EPA ethanol requirement waivers have positive environmental consequence

Certainly folks can appreciate the plight of farmers, who, like everyone else, need to make a living. After investing ten$ or hundred$ of thousand$ in equipment (itself, requiring untold 10's of thousands of kWh's to manufacture) to till the land, again - requiring more fuel & lubrication oil, to get the equipment across those acres, then more petrochemical fuel to plant, then more petrochemical fuel to pump the water up to grow, then more petrochemical fuel 2 spray petrochemical insecticide, then more petrochemical fuel to spread petrochemical fertilizer, then more petrol chemical fuel to harvest, then more petrochemical fuel to get it to the processor, then more Petro chemical energy to ferment into alcohol, so that Ice Vehicles everywhere can burn it driving (... as opposed to selling it for less money, to people that could use corn as food - tortillas, flour, Etc, but that's another issue)

Two issues come to mind by this process;
1 - what is the true energy gain after energy used, to grow food & turn it into car exhaust.
2 - discounting CO2 from all that processing above, how does an automotive alcohol fuel source's efficiency measure up against (for instance) regular gas, or electric cars, or diesel.

Sorry to take all of the political drama out of it, but the question really seems more simple to just ignore the politics smattered with a suggestion of conspiracy against farmers.
.

 

"Ethanol made the transition from an energy sink, to a moderate net energy gain in the 1990s, and to a substantial net energy gain by 2008."
https://www.usda.gov/oce/reports/energy/2015EnergyBalanceCornEthanol.pdf
A little better than 2 times the energy used in the ethanol according to the conclusion.

 

Ethanol was introduced in motor fuel in 2005 with the introduction of RFS (renewable fuel standard) It was a time when the U.S. was only producing 3 million barrels per day of oil and we were consuming 9.2 million barrels per day of gasoline. Our consumption of gasoline has dropped for the last 4 years as more hybrids and electric vehicles appear on the scene as well as improved mileage of new ICE vehicles that are replacing older vehicles. We currently consume 8 million barrels per day. We now produce 11 million barrels of gasoline per day and are actually exporting it.

The upside is:
10% Ethanol (E10) replaced MTBE as a safer octane booster in gasoline. MTBE was a carcinogen and fuel spills have managed to get into and contaminate drinking water.

The downside is:
The demand for corn adds about $0.75 cents to the cost of a bushel raising the prices of any food made with corn or corn syrup.

Ethanol costs more to produce at $1.70/gallon vs gasoline $.90/gallon. After you add in the additives, transportation and taxes, you get our pump prices.

Ethanol has less energy per gallon than gasoline so adding it to gasoline increases it's cost and lowers the mileage that a vehicle gets.

Quote from FuelEconomy.gov - Ethanol contains about one-third less energy than gasoline. So, vehicles will typically go 3% to 4% fewer miles per gallon on E10 and 4% to 5% fewer on E15 than on 100% gasoline.

E10 is not a problem for fuel systems on vehicles that refuel week after week. It is a problem for small engines that are used seasonally. The fuel in that equipment like mowers, weedeaters, generators, motorcycles that may sit for some period of time . When the fuel sits for more than a couple weeks it begins what is called a phase separation. The Ethanol separates out as a top layer of fuel with little or no Ethanol and a second layer that settles at the bottom of the fuel tank. That second layer is corrosive and damages the aluminum parts in the carburetors on those small engines.

My solution for this would be for filling stations across the country to offer one gas pump that offers straight gasoline. Aviation gas and most boat docks sell straight gasoline because the risks associated with fuel problems is higher with planes and boats. In Florida this is done at many filling stations making it convenient for people to fill their boats. In Florida, straight gas costs about $0.50 more per gallon than E10 and boaters buy it.

Where I have a problem is that the Ethanol producers are now trying to move to E15 that is being advertised as Unleaded 88. It will further increase the price of food and gasoline and decrease the fleet mileage.

The political side of this is that oil producers would like to eliminate or minimize Ethanol and increase their market and the corn growers and Ethanol producers would like to increase the percent added to motor fuel to increase their market share. The lobbyists from both sides of this argument are trying to pull the administration in two directions.

 

The Department of Agriculture ..... they write reports ..... the reports find that agriculturally created ethanol is a net gain ..... & that's favorable to the agribusiness.
For some reason, that reminds me of another agribusiness, tobacco, and some of their favorable conclusions in times past;







Certainly the Department of Agriculture is not as corrupt as the doctors & Hollywood that got paid by the tobacco industry. But - they do know what side of the bread that the butter is on.
What really seems to raise a red flag - is when agribusiness calls ethanol a net gain. Imagine all of the input fuels mentioned in post #2. Ultimately, after you spend all that energy from all those sources, you come out ahead ... a net gain. Why not take that ethanol fuel, recycle into, & in place of all the post #2 inputs & get even more energy, then keep doing it again & again & again. You'd have so much perpetual ethanol energy, we'd have to stop using gasoline ... because after all, ethanol is such a net gain.

.

 

You left out plug in hybrids, where fuel will also often sit for a couple of weeks. Now you've got me worried.

 

Ethanol has been added to gasoline in the US since the 1970's; the first federal incentives were started in 1979. The use of it dropped off in the'80s and '90s with cheap oil.

My understanding is that its main job is as an oxygenate, which modern cars can do without. Much of what the EPA and CARB dictate for fuel blends is for the few older vehicles still on the road and power equipment.

Upside: maybe they'll stop putting corn syrup into everything we eat.

Just found out the Netherlands uses hydrous ethanol in their gasoline. Anhydrous ethanol, which is usually used, can't be produced by distilling alone; the water to ethanol bond is too strong to get purer than 95.5%. Historically, benzene was added to bind up the last bit of water from the ethanol. Today, molecular sieves are used, but it still adds the the production cost. Which mostly goes to waste as the alcohol picks up water on its journey to your fuel tank.

Before ethanol in gas became prevalent, the manuals for power equipment instructed owners to drain the tank and run them dry before storage. The vents in the fuel system that let water in also lets oxygen in and fuel vapors out. The process of those two ages even straight gasoline, which leads to deposits and low octane. The presence of ethanol just makes following those instructions more important for preventing issues the next time the equipment is used. Starting up a lawnmower with gas without ethanol in the tank from last season was a PITA to begin with.

The solution to phase separation is to add more alcohol. I used rubbing alcohol in the first tank of a season to get any excess water out of the carb bowl. When the blend gets up to E30, phase separation isn't a concern.

Turns out leaving the last bit of water in the ethanol prevents the corrosion of aluminum. The metal has a protective layer of oxide that is the source of its durability. Alcohols can dissolve it, but aluminum prefers reacting with water, leaving the oxide in place.
Common ethanol fuel mixtures - Wikipedia

Don't know about planes, but some boats have fiberglass fuel tanks. Ethanol dissolves the resin in the tank walls, and deposits it in the engine. So people do need access to ethanol free gasoline. The station with it that I pass in North Carolina, charges $1 to $2 more for it.

I agree the main issue in the politics surrounding it. I'd like other renewable fuels allowed into the gas supply instead of sticking with just ethanol.

Car gas tanks are far better sealed than those on power equipment, boats, and portable cans. Remember, E10 was the norm for most of the US population before the Volt arrived, and I think GM was more concerned with octane drop that gas can experience in time.

The only time I ever had an issue with phase separation was when I added too wet acetone to the lawnmower. If it is still a concern for you, add Heet(methanol) or Iso-Heet(isopropanol) to the tank. They'll keep any extra water that might have gotten into the tank in solution with the gas.

 

In the Netherlands there are two different products.
One is normal E10 with anhydrous ethanol and there is something called BlueOne 95 which contains 15% hydrous ethanol.
The future of BlueOne is highly uncertain and it looks like it is going away since E10 is mandatory at most gas stations and they are looking to have an alternative at hand for cars that don't like E10 in the form of a 98 octane E5 gasoline. Gas stations that offered BlueOne could be switching that out for 98 E5.

*Note, octane ratings are different in Europe since we only use RON and not the AKI (average of RON and MON) like the US is using.
95 RON is approximately 90 in the US.
98 RON is approximately 93.
100 RON is approximately 95.
We don't have fuel lower than 95 RON, we had 91 RON but that was discontinued a long time ago, Germany held on that for the longest time.
Most "premium" gasoline types (Shell V-Power, BP Ultimate, etc) are 98 RON in the Netherlands whereas you can get 100 or 102 in Germany.

 

There are.

Here are the EPA-approved EPA fuels allowed to meet the renewable fuel standard: Approved Pathways for Renewable Fuel | Renewable Fuel Standard Program | US EPA

The issue is that corn-ethanol is still by far the cheapest one to meet the gasoline requirement.

 

Nine of the twenty listed are ethanol.
While renewable natural gas is on the list, there is no mention of methanol that can easily be made from it or fermentation. California once allowed and had methanol flex fuel cars on its roads.

 

Ethanol first came as part of the 1990 Clean Air Act Ammendments.
At that time, Refomrulated Gasiline was born from joint industry/EPA auto emission studies on fuels.
Surprisingly, the lab data started showing no emissions benefit for ethanol (with cat converters), but Congress had more or less already decided to mandate ethanol anyways. Big fight, and the decision was ethanol and/or MTBE, whereas MTBE later got banned for eco-reasons.

Main thing to keep in mind:
there is no fundamental or scientific need to blend oxygenates in gasoline.
Does it work? Yes. Is it needed for any technical reason? No.

Ethanol in particular exerts excess vapor pressure and leads to increased evap emissions, unless the fuel and specs are changed to allow including the ethanol.

So mandating ethanol is to help farmers, and ADM. Basically create jobs by making a new industry. Some would add decreasing reliance on petroluem, etc. But those are debatable politiical goals. Of course we cannot change City Hall, so we have to accept it.

Ethanol lobby is vocal and strong and they want to see E15 mandated next.

 

im not sure where to start with the above

but

1. I find it amusing how conservative farmers get butthurt every time their party does what it said it would do and then vote the same way afterwords.

2. Hybrids have had minimal affect on fuel consumption, As they generally are used in place of otherwise efficient ICEs,
the 2020 Silverado pickup is rated at 33mpg, OTR has doubled economy in about 25 years with 12mpg rigs coming online soon, about 80% of the reductions in fuel use point directly at the heavy end of the mart which is 100% ICE.
Add to this the heavy end of the market wants to shift (it’s fair share) to mopeds, small cars and The non-driving public as “everyone benefits from their services”

3. E15 does not necessarily have any significant effect on economy in warm/hot areas. Heck e30 can do much better than expected for the same reason.
Compression ratios above 11:1 are common nowadays and higher octane, increased cooling and the more favorable vapor point of medium ethanol blends make it possible to run more efficiently, (in warm climatrsgiven manufacturers are begging for higher ethanol standards and the petro aeromatics that get high octane are frowned upon expect more ethanol or *gasp methanol/butanol in fuel as we don’t have base stocks to even make much E0 87 RUG Anymore. (Petroleum industry loves using low quality 84 octane gas blended with ethanol )

4. look at the gas economy of my volt attached as my avitar for why e15 may not really matter.

5. Food for fuel has been debunked repeatedly
Despite crop failures corn costs are minimally affected upwards, the corn grown for fuel is not fit for human consumption, many times moldy and useless
the resulting high quality feed made from the leftover brewers ends are helping more than hurting. That said the additional fallow land being planted is nutritionally devoid of value and we are damaging our top soil to grow this extra feed, 1/3 of which becomes protein meal.

that said yes E0 Regular should be available in more areas.

 

The first federal subsidies for ethanol in gasoline date back to the late '70s.
History of Ethanol Production and Policy — Energy
Timeline of alcohol fuel - Wikipedia

There was a push to use it as an octane booster in the '20s and '30s, I think lead by Ford, but we went with lead instead.

Another thing to keep in mind is that not all the gasoline used is going into pressurized fuel tanks for fuel injected engines with emission controls. Gasoline isn't just an on road motor vehicle fuel, and emission regulations need to address that.

Then many of the oxygenates are octane boosters.

 

In a nation where most of the corn is used as sileage to fatten cows, turned into HFCS to fatten kids, or in the adult beverage industry....I’m thinking that burning it in cars is about the most common sense thing you CAN do with it.
Iran isn’t knocking holes in tankers filled with corn.
Obesity is probably one of the largest preventable health problems we have in the west.

Once you get all of the activists and paid lobbyists out of the loop, it’s pretty easy to noodle out which one is better for the “planet.”

However (comma!) like many, I have my biases.
I got a free one year paid vacation to someplace warm and sandy.


....twice.

It wasn’t caused by corn.

YMMV

 

although methanol is federally allowed in Gasahol up to m10,

it is the source of all the horror stories from a bygone age as to why you can’t run a car on gasahol

that said Methanol should generally be used as m5 or less in the average car since it has an even stronger tendency to cause fueling issues and reduced economy as compared to ethanol.

A mix of ethanol and methanol (even butanol) up to em15 would likely allow you to sub in some methanol in each gallon without as many issues.

From a fueling standpoint Ethanol or bio butanol is best.

 

I'd be surprised if Methanol is allowed in USA gasoline.

 

ALSO......if I understand it correctly, the ethanol is NOT blended with the gas at the refinery(s) because the pipelines are not ethanol "compatible". So the ethanol is trucked to the distribution terminals (tank farms) and blended there.

If that is true, how is a "small refinery" involved in the ethanol mandates at all ??

And since when are there any "small refineries" left in the US ??
I though there were only about 7 left......and all were owned by the likes of Exon-Mobil.

This all leads me to believe that the article and many of the "facts" in it are just made up propaganda.