ETHANOL A "CLEVER IDEA?"

Ethanol a 'clever idea' of industry, government July 5, 2007 by Doug Kelly

David Pitts makes several very good and well-thought-out points. I agree with his analysis of ethanol. I have read similar articles in a variety of magazines that support his scientific data. And I also question not only the veracity of the ethanol proponents, but also the moral-ethical discussion about which he writes. We'll likely run out of water before we run out of oil and gas. If you don't believe it, go to a Western state and see for yourself.

Too many people are ill-informed about ethanol. Some people are just gullible. And others are so desperate to save gas they are clutching onto anything possible to save fossil fuel and cut emission. But clearly ethanol is not the answer. In fact, if people would take a little time to study this, they would find that ethanol will do just opposite of what they want — that is, to save gas.

I'm afraid it's another one of those "clever ideas" cooked up by industry and government. And a more dangerous combination of forces doesn't exist.

Ethanol is a joke for fuel savings because it's nothing but "watered-down" gasoline that actually costs more to make and sell. And it does indeed have water in it. Not only is water not particularly good for an engine, but it will condense in your fuel tank and cause it to rust. This does wonders for your fuel pumps and filter.

Not to mention that it doesn't save fuel because it is really just a low grade gasoline; it burns unevenly in the cylinder head and so it actually gets worse mileage than one gets now on plain 87 octane and certainly less mpg than 92 octane. We used to be afraid of buying cheap gas because it may be "watered-down," now we're actually getting watered-down gas and it's said to be a great achievement.

At first it was 90 percent gas and 10 percent ethanol. Now I'm seeing 85 percent in some places, even 80 for biodiesel. Well, that would invalidate my car's engine and drive-train warranty. It says so very clearly in the owner's manual. I don't like that part. And to all the ethanol-lovers, I'm not confusing this with methanol. Ethanol is clearly stated in my car's manual. Ask a mechanic how ethanol will ruin your engine.

I have another question for those who are saving our environment. How does ethanol save the use of "fossil fuel" when it requires just as much or more actual fossil fuel than before? I believe strongly in protecting our environment. But as I remember, the original idea was to use less fossil fuel, not the same amount or likely more along with corn and water added. Was that not the original idea?

Well, ethanol doesn't lessen our use of fossil fuel. Like a fellow once said, "When you're up to your butt in alligators, it's hard to remember that the original idea was to drain the swamp."

But it is a nice sop from the government and taxpayers to the corn growers. Makes the cost of corn higher because it's in greater demand. Believe me, everything having any amount of corn in it, as well and livestock produced from feed corn, will all cost us more. Well, we can't expect industries reliant on corn and our beef and hog farmers to sell for a loss just because we "need" ethanol.

This is about the worst idea for using less fossil fuel that we've come up with. It's a really, really bad idea. But the bandwagon for ethanol is up and running. And it looks like the loss is going to be ours. What do you think should be done? Well, I guess we can buy carbon credits to allow us to feel good about continuing to emit high carbon content exhaust gasses. Those are popular with the jet set and rich crowd.

TEXT