Over 16,529,996 people are on fubar.
What are you waiting for?
Why do we have oxygenated fuel??
We all know our gasoline contains 10 % Ethanol. And most think that it is an effort to extend our fuel supply and protect the environment. But is it really?
Many years ago (1920’s) when automobile engine technology began to advance and more powerful engines were being produced it was quickly realized that the quality of the gasoline used was directly related to the engines performance. Higher Octane value (Anti knock index) was required. The drawback was that the cost of producing a higher Octane fuel increased rapidly with an increase in Octane value.
It was soon discovered that adding certain organo-metallic compounds would markedly increase the Octane value at a relatively minimal cost. Tetra-ethyl lead (TEL) was the best performer for this purpose. It was preferred over Ethanol purely for economic reasons. It could be made cheaply and only a relatively small amount provided large increase in Octane.
What an advantage this was for the gasoline producers. Cheap High Octane gas selling for a humungous proffet. At first there was no restrictions on the amount of TEL they could add. Take the lowest octane crap portion of the gasoline that had little or no market value. Add large amounts of TEL and Waa La. Premium priced gasoline.
Of course in those days nobody was concerned about the health effects of lead or the environment. The only green the oil companies were concerned about was the folding kind.
Many years later (1970’s) regulations were put in place to limit the amount of TEL that could be added to gasoline. This left the producers with a much smaller profit margin. They could use Ethanol as Europe did before TEL was introduced. But Ethanol had its own set of problems. It was costly to produce in large quantizes, needed to be added in percent levels to have any significant effect and was susceptible to drop out of the fuel if water were to come in contact.
Their solution was MTBE (Methyl Tert-Butyl Either). Cheep to make but still needed to be added in percent levels. And they had to convince the EPA that it was a good idea. So what did they do?? They gathered exhaust data on a good quality gasoline…. Added 10 % MTBE to the same gasoline and gathered exhaust data again. Sure enough the emissions improved. The EPA bought into it on the spot and mandated that MTBE must be added to gasoline.
So other then the health effects of MTBE what could be wrong with that??
Here is what is wrong. MTBE has NEVER been added to a good quality gasoline. It is ALWAYS added to sub-standard gasoline in order to bring it up to standards. The sub-standard starts out with high emissions. Adding MTBE only brought the emissions down to the level of a good quality gasoline.
The producers are ripping higher profits by adding MTBE to sub-standard gasoline but…They tell the EPA and the federal government that it cost them more to add MTBE and therefore will need to raise their prices. The government says …Sure no problem.
And then the EPA finds data to support the ruse of adding MTBE. Over the first 5 years of mandating the addition of MTBE the EPA monitors the carbon monoxide levels. They find the levels have dropped 15 %. WOW it really works ?? Well not quite. The levels at the start of the monitoring were 0.56 ppm and 5 years later was they were 0.48 ppm. A decrease of 0.08 ppm all attributed to the addition of MTBE in gasoline.
Great science there EPA. 8 part in 100 million parts. Let me give some idea what that means. That’s 0.000000008 parts per 1 part of air.
Take 100 million ping pong balls. Each ball has a diameter of 40 mm. if packed in at maximum density this would require a room 45 feet high by 45 feet wide by 45 feet deep. Somewhere in that room of ping pong balls are 8 black ones… go try and find them.
And of course the EPA didn’t even consider the advances in automobile emissions as a result of better engineering during that 5 year period.
Well we finally got rid of MTBE. By that time gasoline profits were high enough that it didn’t faze the producers when MTBE was removed. They didn’t drop the price did they? The supposed extra cost of adding MTBE was not removed from the price that we pay and not 1 politician spoke up to say … Hay now put the price back.
By this time the EPA and the public was convinced that oxygenated fuel was a good thing. So we need a safer oxygenate to add to our gasoline. ETHANOL. Its expansive to make but it’s a renewable resource. It can extend our fuel supplies. WONDERFUL IDEA.
The producer’s baulked at the thought. Way to expensive. Would double the price of gas.
So the federal government steps in. Gives out very generous grants, subsidies and tax breaks to Ethanol and gasoline producers including incentives for farmers to grow corn earmarked for ethanol production.
YAAAAAY we have clean renewable fuel.
Ummm well not quite.
Just like with TEL and MTBE, Ethanol is added to sub-standard fuel that burns dirtier to start with. Any environmental advantage we could realize from the addition of Ethanol to gasoline is more than offset by the poor quality of the base fuel and the higher consumption rate due to lower fuel mileage.
Oh sure it can extend our oil reserves (if we were using them) but not to the tune of the touted 10%. In reality it is more like 2.5 % or less.
So is it worth higher gasoline prices and business getting rich on our tax dollars to have minimal, if any positive effect on the environment??
Is it worth higher food prices because land and resources are being diverted to the production of Ethanol??
Are we suppose to sit back and swallow this ruse hook line and sinker ??
I say NO and you should too.
Food for Fuel trade off.
The Biodiesel scam in the US.
The use of food crops to produce a petroleum fual alternative is a hotly debated issue and one that the average consumer rarely has all the facts to make an informed option. I will attempt to shed some light on this subject. It is unlikely that I will be able to do this in an unbiased way but I hope at least it will start some people thinking about what we and our government is really doing.
I have worked in the petroleum industry in one aspect or another for over 30 years. I have seen the industry from the inside and have been involved in many of the innovations and processes that has culminate in our current state of affairs. I won’t go into details of my experience or carrier, suffice to say that I do not approach this subject from a laymen’s or outsiders view point.
The concept of Alternative fuels is not new. It began in earnest with the development of the diesel engine by German inventor Rudolf Diesel in 1893. Although Diesel didn’t design or intend for his invention to work with vegetable oil or other types of renewable fuels, as is commonly believed. He did show that his engine was fully capable of operation on these fuels and was fully supportive of its use. In a 1912 speech Diesel said, "The use of vegetable oils for engine fuels may seem insignificant today but such oils may become, in the course of time, as important as petroleum and the coal-tar products of the present time."
Since then pure vegetable oil has been used in diesel engines throughout the world in areas where petroleum fuel is difficult or expensive to obtain. Even before the invention of the diesel engine, the chemical process for converting triglycerides into methyl esters was conducted by scientists E. Duffy and J. Patrick in 1853. In 1937, G. Chavanne was granted a patent for what was the first efficient process for the production of “Biodiesel”.
Many countries without an abundant source of petroleum available within their borders looked to biodiesel as an alternative as early as 1920 and WWII served to encourage this approach.
Brazil is, in my option the world shining example of what can be accomplished with the use of bio-fuels. Their government mandate the use of 25% Ethanol in gasoline as early as 1931 and the country is currently the second largest producer of ethanol with the US being the 1st. In recent years they have cut their petroleum imports to Zero and have increased their ethanol exports. Currently they are improving and implementing the use of Biodiesel as a fuel source due to the increased value of the sugar needed to make ethanol. The majority of vehicles in Brazil run on pure bio fuels. This is a country that did it right.
In the US the situation is significantly different. The production of Biodiesel in the US has a negative sustainability and marginal beneficial effect on the environment. Here is why…
On average 1 acre of Soybean will yield 63 gallons of oil. It takes about 25 % Methanol to make Biodiesel. Methanol is made from petroleum at a net energy lose of about 35 %. Therefore the petroleum cost of Methanol to produce biodiesel is about 34 %. That leaves us with 42 gallons of Biodiesel per acre. It takes about 10 gallons per acre to plant and harvest soybeans leaving us with 32 gallons per acre. The production of Biodiesel requires heat, and lots of it, reducing the yield even further to 25 gallons per acre. Catalyst production, Transportation and delivery, Waste removal and disposal, all consume energy at an estimate 22 % of production rates leaving us with only 19 gallons per acre. A 30 % yield.
Biodiesel in a diesel engine is less efficient then petroleum diesel by as much as 10 % and it produces only 15 % less green house gases. If added to petroleum diesel at 5 % the effective reduction of green house gasses from the supplanting of the petroleum is less than 0.25 % and the increased fuel consumption offsets the benefits of producing and adding it to the fuel to begin with.
So why has the production of Biodiesel been expanding so rapidly in the US??
It’s simple. $$$$ and LOTS of it.
The cost of production of biodiesel cannot compete with that of petroleum therefore the government in its infinite wisdom has provided enormous grants, kick backs and subsidies to companies to produce biodiesel. An in the end it is WE who are paying for it.
The government and producers are feeding us false information about the benefits of biodiesel while at the same time driving up the price of consumer crops.
Yes we need to wean ourselves off of dependents on Mideast oil. Biodiesel could do that but as long as our government makes it enormously profitable true advances in the industry will not take place. Our environment is not befitting from our governments smoke and mirrors.
Even the traditional petroleum companies and getting to the Biodiesel market. Why? Profit !!! Not because they give a crap about our environment or imported oil dependents.
We can be as good or better then Brazil as far as Bio-Fuel production and us but we need strong leader ship supported by a well informed public.
Don’t take my word for it. Learn the facts. Get involved. Vote the money grabbers out if they’re not doing a good job.
It’s our country. It’s time to take it back from big business and their controlled government.
It’s time to do what is right for our country and the environment.
