On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 18:56:46 GMT, cavelamb himself
wrote:


snip

“Just as the events of 9-11 changed how we guard our cities and protect
ourselves, a new generation of ethanol may soon change the way we gas up
our cars and protect the earth.” - Dateline NBC

"Our plan to expand into ethanol production has the potential to
generate significant profits and increased shareholder values," JT
Cloud, CEO of Gulf Ethanol.

That it does.

snip

Factors Driving Alternative Energy Investments

* FREEDOM FROM FOREIGN OIL: Ethanol could free America from its
reluctant dependence on foreign oil. This is not a pipedream, conjured

it's doubtful we could make enough alcohol from corn to make more than
a small dent.However using all sources we probably could and becoming
independent of foreign oil is very important. It's also going to be
expensive.

up by some pro-U.S. idealists. Not at all. Brazil has turned that vision
into reality, where 70% of the vehicles in that country are sustained on

They are missing something very important here. Not all alcohol is
created equal, or rather at the same cost. The Key is Brazil does not
make alcohol from corn. They make it from sugar cane with has a much
higher yield than corn and costs far less to produce. Even with the
most optimistic approach providing alcohol from corn in the best
possible light at the lowest possible price, Brazilian alcohol would
still cost only a fraction of what it would cost us to produce corn
alcohol.

ethanol. Brazil's ethanol plan has successfully replaced imported oil
worth an estimated $120 billion. To put it into perspective, this would
translate to a savings of about $2 trillion for an economy equivalent in
size to the U.S.

How would it save anything for the consumer? The only thing it would
affect is the balance of payments or trade deficit IOW. Made from corn
the alcohol and gas containing it will cost more than straight gas
made from crude. Rephrased, moving to E85 or straight alcohol is going
to cost more, not less.Given that we are replacing something with
something else that costs more there is a problem with some one's
math.

The bottom line is the true cost of E85 and straight alcohol is more
expensive than the most expensive gas we've seen so far. Add to that
it only has 60% of the energy available of straight gas. So it costs
more and it takes more of it.

* INCREASED INCOME TO U.S. FARMERS: In terms of economics, there is
no clearer choice for the American public. It would mean higher farm

Yes it would mean higher farm income and that is something the smaller
farmers really do need.

incomes and we would see a steep increase in rural employment.

Depends on what they mean by rural employment. It certainly would not
translate to much of an increase in the number of farm workers. It
would mean more workers in the alcohol industry and fewer in the
petroleum industry. I don't see any where it would bring a steep
increase in "rural" employment. Switching land from another crop to
corn isn't going to require more labor either.

* THE TECHNOLOGY’S IN PLACE NOW: The technology to run cars on
ethanol already exists. General Motors alone has built more than 1.5
million ethanol-compliant vehicles.
The technology to produce the alcohol is in place, but the ability to
do so is not, at least as far as alcohol produced by corn in
quantities large enough to make much of a difference. Alcohol from
corn will have to be supplemented by alcohol from other sources which
will probably be capable of producing more alcohol at less cost than
that from corn, or at least eventually will be capable of doing so.
That means the use of corn for alcohol would not be nearly so
attractive unless artificially supported.

According to a recent AP story most of those "flex fuel" vehicles are
not designed to run long term on E85 or straight alcohol.

* IT’S RIDING THE “GREEN WAVE”: And let’s not ignore the fact that
ethanol is believed to be much more environmentally friendly than our

That is true.

current petroleum. Many experts agree that a switch from gasoline to
ethanol could significantly reduce our carbon dioxide emissions, some
say by as much as 80%. Ethanol’s appeal extends throughout interest

It wouldn't really reduce the emissions from the cars, but what it
would do is be releasing CO2 than had been taken from the atmosphere
during the growing of the crop so it would not be adding *any* new
CO2. They are confusing emissions with "additional CO2 to the
atmosphere" and that is much more than just semantics.

Ethanol is (as far as we currently know) more environmentally friendly
to burn than gas. There are some outstanding questions, but in general
it is thought to be far better for the environment than gas.

groups. The U.S. government, American car manufacturers,
environmentalists and the agriculture industry are all strong supporters
of this alternative fuel.