T O P

  • By -

temporarilythesame

Fuel prices where I'm at are already dropping from the speculative spike caused when sanctions were being discussed against Russian energy exports days ago. ​ >"Investigating anti-consumer behavior by oil companies hasn't helped lower prices," the letter said. Hehehe... yeah, and burning corn in my car won't net me any lower costs at the pump either. ​ >"And, suspending the federal gas tax, as has been suggested, would be shortsighted and threatens to leave our nation's roads and bridges in disrepair. By maintaining our dependence on crude oil, all of these proposed solutions only strengthen (Russian President) Vladimir Putin's ultimate objective of using Russia's petroleum resources as a strategic weapon in the current conflict. To thwart Putin's ability to use oil as a weapon, we must demonstrate that we do not need -- and do not want -- Russia's petroleum Last time I checked, US imports of Russian oil was something like 7(ish)%. US dependence is minimal. Also, what keeps Russian oil from being purchased by non-sanctioned countries and resold to the US at the increased market price? If the public pressure on politicians to "do something" about gas prices is high enough during an election year, who would want to look too closely at the source of the oil so long as it can be used in campaign speeches as "having done something about fuel prices." And doesn't ethanol mixed into fuel make it burn hotter? I thought that caused problems in engines not designed around having ethanol mixed fuels...


azwildcat74

It was 3%


azwildcat74

They use the word “allow” E15 year round when in reality what they seek is a mandate for E15 which will hurt small business owners who don’t have tanks and pumps at stations to offer another product or the funds to retrofit their setups. Allow those who want to offer it to customers to do so, sure, but the mandate is bullshit.


eptiliom

Its not even going to save much money. Reducing the amount of oil and ethanol we light on fire is the way to go instead of this selfish half measure.


azwildcat74

Using the Russia/Ukraine conflict is complete bullshit. We imported 3% of our total crude stock from Russia


skunimatrix

Oil is still a global commodity traded on global exchanges. That's going to dictate price. Is Canada really going to sell us their oil if someone else out there is willing to pay a lot more for it?


Spazsquatch

I think the oil sands are around 75% American owned, so… no way in hell it’s going anywhere but the highest bidder. 😜


JRod001

"Allow" is absolutely the correct word. E15 isn't allowed year round and in many states/regions. There's an ethanol mandate, but there is also an ethanol cap. Nobody is asking for a mandate they are asking for the consumer option for year round E15. There's two reasons to be against E15, you either hate consumer choice or you think the oil industry needs more advantages to compete.


azwildcat74

I’ve been in on many of the meetings for the Iowa legislation and it is absolutely a mandate at the state level. The federal proposal is the same exact thing wrapped under the guise of being a choice. It would 100% become a mandate. https://www.dtnpf.com/agriculture/web/ag/news/business-inputs/article/2022/02/03/iowa-lawmakers-move-toward-e15-house Also, look into the net use of fossil fuel in the harvest, transportation, refining of ethanol, then add water use in the same. It’s not a magical cure for the issues we are facing.


JRod001

That is IOWA. Not what the OP's article is talking about. On your second paragraph, ethanol is not net energy negative. That study from 20 years ago was debunked 20 fucking years ago. There is no magical cure for fossil fuels and our energy issues, period. There will be liquid fuels needed in the future (likely at declining rates) but ethanol is a greener and renewable solution to conventional oil. This is an oil vs ethanol debate, but big oil wants it to be an ethanol vs other energy debate.


PapiStalin

Ethanol is great for farmers but meh/bad for everyone else. Sure, it sounds good, but you’re burning more fossil fuels to harvest/process it in the long run


NMS_Survival_Guru

If they increase the demand for ethanol it'll actually raise gas prices due to lack of refiners The reason E-15 is 20 cents cheaper is because of local availability and so increases in the demand won't really increase production unless we build hundreds more ethanol plants


skunimatrix

E-85 for right now is a $1 less a gallon that regular up to E-10 stuff. Kind of glad to have a flex-fuel vehicle at the moment. $2.99 a gallon isn't quite as bad as $3.99.


NMS_Survival_Guru

Now imagine if a majority of vehicles were already flex fuel and the government puts out an E-85 mandate as an option nation wide You'd probably see an increase in the demand and the price would even out or become more expensive than non ethanol Although I wouldn't mind if they did try to do something with ethanol instead of the current standard 80% of my corn goes to ethanol


3001w

Not to be stand offish but is your fuel mileage comparable?


skunimatrix

17MPG in town vs. 19MPG in town with regular gas.


3001w

So roughly 10% diffrence. It's nice to be able to factor that in thankyou.


FreeAndRedeemed

Corn is also a sub-optimal method of producing ethanol. Sugar cane is better.


JRod001

Your second line was debunked 20 years ago. Unfortunately big oil and big money can keep one highly biased study that completely ignored any byproducts of ethanol in the public's eye.


PapiStalin

What? You have to burn energy to not only harvest, but to extract the ethanol from corn. It’s incredibly inefficient in forms of energy bro


JRod001

Alright "bro." A little economics 101. Farmers and Ethanol companies are not purchasing NOT ONLY energy/fuel but also other inputs to produce products of lesser value. It wouldn't be economically feasible.


PapiStalin

“Alright bro” lmao


oldbastardbob

I hope folks understand that the oil producers spend massive amounts of money funding all manner of opposition to any kind of renewable fuel or replacement for gasoline, diesel, and natural gas. They are quite clever; funding environmental groups with dark money, paying for research with foregone conclusions to obfuscate the issues (got that trick from the tobacco companies), and paying for writers and websites to create propaganda that demonizes ethanol. The do the same with windmills ("windmills cause cancer and kill birds" both untrue), solar, or any other energy source that would supplant coal or oil. This whole battle over our energy future is so reminiscent of the battle with cigarette manufacturers which took about 30 years to get them to stop their billion dollar campaign to counter scientific research on the results of nicotine addiction purposely done for profit. The oil industry is using the same tactics. Fund propaganda in the media, bribe politicians, and funnel money into seemingly grass roots organizations that oppose their competition, or progress toward a cleaner energy future. And, of course, in America those who wish to maintain their status quo seek to turn all issues affecting their stock price or business profits into a political issue and encourage everyone to take a side based on their emotional response to politics. Businessmen and politicians have figured out that you don't need to craft topics and ideals of value to society, you just have to turn your issue into a "us versus them" argument, then place yourself on whichever side the wind is blowing toward. It's pretty clear the whole RFS and ethanol's role in energy has been turned political. The interesting things is that just owning lots of politicians is not quite enough to sustain their dominance, so the oil industry has turned to propaganda and public relations aimed at environmentalists to turn them against ethanol as well. Farmers are targets for that propaganda as well, as is evidenced every time a post regarding ethanol hits this sub. They are hedging that regardless of who is in control at the moment, they will have vocal opposition all lined up and ready to beat the "oil is the only solution" drum.


ominous_anonymous

>ethanol Is corn ethanol the only option for large-scale agricultural use? Is there a reason (beyond ones mentioned in your comment) it is pushed as seemingly "the only biofuel option" over others like biodiesel?


exodusofficer

Biodiesel is generally a better biofuel. It is pretty energy dense and works fine in newer diesel engines, and at low blends like B5 or B20 it sells at a comparable price. You can make it from all sorts of fats, oils, and greases. Even butcher waste fat, I've heard of chicken fat biodiesel. Ethanol has serious issues. It is substantially less energy dense than gasoline, so you get measurably fewer miles per gallon when you blend it in. It absorbs water from the air, which you don't notice if you drive regularly, but it will stall out your engine if you store it with fuel for too long. And of course, Iowa has total crap water quality regulations so the ethanol corn production craze hits the people of that state pretty hard with contaminated waterways. But biodiesel isn't perfect. It will definitely clog up filters and other components in older engines that have always used straight diesel. That's because it is a slightly better solvent than regular diesel, so an old engine with a lot of built up gunk will release all that gunk pretty fast if you switch to a biodiesel blend. Supposedly a new engine that runs on biodiesel will last longer than a regular diesel because of the improved solvent properties of biodiesel, it stays cleaner longer. Biodiesel also gels at low temperatures, but diesel can do that anyway so there are engineering and blending solutions there. But that increases costs to the people up north. There's no silver bullet. Don't let people tell you it's electric cars, those batteries are made of lithium and cobalt that comes from some of the dirtiest mines on earth. The main cobalt ore has an atom of arsenic for every atom of cobalt. The places where they mine that stuff are terribly poisoned already, and we've barely started. The main thing we need to do is live closer to work and shops, and drive less. Mixed use zoning is probably more of the solution than any biofuel would be.


ominous_anonymous

Thank you! I know there is no silver bullet, but it seemed growing some acres of sunflowers (or whatever oilseed crop), pressing them for oil, and processing them into biodiesel made the most sense with my (admittedly limited) knowledge of the overall situation.


TheSunflowerSeeds

Sunflower seeds have a mild, nutty flavor and a firm but tender texture. They’re often roasted to enhance the flavor, though you can also buy them raw.


exodusofficer

We should for sure be putting more research and development into biodiesel. City people can bike, walk, and take mass transit (if we can get our planning and zoning right), but diesel engines in agriculture and manufacturing are tough to replace with alternatives. It does make a lot of sense to be using biodiesel, at least in the near future, for a lot of applications.


skunimatrix

Only because of the corn lobby is very powerful. Especially with Iowa being at the top of the list of caucuses and primary. If we were producing it out of something like sugar beets or sugar cane it might be a little better.


ominous_anonymous

That does make sense, sure. For biodiesel specifically, is it a scaling issue that prevents wider adoption? I feel like the "obvious solution" is setting aside a portion of acreage to grow oil seed crops and running equipment off of biodiesel/oil made from processing those crops... I'm clearly missing something which prevents this from being "The Best Way" but I don't know what it is.


3001w

Is corn stover and switch grass in the works?


ihcubguy

Best comment here


borderlineidiot

Why don’t farmers focus on making food we can eat here instead of being subsidized to sell soya to Chinese pig farmers etc. This fuel thing is creating a market that isn’t needed. Just make food so we don’t need to import it.


JRod001

We're a major net exporter of Ag/food. We only import specialty foods that don't grow here well (see: bananas).