N1593Y wrote

so far nobody wants to build an ethanol plant in a state that has less than a million residents

What?

N1593Y, did you make this up? I'm not trying to pick a fight, just wondering where you come up with this stuff.

North Dakota is next door to Montana.
We have 650,000 residents (that is less than a million), eight ethanol plants and two or three more sites being studied.

I don't know why Montana doesn't have a plant. North Dakota has ethanol plants because we have coal to power them and rail to bring the corn in and ethanol out. North Dakota farmers are also growing more and more corn because the ethanol plants have created a good market for locally grown corn.

Bill

Flat Country Pilot wrote:N1593Y wrote

so far nobody wants to build an ethanol plant in a state that has less than a million residents

What?

N1593Y, did you make this up? I'm not trying to pick a fight, just wondering where you come up with this stuff.

North Dakota is next door to Montana.
We have 650,000 residents (that is less than a million), eight ethanol plants and two or three more sites being studied.
Bill

It was only an observation about Montana, sorry I offended you. Besides you have about 50% more people / square mile, MT is huge and empty. Their law has been on the books since 2006 and according to some ethanol plant site that tracks new plant construction, there is no plans to build any ethanol plants in MT as of late 2007. I would think it would relate to the amount of fuel pumped in MT and the population distribution.

Does North Dakota have some attractive subsidies for ethanol plants? Do you grow a lot of corn? It has to be some reason that you have them and MT doesn't. I don't think MT offers any subsidies to ethanol plants in their law, just tax incentives, like here in OR and I don't think they grow much corn in MT, we sure don't in Oregon, import it all from the midwest for the two plants we are going to have, one online now, one building.

The attitude of the buricrats and politicians that they know more than the citizenry really pisses me off. They force us to do things that we would not ordinarily want to do through laws and what they call incentives. If it were not for this there would be no ethanol plants.

Leave out the subsidies and the folks like our California governor then what would be the demand for the stuff.

And while we are at if lets goar everbody elses ox as well and save a ton of money.

Tim

N1593Y wrote

sorry I offended you

No offense taken

I have been trying to stay out of ethanol and political discussions because they seem to go no where. We all believe what we believe.

I can only speculate about MT. My speculation is that the plants they had in the 80s went broke and so far no one has stepped up to do it again.

North Dakota has relatively cheap energy from coal, lots of coal. A couple of the older plants are fired from natural gas but most are from coal. The most efficient ethanol plant here is powered by waste steam from a coal fired electrical generating plant.
http://www.blueflintethanol.com/

North Dakota is not exactly in the corn belt, but more and more acres go to corn every year. New corn varieties and technology make it a profitable crop, not to mention the ethanol plants almost eliminate transportation costs. However, we do not grow enough corn to feed eight ethanol plants in this state so most of it is brought in by train.

This year on our farm corn is about 5% of our total acreage. Because I can see the Blue Flint Ethanol plant from our farm yard, we decided that now is the time to learn how to grow it. We'll keep our toe in the water and see where this whole ethanol and corn market gos. Our yield goal for corn is 110 bu per acre which should make 180 Marty shudder, he probably grows two or three times that.

One other reason ethanol companies are building plants here is water. Right now ND has water. In some parts of the state too much.

So much for avoiding ethanol discussions.

We've been using ethanol in all our farm vehicles and anything that burns gas since the early 80s. Now we have a plant I can see from the farm and sometimes we can't get ethanol blended gas because the states that have outlawed MTBE and mandated ethanol are using almost every gallon produced. Funny world.

The powers that be and our politicians pass laws everyday that create chain reactions they never imagined. You and I have to deal with it somehow and its not always fun.

Bill

Flat Country Pilot wrote:N1593Y wrote
>...

I can only speculate about MT. My speculation is that the plants they had in the 80s went broke and so far no one has stepped up to do it again.

They sure have an incentive now. If one plant was constructed which produced 40 mgy, the mandatory E10 law would trigger and every gallon of regular gasoline sold in MT would have to have 10% ethanol in it. They are like Missouri in that premium unleaded is exempt, so I don't know where that leaves their mid grade. Don't know how many gallons total MT would need, but if it was in ratio to OR, it would be somewhere around 75 mgy I think, we need 165 mgy for a couple of million citizens.

>...
So much for avoiding ethanol discussions.

>... Now we have a plant I can see from the farm and sometimes we can't get ethanol blended gas because the states that have outlawed MTBE and mandated ethanol are using almost every gallon produced. Funny world.

Probably because states like CA have hidden their ethanol program. It isn't a law. It is an agreement between Air Resources Board and EPA to oxygenate all of the gasoline. Right now they have a max limit of 5.7% but that is changing to 10% in the next few years. And they sell a lot of gasoline. Unfortunately it has killed self fueling of aircraft in the state and their are no airports selling mogas.

I have no quarrel with ethanol, as long as I get a choice. Don't abide the government mandated monopolies and giving my tax money to corporations, just more corporate welfare.

The powers that be and our politicians pass laws everyday that create chain reactions they never imagined. You and I have to deal with it somehow and its not always fun.

Especially when it affects aviation. You can't self fuel in Oregon anymore and there is only one airport with mogas. My airplane is for sale, tired of dealing with the pencil necks. No telling how it will impact LSA which is supposed to save the decline in pilot numbers. Wonder when AOPA and EAA are going to wake up?

Gasoline needs to be oxygenated to burn properly and completely in todays engines. MTBE has been the oxygenator for years but has been found to pollute ground water and therefore outlawed in many states. The cheapest and quickest alternative to MTBE is ethanol. I can only guess that as more and more ethanol plants come on line, more and more states will outlaw MTBE.

I have said this before and will stick to it. If this trend reverses and we allow MTBE to oxygenate gasoline, the price of corn mash whiskey and Everclear will fall dramatically do to the ethanol plants seeking new markets.

Bill

You can't self fuel in Oregon anymore

Sooooooooooooo you are saying that there are no airports in OR you can physically fuel your own plane with 100LL?

I can buy auto gas without ethanole at the bulk plant in Medford Oregon and transprt it to my plane in Weed, CA. I use a 100 gal slip tank in the back of my pickup. About an hour to Medford but I have to go there about once every two weeks anyway.

You cannot self serve gas at the pumps in Oregon. It is a law to keep the toothless people employed sence the carnival quit comming to town.

Tim

Flat Country Pilot wrote:Gasoline needs to be oxygenated to burn properly and completely in todays engines.

I respectfully completely disagree with that statement. The only oxygenate mandates were in large urban areas with excess CO problems determined by the EPA. The only areas mandated in Oregon were the Portland metropolitan area and a couple of other counties with "large" cities (by Oregon standards) and that was only in the winter. There were no oxygenate mandates in eastern Oregon, except the Klammath basin. States in the Northeast that outlawed MTBE years ago agreed to use ethanol. But then in the last few years cars burned so clean that they successfully sued the EPA to stop the mandates, including Portland, OR. Connecticut started the successful lawsuits ending EPA mandates: http://ct.gov/ag/cwp/view.asp?A=2426&Q=310200

MTBE has been the oxygenator for years but has been found to pollute ground water and therefore outlawed in many states. The cheapest and quickest alternative to MTBE is ethanol. I can only guess that as more and more ethanol plants come on line, more and more states will outlaw MTBE.

Whenever ethanol is mandated, MTBE is outlawed. The two are totally incompatible. I am not aware of any states that still mandate MTBE.

I have said this before and will stick to it. If this trend reverses and we allow MTBE to oxygenate gasoline, the price of corn mash whiskey and Everclear will fall dramatically do to the ethanol plants seeking new markets.

Bill

I doubt that MTBE will ever be allowed again. It is not needed, neither is ethanol in most places. Maybe in the LA and the Bay area.

Flat Country Pilot wrote:

You can't self fuel in Oregon anymore

Sooooooooooooo you are saying that there are no airports in OR you can physically fuel your own plane with 100LL?

Nooooooooooooo, I did not make that claim. Self fueling refers to the act of purchasing mogas at a service station and bringing the fuel onto the airport and fueling your airplane.

Airports are exempt from the full service requirement of all auto fuel service stations in Oregon. Only Oregon and New Jersey do not allow you to fuel your own car.

qmdv wrote:I can buy auto gas without ethanole at the bulk plant in Medford Oregon and transprt it to my plane in Weed, CA. ...
Tim

You are lucky. Medford is one of the two places on the I5 corridor that is still selling unblended mogas under the new law SB 1079. Is that Colvin Oil? I would love to verify that for others in Oregon.

sorry - double post - deleted

WOW N1593Y, you posted four in a row in the same message. I am impressed.

tim

Flat Country Pilot wrote

Our yield goal for corn is 110 bu per acre which should make 180 Marty shudder, he probably grows two or three times that.

My average wasn't too much better than that last year(130 to 140) since I goofed my nitrogen fertilizer strategy-----side dressed and then it didn't rain for a month. There was a bunch of 200 bushel corn around though.