Will 2009 see an ethanol bailout?
Ethanol may be the worst type of renewable energy, but that won't stop the industry from attempting to participate in the new bailout culture of the United States. A story in the Wall Street Journal says that the industry's lobbying group, the Renewable Fuels Association, is asking for a $1 billion short-term credit line as well as $50 billion in loan guarantees. What would all this money be for? The one million is to keep the doors open and the $50 billion is "to finance expansion." Another little request from the industry: let us put more than 10 percent ethanol into your standard gasoline at the pump. The WSJ gives the short and recent history of ethanol, which should be familiar to most readers, and includes lines about how "the ethanol industry wouldn't even exist without the more than $25 billion in taxpayer handouts over the past 20 years." So, are you ready to keep on funding ethanol in the US?
[Source: Wall Street Journal]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Rick 3:55PM (12/28/2008)
The only plausible argument I can see for Corn ethanol is that it may be useful as an additive if it's less environmentally damaging than the alternatives. I have no idea if thats true or not.
If it is true, then the oil industry could be required to fund ethanol so they can use it as a cleaner additive.
E10 maybe - E 85 forget it.
Reply
Joe 4:07PM (12/28/2008)
There is no good argument for corn based ethanol. It's awful.
Joce03 6:57PM (12/28/2008)
In a world where three quarters of the population is underfed, using corn to make fuel is not an alternative. It shouldn't even be a choice. The fact that we can make fuel from corn should only be a stepping stone, technology wise, leading to using waste to make fuel (wood waste, food waste, even regular old garbage).
BoneHeadOtto 7:08PM (12/28/2008)
" So, are you ready to keep on funding ethanol in the US?"
HHEEELLLL NNNOOOO!!!!
Ethanol is the worst possible fuel especially because we are talking corn ethanol. Other ethanols are perhaps reasonable but none are as good as the biodiesel alternatives. But bottom line we should not be handing out money to promote the poorest of all alternative fuels and attempt to create an industry that has not proved itself profitable or one that can save America money.
Reply
kubilay 7:17PM (12/28/2008)
happy new year... Go on holiday http://bluelifes.blogspot.com
Reply
GoodCheer 10:03AM (12/29/2008)
Hey Sebastian...
Can we block this spammer and erase its messages, please.
Dsuupr 8:40AM (12/29/2008)
That money is not all for corn ethanol. The majority of it is earmarked for Cellulosic Ethanol, more specificially, trash to fuel ethanol.
Cellulosic and Algae Ethanol are great answers and are starting to prove to be just as good, if not better, answers than digging out precious metals to make our cars and trucks run.
Not all of us live in the city. Some of us need and use our SUVs and trucks at farms or are disabled and need the space. Cellulosic, especially when using trash as a source and Algae Ethanol are great solutions for our current needs.
Reply
Dsuupr 8:46AM (12/29/2008)
For the record, the Ethanol industry has produced more in tax revenue than it spent.
I agree and understand why people would not be into corn ethanol, however, it is corn ethanol that opened the door to better versions of fuel like Cellulosic, Algae, . . .
Before getting huffy about how much money a group takes from the government, check out how much they contribute.
Reply
DaveD 10:11PM (1/05/2009)
@Dsuupr:
Do you have any government or independent sources to back that claim up? I'm not talking about some propoganda from the ethanol industry, I'm looking for real data because I simply don't believe this claim.
Bill 11:16AM (12/29/2008)
Cellulose is much, much tougher to reduce to fermentable sugars than the starch in corn.
Cellulosic ethanol companies won't tell you what it currently costs them to produce a gallon of ethanol.
Only that they expect it to be competitive with corn ethanol sometime in the next few years (not without massive subsidies over and above what we've already spent for corn ethanol)
If we want ethanol that makes economic sense we'd import it from Brazil instead of propping up high-cost U.S. producers.
Reply
TC 5:45PM (1/06/2009)
we do already, at least some..
Steve-O 3:16PM (12/29/2008)
I am all for ethanol, wherever it comes from. Corn isn't the best source I agree. Cellulosic is much better. Every mile driven on alcohol is better than a mile driven on gasoline. Let's no trash something that is better than gasoline when we really have no other alternative for now.
That being said, NO WAYshould we put government subsidies into CORN ethanol. Cellulosic, POSSIBLY. Biofuels in general such as bio gasoline and butanol, YES.
Biofuels when grown specifically for fuel from waste and non food, naturally growing sources are a very good investment. Look, Bio gas and Bio diesel miles driven are better for the planet, and almost CARBON NEUTRAL.
Companies like ls9 (http://www.ls9.com) and Virent (http://www.virent.com) claim carbon neutrality for their biofuel processes.
There is that crowd that constantly disses biofuels, they are wrong. We need them for many years to come, and if they're not perfect for the planet they are way better than petroleum, and they are localized. Which is good for the United States AND everyone else as well.
Reply
Alan 11:00AM (1/07/2009)
Are you kidding? So, fermenting vegetable matter is worse for the environment than drilling for a rapidly vanishing resource? Does anyone thing $4.00 was just a fluke? get ready, that is going to happen again and again.
Corn ethanol may not be the only answer to this problem, but drilling for more oil is no answer at all. Let's start thinking about using ethanol, methanol, natural gas, solar, and wind to start working on these problems instead of just yelling "corn ethanol kills people" or whatever the oil industry has fed us this week.
Reply
conor 5:52PM (12/29/2008)
ethanol is the future of the midwest! bring it on!
Reply
CNCMike 4:52AM (12/31/2008)
I'll be glad when all these oil company sponsored myths about ehtanol finally die forever. Oil companies are scared to death of ethanol for one reason. Because everyone can make ethanol at home easily, cheaply(I make it for $1.00 a gallon), safely and legally(5000 gallons/yr) and they can't controll that. Ethanol, unlike gasoline, has a positive energy return on investment, makes better animal feed than the corn itself would have been, produces 98% less pollution than gas, and in an engine built to run on alcohol will give you about 20% better mileage than gasoline.
Reply
Janet 9:23PM (1/05/2009)
Hi, I agree and am trying to get people to google David Blume's, of "Alcohol Can Be a Gas." Check it our and join the revolution.
Take care, Janet
Janet 9:24PM (1/05/2009)
Nooooooooo! Please do not believe the lies. "Fuel v Food" MYTH! 'More energy in than out.' LIE! 'It takes good ag land.' BULL!
Google or Youtube "Alcohol Can Be a Gas." now. Author David Bloom, virtually blacklisted by the huge oil and war industry, shows how Ethanol WILL reverse global warming, feed MORE people, provide for millions of new US jobs, and allow the US to become energy independent.
PLEASE do not repeat the lies you have been told by Big Oil, you are better than that. And do not reply till you have heard David speak on Youtube. This is not a yelling contest, it is information sharing.
Take care, Janet
Reply