Ethanol Mandate for Iowa?

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...

If ethanol were actually an economically viable improvement to gasoline,
we wouldn't need laws to encourage it.



Absolutely correct, and that day may come. You have had your first
flirtation with 5 dollar gas; next time it might be 10 or 15.

The issue is: do you encourage alternates *now*, in anticipation of that
day, and begin a phase-in of the necessary infrastructure (both physical and
mental).

Or do you simply wait for the day, and attempt to create it all overnight?

There's a catch-22 if you do not phase alternates in soon. Unless you
create some alternate-energy capacity now, alternates will *never* be
economically viable.... because when you *do* finally admit that petroleum
is too expensive, the too-expensive petroleum will still be the only
available energy to produce your methanol, or whatever.

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:b3c_e.369489$x96.190155@attbi_s72...
Today Rep. Jim Nussle -- potentially the future governor of Iowa -- was
reported as proposing that all gasoline sold in Iowa be required to
contain 20% ethanol additive. Presumably, this legislation, if passed,
would make the sale of regular unleaded gasoline illegal in Iowa.



I'm a big Jay Honeck fan.......but, Jay on this one you are wrong, wrong,
wrong!

Please research what Brazil has done since the 70's to become energy
independent.

I personally have a car, truck, motorhome, a motorcycle
for myself and one for my wife and a Cessna 172. I burn a LOT more fuel in
everything else than I do in the airplane (and I put over 100 hours on it in
the last year).

I am not wealthy by a long shot, but if we can have ethanol powered vehicles
for less than $1.00 per gallon, I'll gladly pay 3.00 or 4.00 per gallon for
av fuel. I have an autogas STC and mostly burn unleaded car gas, but for the
good of the country we need to develop alternate
fuels.

Ethanol would also be a boon to the farmers in middle America.

As Ross Richardson (a fellow Sherman Texonite) mentioned, they have, in
Brazil, adapted most everything to run on ethanol (they call it alcohol).

Most of my information was gleaned from a retired AA Capt. who flew the
South America route until '98. His son is flying it now for American, and
stated that as of about 2 weeks ago ethanol (alcohol) was about (converted)
95 cents per gallon in Sao Paulo.

So......my not so valuable opinion is that we should encourage all our
legislators to pass legislation requiring us to be energy independent within
a few years. Ethanol is a large part of that.

I really think that there is a retrofit solution to every gasoline
engine....including aircraft. But even if there was not wouldn't you rather
pay $1.00 per gal for all your other fuel needs??

Just my opinion.......yours is probably different, as evidenced by most of
the elections of the last 20 years G.

Dan

sfb wrote:
Do you have a patent on magic BTUs? Petroleum BTUs are used grow and
distill corn into ethanol.

Really? You never heard of coal? Propane? Natural gas?

Hell, even wood makes a fine fuel for a still.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

"Gig 601XL Builder" wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote in message
news:Uag_e.87517$7f5.46917@okepread01...

The problem is if you use a gallon of Ethanol to produce 0.99 gallons of
Ethanol all of the fuel produced will go into production and you are going
to have to add .01 petro just to break even.


Although there are scientists who claim their research shows a negative
production efficiency, there appear to be an equally impressive number who
claim otherwise.

RST Engineering wrote:

I do not quite understand why gasahol burns well in old Ford tractors that
use Marvel carburetors and is prohibited in aircraft with Marvel
carburetors, other than some bureaucrat with a bad comb-over deciding it is
so.

What I've read in a number of places is that there are problems with issues
similar to vapor lock in aircraft. Since gasahol doesn't seem to be causing
problems in cars that cross the Rockies, it seems to me that this wouldn't be a
proble for a pilot who rarely exceeds 10,000' ASL.

If vapor problems are actually the issue, perhaps an STC with altitude limits is
in order?

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

Good God, you're complaining about THAT! It's positively cheap.

Try buying a gascolator from Raytheon for a Beech Musketeer. The list price
is around $19,000.00. Yes, that's NINETEEN THOUSAND DOLLARS. (Yeah, but
they only have to sell one.) If I could part my plane out for RAPID's list
prices, I'd be a multi-millionaire, and I could afford flying.

Paying $170 for a damn gascolator bail of a Cherokee (this was on
another thread) makes it awfully hard to be enthusiastic and attract
new people to aviation.

"Ross Richardson" wrote in message
...
Isn't Brazil flying a Cessna with gasahol or something like that?




Actually, they have a new aircraft produced specifically to run on
*ethanol*, and they have "300 to 400" small aircraft which have been
*converted* from gasoline to ethanol:

http://www.bellona.no/en/energy/37677.html

"Dan Engleman" wrote in message
...

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:b3c_e.369489$x96.190155@attbi_s72...
Today Rep. Jim Nussle -- potentially the future governor of Iowa -- was
reported as proposing that all gasoline sold in Iowa be required to
contain 20% ethanol additive. ...snip...


As Ross Richardson (a fellow Sherman Texonite) mentioned, they have, in
Brazil, adapted most everything to run on ethanol (they call it alcohol).



Here is an interesting slide-show of Brazil's numbers, presented at a
conference in 2004. (in pdf format)


http://www.renewables2004.de/ppt/Presentation4-SessionIVB(11-12.30h)-LaRovere.pdf

Bottom line:

At that time, oil over 30 dollars made the ethanol program profitable for
them.
And in spite of the historic "low" oil prices, estimated savings of
1.8Billion USD over the 22 year period of the program.

Think of it now, in terms of today's price of oil. And their infrastructure
is up and running.... We are apt to be replacing foreign oil with foreign
ethanol. is to laugh.

exactly.

Blanche wrote:
Great idea.

Wrong approach. By using the argument "GA will become economically
unfeasible -- we won't be able to fly" there's the impression of
whining. You need to make the economic argument of *why* GA is so
important to Iowa. Get the economic impact assessments from your
state Dept. of Transportation. Point out the money that is brought into
the communities of each of the smaller non-commercial access airports.
Get the figures from Angel Flight of the number of flights within,
into and out of the Iowa area.

You absolutely MUST make the economic argument and NOT the "it'll be
too expensive for me to play with my toys" complaint.

"Icebound" wrote in message
...

"Gig 601XL Builder" wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote in message
news:Uag_e.87517$7f5.46917@okepread01...

The problem is if you use a gallon of Ethanol to produce 0.99 gallons of
Ethanol all of the fuel produced will go into production and you are
going to have to add .01 petro just to break even.


Although there are scientists who claim their research shows a negative
production efficiency, there appear to be an equally impressive number who
claim otherwise.


Does it really matter if it is so close that informed people can't agree it
the energy balance is slightly greater or less than 1? Clearly it isn't
much of an alternative fuel if that is the case.

Mike
MU-2