Buddy, Can You Spare A Dime ? How About 100,000,000,000 Of Them ? Ethanol Costs Up This Year?

Mandates Could Have U.S. Drivers Husking Shelling Out More For Corn In Their Gas Or Paying For “Credits,” According To A March 23, 2013 David Shepardson Detroit News Newspaper Article, $10,000,000,000 More This Year.


Although vehicles are getting better mileage, drivers are buying less fuel, and cars are running cleaner, our government is taking steps to step up ethanol use.

Will this help the environment, wreck cars, weaken the economy?
Is it a bad idea at this time or an idea that’s overdue ?
I have an opinion, but I’d like to hear some others.


@csa It’s a good thing to see someone push back. Personally I am against ethanol for a number of reasons, and the net benefits to the environment are questionable. It does ensure votes for the governement in the Corn Belt, though.

The extra cost is subject to debate, but just taxing gasoline more and using that money to lower income taxes makes more sense to me.

I have a better idea…how about NO subsides for corn. They use it for dumb ethanol and HFCS.
Get in touch with your representatives and tell them you will not vote for anyone who wants to increase ethanol content. Our senators are officially against it for that reason…complaints !

It’s just a way for everyone but the consumer to make money. The is NO GAS SHORTAGE and refineries are being shut back to keep the prices up. Subsidies for corn is a SCAM.
Though cars can be made to withstand the problems…heck, some can run on pure alcohols, cars will suffer effects from storage problems and every other small ICE will be TOAST. New outboard motors at $4K plus a wack in our state that depends upon tourism ? There are plenty more reasons other then cars to be against this idiot idea.

Four words come to my mind: Powerful farm lobby. Boondoggle.

Strip mining the last six inches of arable topsoil to grow corn to burn in cars while three quarters of the planet is undernourished is beyond insane, not to mention the economics involved are akin to using huge amounts of water and natural gas (or even reactors as some lunatics are proposing) to get oil from the Alberta tar sands. Why not just import Brazilian ethanol which is made from sugar cane waste, way cheaper and less injurious to Mother Nature? See above first three words.

Autocentricity will be the death of our so-called civilization.

And. if you think corn growers are doing this for “health reasons” remember one of our biggest use for corn products is for HFCS (high fructose corn syrup)…a nation wide epidemic paid for by or own tax dollars…

The federal farm subsidies don’t pay farmers to grow more of a regulated crop. The subsidies designate land as suitable for a particular crop and from year to year offer the owners subsidies to NOT PLANT that crop in order to keep supply in line with demand. If the price of corn is rising as demand outstrips supply there will be no subsidy offered and land not designated for that commodity can be cultivated and used for that crop. If ethanol is removed from our gasoline the subsidy to corn farmers would be resumed. The subsidies are part of the “Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Act.” It’s purpose is to prevent “boom and bust” periods that bankrupt farmers and food processors.

In that case…I amend my pervious comment and recommend we pay what ever we have to to keep ethanol and HFCS off the market…I am blinded by the anger. ;={{

How does brazil use 80% of its fuel from ethanol produced from sugar cane? Just think of all the food crops that are displaced for growing cane?

Increasing the ethanol content will not benefit the environment. It will wreck cars. Just ask the automobile manufacturers. And is is good for the economy. Of Nebraska, Illinois, Minnesota, Indiana and Iowa. The rest of us can just get over ourselves and pay up.

Brazil has been in the slash and burn business for several decades now. Jungles have been hacked away and burned to become farm land for the poor and for wealthy investors. But if ethanol was a significantly beneficial fuel component for the US, buying ethanol from Cuba and Latin America would appear to be a much wiser course to follow. If sugar cane is a much better source of ethanol investors might throw some money into Haiti and get a great return on their investment. But everything is reported to US with the ‘spin’ that suits the agenda of the news source so we have only our best hunches from forum chatter to decide what is best. The parts counter at a local outdoor equipment dealership says that ethanol shows up in all gasoline regardless what the pump might say and it is a big problem with Zama and Walbro carburetors. For me a dependable source of pure gasoline would be good, I would gladly pay a few cents extra for the REAL STUFF.

It will get worse.
Corn lobby does not compare to the Sugar and Cuban-American Lobby.
Mario Rubio has no intention in balancing the budget at the expense of his benefactor(1)

Ethanol is right up there as a huge scam; right along with wind power, a legitimate all electric car, etc.

The powers that be (including the ones who stand to profit from it) are working on something similar here. The idea is to take scrub Western Red Cedar trees and manufacture bio-fuel out of them which will save the Earth, etc, etc.
The processor wil pay 20 dollars a ton for the trees but the harvest costs will run a 100 dollars per ton.
This has led to calls for the 80 dollar per ton difference to be made up for by the taxpayers and which is referred to as a “wise investment”.
This one plant will call for 2000 tons per day, every day, for 20 years under the contract. Do the math on that one.

The taxpayers are already footing the bill for simply knocking the trees down in certain areas; a job that a farmer used to do with his own tractor.

There seems to be a “bio-fuel” corporation looking for investors behind every tree hugger. They may be the same entrepreneurs who brought us perpetual motion motors and solar clothes dryers.

BTW, for $50 I’ll send you the components and blue print for the solar clothes drier.

If corn lobby does not compare to sugar lobby, why is it the only mainstream soda pop I can get made with sugar instead of high fructose corn syrup is Pepsi Throwback?


Get in touch with your representatives and tell them you will not vote for anyone who wants to increase ethanol content.

That doesn’t work so well in the heart of the corn belt. The farmer vote is important, and they won’t vote for anyone who wants to decrease ethanol content. If you pledge not to vote for anyone who increases ethanol, you’ll have to stay home on election day, 'cause all of 'em are for it.

My state wants to up required ethanol in gas to 15%. Guess that means I have to go to the neighboring state to get gas for my mower, because the warranty is void if the gas has higher than 10% in it.

The Amazon basin is known as the lung of the planet and Brazil is destroying it to grow sugar cane for fuel.

" Guess that means I have to go to the neighboring state to get gas for my mower, because the warranty is void if the gas has higher than 10% in it. "

It will void the warranty covering engine problems in cars made by certain manufacturers, too.


Because Pepsi (throwback) and CocaCola(Mexican derived) are beverages that Boomers remember. There is a flavor difference-IMO, mostly in the mouthfeel and initial sweetness.

Other carbonated flavors as RC, Rootbeer, 7up, and that Southern prune stuff, are minor drinks where ingredient costs are more important.

If I remember, Sucrose sugar in colas will eventually become glucose and fructose, but since most of the colas are made and drank soon after blending, the conversion is not normally noticeable.

I live in the farm belt and the U.S. congressman who represents this district has never found a farm program of any kind that wasn’t a “wise investment”.
He’s been re-elected to office more times than I can even remember. His office quit calling me for opinions about 10 years ago when they got a mildly crude response from me as to whether he could expect my vote in an upcoming election. It basically involved a cold day and non-Thanksgiving Day stuffing… :slight_smile:

I try to bite my tongue with local politicians but it can get tough. Local politics is like Washington politics in the mud. The local airport is losing its federally paid traffic controller due to the sequester but the federally subsidized airline ($2,000,000/year) will continue to operate. And this VERY RED town that sees entitlements as a sin against humanity is ranting and howling at the administration for mismanagement because losing the tower reduces other federal subsidies. Has anyone else seen the Tea Party rally video with the sign that reads KEEP YOUR SOCIALIST HANDS OFF MY MEDICARE PREZ OBAMA? I feel sure that was a neighbor of mine. Mississippi ranks last at anything worthwhile but first in ‘dog and pony show’ politics.