180Marty wrote:Sig, I'll put my slant on the CRP since I have 13 acres. It entails 100 feet on each side of the creek that runs through the farm. I get $83 per acre per year. The idea is to keep the soil in Iowa instead of the Gulf Of Mexico and while I don't hunt, there are a bunch of people that get to shoot pheasants. Because I need some passive income, I am renting some good farm ground for $300 an acre to my cousins and if it wouldn't be an environmental disaster, I'd gladly let them farm by the creek. Oh, I am still farming also by renting from another relative so I still drive a tractor. On the ethanol and food, 1/3 of the corn that goes to the ethanol plant comes back out for animal feed. Some corn actually gets fractionated before the fermentation process where the starch and germ are separated and the germ gets processed at another place like I invested in and you get food grade, kosher corn oil and the germ meal can make gluten free cereal , cookies, and other tasty food products---how do I know---I have eaten some very good cookies. Ethanol is the cheapest octane booster there is and while I know we are swimming in oil in North Dakota, I don't think all the gasoline molecules in a barrel are 93 octane. Doesn't it make more sense to make 84 sub-octane gas and get every possible part of a barrel that can go for gasoline out and mix with a octane booster instead of limiting 87 as the lowest octane E0 and wasting some potential fuel molecules?

Marty,
Thanks for posting your experience with CRP. But, where do the funds to pay for it come from?

I am down in the area where the Keystone pipeline is supposed to end but don't work for the refineries. I don't believe for a moment that there is any waste in a barrel of oil. In reality, a barrel of crude (42 gallons) will refine out a total of 44 gallons of products (about 27gallons of motor fuels). Different grades (heavy, light, sweet, sour) of oil will get you varying amounts of different products...fuel,sulphur, ammonia, plastics, lpg, propane, etc. Anyway, here is my prospective.

I could digest using corn to make ethanol as a additive for fuel if it didn't do so much damage to equipment other then autos. In the old days, I could leave gas in a lawnmower from year to year without it souring. Now in addition to souring, I have to check my fuel lines to make sure they are not disintegrating and choking up my carb. The same thing happens to outboard motors. Why are all the fuel stc's only for nonethanol fuel if the additive was not hazardous for them? I don't blame you in particular, but some short sighted people have pushed the EPA to mandate so much (%) be added to fuel. They first stated it was because of a "energy" shortage. Then another time its for the "environment".

In the end, it appears that it has cost us more in engine repairs/upgrades, food costs both human and livestock then what we gained......which is what?? A increase in the price of corn? (Not totally blaming the increase on ethanol, as the weakening dollar has a lot to do with it)

It would probably benefit us all if we limited mandated ethanol additives for the regular grade of gas and let the market decide whether it would be feasible for other grades. Then a person would have the choice to run fuel with ethanol or not. In a free market, ethanol would either fly or crash on its own benefits rather then be forced upon us.

In a free market

http://www.forbes.com/sites/energysourc ... love-them/

Sig220 wrote:A interesting article on using corn for food, not fuel......

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/31/opini ... -fuel.html

and another......

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/20/opinion/m ... index.html

Hey Dirtstrip, any interest in trying to explain how CRP works? Is it like being paid not to plant?

I didn't realize that NY Times Op Eds and CNN Op Eds were considered anything but opinionated and biased sources.


http://www.soybeansandcorn.com/Brazil-Crop-Acreage

Sugarcane Expansion Continues In Brazil Unabated

"A true success story in Brazil has been the development of the sugar and ethanol industries in Brazil. Brazil leads the world in the development and utilization of alternative fuels and there does not appear to be any end in site. Many people wonder if Brazil can expand their row crop production at the same time that they are expanding their sugarcane production as well.

The sugarcane industry in Brazil continues to expand at breakneck speeds. The Minister of Agriculture announced last week that 40 new sugar mills are expected to open in Brazil by 2010. Brazil already has 410 sugar mills in operation. Conab also announced that Brazil will produce 558 million tons of sugarcane during the 2008 harvest which represents an 11.4% increase over last year. Fifty seven percent of the sugarcane will go toward the production of 27 billion liters of alcohol (17.3% increase over last year) and 43% of the sugarcane will go toward the production of 32.8 million tons of sugar (4.5% increase over last year).

Another much bigger concern in Brazil is deforestation and the clearing of virgin land to increase crop production. Very little land is being cleared for sugarcane production, but as sugarcane takes over pastureland in southern Brazil, ranchers are increasingly moving to the southern edge of the Amazon where they can purchase land to expand their cattle operations. So as a consequence of increasing sugarcane production in Sao Paulo, land is being cleared in Mato Grosso and other states in central Brazil to increase cattle production. Therefore, in an indirect way, the expansion of sugarcane production in Brazil is putting increased pressures on land clearing in the Amazon region."

Corn ethanol does not degrade your children's future like this will. No one in their right mind disputes the value of the rainforest to the rest of the world.

CRP:
I would be happy to meet under another heading to explain the value of preserving soil for future use. Or did I just do it?

180Marty wrote:In a free market

http://www.forbes.com/sites/energysourc ... love-them/

Yep, gotta love it!!


http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2 ... we-thought

one about corn subsidies......

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2011/12 ... -more?lite

I think we will all find plenty of ammunition to suit our views......and maybe later we can take up crp's and farm income stabilization and other programs.

dirt,
I didn't want to copy your entire post, as rather then post a link you want to post the article.......

The two links I posted are plainly labeled as to what they are and they also raise some valid points, no?

Are only select people allowed to post opinions?

Do you really think we can dictate to Brazilians how to use their land? Do you think they will listen?

I will be upfront........I don't like corn ethanol in my fuel. My opinion but the facts behind that is that it damages my equipment as the equipment was not designed to handle ethanol. I don't have investments in either corn, ethanol or refineries or dino oil. Everyone knows 180Marty has a interest/investment in corn ethanol. What is your interest/investment in?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25936782/ns ... LWqKmewVjU

Seriously, I doubt my concerns about ethanol will change the EPA mandates. But I doubt they will be able to silence my voice/opinion.

BTW, opinion or fact?

Corn ethanol does not degrade your children's future like this will. No one in their right mind disputes the value of the rainforest to the rest of the world.

Tricky wording too, almost like a politician!!

Sig220 wrote:dirt,

The two links I posted are plainly labeled as to what they are and they also raise some valid points, no?

Are only select people allowed to post opinions?

Valid points do not always lead to valid conclusions just as "Op Ed " does not stand for Educated Opinion but stands for Editorial Opinion. People today have a much harder time sorting that from news, and it has to do with how news markets itself, but this was clearly marked as such in both rag sheets" Hot Air section.

Sig220 wrote:dirt,

Do you really think we can dictate to Brazilians how to use their land? Do you think they will listen?

As individuals we cannot dictate to Brazilians how they use their land any more than some one in your position cannot dictate to an American farmer how to use his. When a nation needs to do something as large as over powering individual property rights to protect or preserve resources for the nation's good "the people" use government programs. They come at a cost and they are enacted through the constitutional/political process. One of those programs is CRP another one is the Clean Air Act. Flawed as they may seem to many they are put in place to protect the nations resources otherwise individuals and corporations could run through all the resources of the country in the name of short sighted business profits and destroy something greater in the process. This is why I gave up some of my best land (or have it condemned through eminent domain by a foreign company) to allow the Trans Canada oil pipeline to build through. This is the dirtiest oil on the planet forever under my farm land that will eventually leak but I cooperated by forfeiting property rights to them so others in this country could have oil. I even was asked to be the main speaker in their promo video to be used to promote the pipeline to other landowners down the line because my son was a marine serving to ensure and protect your rights to uninterrupted flow of foreign oil while he served in Iraq. I found it contrary to his service to oppose the Keystone Pipeline because of that sacrifice. Without question I have risked or sacrificed much personally to promote the oil culture of the US for everyone here through the loss of property rights so I too am entitled to my opinion.

The best you and I can hope for is an understanding of an opposing view point and during that discussion allow others to form theirs. I believe we have accomplished that. Just sayin'.

dirt,
I for one and I am sure we all appreciate your son's service to our country.

The best you and I can hope for is an understanding of an opposing view point and during that discussion allow others to form theirs. I believe we have accomplished that. Just sayin'.

I would only add to the above the word "civil" and place it just before understanding!!

With that.....I am going to be a little scarce on the topic, I have a deer stand on some CRP land in Louisiana that is just calling my name!!! Yep, I know more about CRP then I have been letting on.

I'm waiting for 'Swift Fuel' to be made in all or some of the alcohol refineries now.

Today Chicago Board of Trade price for ethanol is $2.44----less out at the plants since it costs to transport to Chicago. If another dollar's worth of processing would make Swift, that'd be great.

In 2008 Swift Fuel stated they projected 1.80/gal and the original fuel was made from corn. 2008 was the historical high of corn prices. Since then Swift has moved to cellulosic biomass nonfood sources to avoid the food v fuel debates. Lastly Swift has been produced from natural gas, at least the acetone portion. Natural gas is at all time lows of the last 10 years. Last numbers on price from Swift is that they expect to market at prices "competitive to Avgas". I don't speak fluent business-speak but the word competitive must mean "We are willing to pocket the difference from 1.80."
If the fuel performs and has the density of energy advertised it would be a comparative better value. Full speed ahead.

For Auto gas, maybe they can offer something competitive there also and stc's can be issued.

For natural gas, diesel might get a new competitor.

http://www.yorkdispatch.com/business/ci ... ucks-buses

For those worried about food because of ethanol, just saw on U.S. Farm Report that 2 million acres of cotton might be switched to corn or soybeans since there is simply to much cotton. Evidently underwear is lasting longer

CARSON CITY, Nev. (AP) — Common household trash will be converted into ethanol for transportation fuel at a planned biofuel production facility in northern Nevada backed by a $105 million federal loan guarantee announced by the Obama administration Monday.

The company, a subsidiary of Fulcrum BioEnergy Inc. headquartered in Pleasanton, Calif., plans to convert 147,000 tons of municipal solid waste into 10 million gallons of ethanol annually at the new plant.

The plant will be built 20 miles east of Reno in the Tahoe-Reno Industrial Center in Storey County. Officials said the project will create 430 construction jobs and 53 permanent jobs after completion by 2015.

In an interview before Monday's announcement, Vilsack said the technology used to create transportation fuel from garbage takes the biofuel industry to the next level.

"We're basically trying to create opportunities in all parts of the country," he said.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/0 ... 48737.html

Here is some info just posted on an E85 website by a guy that designs ethanol plants and has done a lot of testing of different fuels in Detroit. He is finding out some interesting thing that your friendly oil company is doing.

If we could only get everyone to realize just how much variation there is in gasoline, we could actually go on the offensive about what gets put into our tank. When a 2011 Survey done by the state of Texas shows gasoline can range from 10 to 50 percent aromatics, what do you think happens to the BTU per gallon, or should I ask mpg?

When the state of Texas fuel survey with the fuel quality calculation developed by Honda Motors had shown 3 times the emission level as EPA's Test fuel, should someone ask what is going on? Remember, it seems that ethanol needs to be better in every category to avoid criticism but why can consumer fuels be worse.

It would be easy to say from the survey data that 5 percent of gasoline sold in Texas in Kerosene. The question we need to ask EPA, how 3 to 4 percent of this fuel can have over 400 degrees distillation yet the ASTM testing standard won't pick this up. This may sound small but this can be a 3 to 5 billion gallon a year market.