If biofuels were readily available, would you use them?

Well, it's better than recycled diesel fuel isn't it? I mean if they are going to recycle used cooking oil for diesel fuel, why can't they do it the other way around as well?

 

I'd still rather have my hash browns cooked in butter! It's the farm girl in me and the fact that it was the way we did things at the restaurant we had when I was a kid.

 

And let's make sure it is REAL BUTTER, not any of that oleo crap!

 

They do it in Germany, after desaltening and dehydration it may be used, but with old diesel engines.

In Ukraine there was a project of making fuel of fat.. Meat companies used it as fuel for trucks.

I want biofuel to be on market. May be I will not use it, but biofuel prices limit gas prices

 

No kidding! Gotta be real butter. It's the only thing I buy.

 

My fuel mileage dropped with B20 blend no matter if it was a one ton dually or class 8 truck every time I tried. I pay for my fuel, therefore my foot is not mashing the pedal to the floor. All the hybrid seed corn reps I know were issued E85 trucks from their respective companies & they even said their fuel mileage was at 75% of the gas counterpart.

Years ago I use to sell seed along with the chemicals/fertilizer at a ag facility. Absolutely could not wait for ethanol plants to pop up all over the place to get corn above $2.00 per bu. again. It was not long ago $1.60-$1.90 was the best you could get at the elevator.

The technology has improved in hybrids in terms of traits as well as for soybeans, so yields have improved on a national basis. However corn hybrids in the late 90's to early 00's use to sell for an average of $70-95 per bag. A year ago the same bag of corn with all the improved technology was over $300. One 80,000 kernal bag plants approximately 2.4-3 acres.

What I have leaned is that you absolutely CANNOT burn food for fuel with an artificially inflated infrastructure via the gov't. Farmers still recieve subsidies, ethanol facilities are subsidized & ethanol does not put out the same energy as oil. Also, the farmers are not benefitting nearly as much as the Monsantos/Duponts & other corporate giants in the ag industry.

I understand doing nothing to address our energy needs is wrong, but the direction we are going is completely wrong. I do not know what the answer is as oil drilled from any continent irritates the hug a rainbow types. Tax dollars subsidizing burning food for fuel is obviously the wrong answer. T Boone Pickens wants all commercial trucks to run on natural gas in the coming years. Solar & wind energy so far has not panned out in terms of dollars spent vs. return on investment, unless you are G.E. with the gov't contracts.

We can all split hairs over this, but until our elected government comes up with an actual energy plan that returns a positive net vs. investment, we're screwed with just burning money & food as fast as it will burn.

 

I agree only real butter--but in the case of Waffle House--does it really matter? Since they aren't REAL hashbrowns!

 

E10/E20 has very little noticeable effect on mileage and yes, E85 will show around 20-25% less over straight gasoline as there are less BTU's in ethanol but even here ethanol is overall cheaper than gasoline made from imported fossil oil ... much cheaper!

Yes, Ethanol gets subsidies but then so does fossil oil, natural gas, coal etc. and they have been getting subsudized for decades by our government so they have nothing on biofuel here. The real cost of fuel/gas is more than double the pump price (our tax dollars paying the rest) so ethanol is a absolute bargain in comparison.

As for "buring food" Around 80% of the corn we grow is fed directly to livestock, around 10% exported and 10% used for human consumption. That which is is fed to livestock can and is being used to make ethanol first then fed to livestock ...

WHAT'S IN A BUSHEL OF CORN?

Each bushel of corn can produce up to 2.5 gallons of ethanol fuel. *Only* the starch from the corn is used to make ethanol. Most of the substance of the corn kernel remains, leaving the protein and valuable co-products to be used in the production of food for people, livestock feed, and various chemicals. For example, that same bushel of corn (56 lbs.) used in ethanol manufacturing can also produce the following:

The Wet-Milling Process

2.5 gallons of ethanol
and
31.5 lbs of starch
or
33 lbs. of sweetener
and
12.4 lbs of 21% protein feed
and
3.0 lbs. of 60% gluten meal
and
1.5 lbs. of corn oil (that can be consumed or used for biodiesel)
and
17 lbs. of carbon dioxide (puts the bubbles in your beer)

The Dry-Milling Process:

2.5 Gallons of Ethanol
and
10 one-lb. boxes of cereal
and
15 lbs. of brewer grits (enough for one gallon of beer)
and
10 eight oz. packages of Cheese Curls
and
1 lb. of pancake mix
and
22 lbs. of hominy feed for livestock
and
.7 lbs. of corn oil (that can be consumed or used for biodiesel)
and
17 lbs. of carbon dioxide

The biggest thing everybody needs to understand is alternatives do work and can be cost effective already (again, domestic biofuel is way cheaper than imported fossil oil when looking at the numbers) but macroeconomics dictate a slow change over. If this didn't happen the world economy would crash.

 

I only buy free range farm chicken eggs even here in FL, same when in WI. I can always find them somewhere.

I saw somebody mention that disgusting “oleo.” If ever there was a product that should not have been on the market is oleo as we now know it’s was a really bad idea for the body.

Much of the Midwest banned the sale of oleo (not the use of, only the sale of). WI was the last to remove the ban in 1967. It had been banned since 1895!

Now that modern research has shown the horrors of the truly evil hydrogenated fats in oleo the farmers were correct all along = you cannot mess with Mother Nature here!

 

Contrary to how this is going to sound, I am for alternative energy that we can produce in the U.S. vs. importing more oil. E10 is negligable, but the true green folks are not happy as the emission footprint is not reduced as much as they had hoped.

The E85 pro ethanol websites list cost structures as a negative. The reasons I glanced across cited that the energy it takes to make ethanol vs what it produces is not much of a net. Also, it has been cost prohibitive to market it outside of the corn belt. Additionally the price structure at the pump here in IL. was always right at 80% of regular gas. So it was a wash to the consumer straight out of pocket.

I heard the same thing above at meetings back in '02, though they never could document/prove the numbers. The green in their eyes back then was money.

The 80% to livestock is for food. Some may argue that oil may be 20% higher had it not been for ethanol use currently, but corn has tripled in five years affecting the cost of everything. Corn, soybeans & wheat had historical stable lines until the gov't gets to fixing things.(Still remember '96 gov't intrusion or fix for farmers.)

Energy use is the main driver for the current increase. Not against farmers actually making money, but all other costs to grow a crop doubled/tripled with the market & when the newest latest green trend comes along it will be the farmer paying the price.

The only short term answer for any of this will be more acres planted in areas that typically have not grown crops in the past. I do not see areas in the midwest that were listed as highly erodible soil not planted to something these days. So planting NEW acreage will require technology, expensive seed traits, & more infrastructure. My point to all of this, is that we need to work on the energy of tomorrow, but need to drill all we can right here at home until alternative sources are viable mainline energy.