in a 34% reduction in miles per US gallon, given the same fuel economy, compared to burning pure gasoline. Since ethanol has a higher octane rating, the engine can be made more efficient by raising its compression ratio. In fact using a variable turbocharger, the compression ratio can be optimized for the fuel being used, making fuel economy almost constant for any blend. .[18][19] For E10 (10% ethanol and 90% gasoline), the effect is small (~3%) when compared to conventional gasoline,[41] and even smaller (1-2%) when compared to oxygenated and reformulated blends.[42] However, for E85 (85% ethanol), . Actual performance may vary depending on the vehicle. Based on EPA tests for all 2006 E85 models, the average fuel economy for E85 vehicles resulted 25.56% lower than unleaded gasoline.[43] The EPA-rated mileage of current USA flex-fuel vehicles[44] should be considered when making price comparisons, but it must be noted that E85 is a high performance fuel, with an octane rating of about 104, and should be compared to premium. In one estimate[45] the US retail price for E85 ethanol is 2.62 US dollar per gallon or 3.71 dollar corrected for energy equivalency compared to a gallon of gasoline priced at 3.03 dollar. Brazilian cane ethanol (100%) is priced at 3.88 dollar against 4.91 dollar for E25 (as July 2007).
J-Man
Zumbrota, MN
Posted on 11/6/2009 at 8:34:35 AM
The article is about 15% Ethanol in our fuel, not E85.
OnlyTheTr
uth
MN, MN
Posted on 11/6/2009 at 12:41:09 PM
Forget local/regional supplies. If the Ethanol industry can NOT cover for a 10% blend nationwide, forget it!
This is like a $7 hour wage earner trying to decide (living in a fantasy world) on buying a new BMW (like a 10% blend production) or a Ferrari (over 10% blend).
The worker can’t deal with either!
Ripper
SE, MN
Posted on 11/6/2009 at 2:33:25 PM
Well lets see. I don’t think there is a bus or train running to fountain to Rochester. Walking that far, you might have to take a tent along to stay over night, but a bicycle would work. Be to work at 8 am, have to leave fountain about midnight. I don’t think any of those will work. Can you imagine the cost of making something like that work?
BillyK
Butler, Pa
Posted on 11/6/2009 at 9:34:56 PM
Yea, lets use more water than one obtains from oil! The oil companies force water down holes in oil fields to increase the pressure so more oil can float to the surface. Once down the hole, the water is not to be recycled. The Canada tar fields use more than 2x the water per oil produced. This doesn’t include the pollution induced from the process. The cellulose Coskata ethanol production produces water and is 7x positive energy efficient. Coskata can use any organic feedstock including rubber tires and sewage for their process. Oil is old fashioned.
BillyK
Butler, Pa
Posted on 11/7/2009 at 4:29:45 AM
I see this “poll” has been moved from the anti-ethanol article to the pro-ethanol article. It tells you all you need to know about the media and so-called Professionals.

E-mail Story
Print Story
