# Ethanol some Pros some Cons



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

*Demand for corn might top supply*

*MELANIE BRANDERT*
[email protected]

Article Published: 02/24/06, 8:50 am

MARION - Turner County faces a unique situation in South Dakota with the potential of two ethanol plants within its borders, thus creating a competitive atmosphere for corn.

It's creating some apprehension as well.

When the Turner County Board of Adjustment voted Feb. 14 to grant a conditional-use permit to Millennium Ethanol for its proposed 100-million-gallon plant near Marion, it did so over concerns from Great Plains Ethanol, which opened its 40-million-gallon plant in March 2003 near Chancellor.

Great Plains, which is managed by Broin Companies, isn't sure there is enough corn to satisfy the demands of two plants just 18 miles apart, said Sioux Falls lawyer Bill Taylor, who represents Broin.

The company announced Thursday that Great Plains will expand to 100 million gallons, with construction starting this summer.

"While that may sound anti-competitive, one or both plants would be forced to import corn," Taylor said.

If that occurred, plants might need to ship grain by rail cars, paying a freight rate that could be 20 to 40 cents per bushel, Taylor said.

"Till the (industry's) distribution infrastructure catches up, you can expect margins to go down and get narrower and narrower," Taylor said. "If both plants are expected to buy from a distance, and the cost of transportation goes up, there comes a point where neither plant will be competitive. If that happens, one or both will close or run at a loss. That is a very serious risk."

South Dakota Corn Growers Association board treasurer Gary Duffy, who farms east of Oldham, said that the issue of an adequate corn supply at both plants will depend on the year.

If there is a corn crop like 2005, there wouldn't be a problem, he said.

"They'll be years when supply will be tight, but most years it will be a nonissue," he said. "The law of supply and demand will work."

Duffy said that farmers could devote more acres to corn than rotating soybeans with corn, but that is a management decision for farmers.

Although the county adjustment board has approved Millennium's permit, the board also needs to consider that plant's water use, Taylor said. He said Millennium would use 1.4 million gallons daily and discharge 400,000 gallons.

Of the two aquifers Turner McCook Rural Water could tap to provide water for the plant, one is deeper and has a fair amount of minerals, the other is shallower and used by irrigators, Taylor said, citing the state Geological Survey.

Because ethanol plants need pure water, Millennium would need another half-million gallons to clean mineral-tainted water from the deeper aquifer, Taylor said. Millennium's discharge will end up in the Vermillion River's west fork, he said.

"Turner County needs to give consideration to a river that has a flat flood plain," Taylor said, adding that the river at Parker "has been out of its banks many times."

When asked if Great Plains would appeal the zoning board's decision, he said the plant's board had yet to make a decision.

Steve Domm, chief executive officer for Millennium, declined to discuss competition with Great Plains this week. However, he said last September that a corn price increase hurting profits at one or both plants was a concern.

"There can't be a plant built on every corner," Domm said last fall. "Crop failures can happen, but we feel we have an abundance of corn here."

FreMar Farmers Co-op in Marion, which will manage the Millennium plant, already buys, dries and stores corn from farmers and ships it out by rail, Domm said. That expertise could give the new plant an edge over the Chancellor plant, he said, noting that the Marion site has the ability to store up to 10 million bushels of corn when corn prices are low - enough for up to 27 million gallons of ethanol.


----------



## Invector (Jan 13, 2006)

The biggest is how it burns. This stuff dont burn like normal gas. So the engin has to be able to run on the different burning. Take my turck...please...it dont even like the 10% blend. I dont get the responce of it. It may take a few more years to refine it to a point that it can burn in an engin with the same ability as normal petrol gas. But think of the amount of corn that could be gorwn. More corn want brings up the prices of corn, makes the farmers happy, they grow more corn, the more corn means better duck and goose ground to hunt on, makes us happy. :beer:

On a better note, being cleaner its just not quite there yet to be used on a broad base. Miles per gallon are not as high as regular gas. But it freeezzzzezzz at a bit lower temp and keeps gas lines form freeeezzzzing up better. Take the decells the ethonal (if I;m not misstaken) blends do better in winter. Its an up and comer


----------



## sierra03 (Jan 27, 2005)

With the new technology of engines going into newer cars and trucks, I think we are ready to shy away from the limited supply of oil. Plus the US wont have to rely on foreign oil. It will make us more dependant. Also it will benefit North Dakota's farmers. Another Positive is the environmental cleanliness, good for our atmosphere. Maybe even the price on the ethanol would benefit us, unless they put a heavier tax on it??

People even say sure it is cheaper, but it burns faster. If thats the case, were still running a cleaner fuel and helping the AG workers. I dont think it will replace gasoline for a long time now, but lets get it started huh?


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

What's the deal on it costing more oil to make than it would to just burn the stuff normally? I think Plainsman said this a while back and I've been trying to use it ever since, but can't recall the figure.


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

> More corn want brings up the prices of corn, makes the farmers happy, they grow more corn, the more corn means better duck and goose ground to hunt on, makes us happy.


From the standpoint of wildlife it means more wetlands will be drained. It means more CRP will be returned to cropland monoculture. It means more native grasslands will be converted over to cropland.

America's addiction to energy consumption is insatiable. We want our cake and eat it too because there has always been more cake. The idea of energy conservation has never been seriously considered by the politicans or the public.


----------



## scissorbill (Sep 14, 2003)

Dick Monson is right on ,wildlife will suffer greatly. Invector .your response is sad and shows you do not have a grasp of reality.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

MT you are correct that was me that said it takes more energy to make ethanol than you get from it. That was a couple years ago, and technology could have changed, but I doubt it. 
The article I read went through every aspect of energy consumption to produce a gallon of ethanol. They included the diesel to apply fertilizers and plant it, spray insecticides, harvest, transport, even the energy to produce the fertilizer, the pesticides etc. I think the fellow did a good job, and in the end he estimated it took 1.2 gallons of diesel to produce a gallon of ethanol.

I like to compare this to the ad on TV for electric energy. They say it is the cleanest most environmentally sound energy you can heat your home with. I have electric heat in my home, but I realize that somewhere west of me large coal generators spew our atmosphere full of hydrocarbons and other chemicals. Perhaps some comes from dams that now cover thousands of acres of native river ecosystems. Ethanol is much like that. People say it is so much cleaner, but you must count the hydrocarbons produced by the 1.2 gallons of diesel and the gallon of ethanol.

This morning in the Jamestown Sun they pointed out that two of our ethanol plants in North Dakota are very close together and there may not be enough corn raised to supply them. The corn to feed beef will still be needed. The corn for human consumption will still be needed. This new industry will require land for production, and farmers near the ethanol plants will be waiting for their CRP to come out. Others will say "Martha, lets sell the cows and break up that 300 acres of native pasture we have. With no cows we can spend the winter in Arizona". There goes the CRP, native prairie, and more financial support will be available for the economy of some southern state. This isn't the panacea that many would lead us to believe. If it is not economically or environmentally sound then why is it being pushed so hard? Simply for another agricultural program that will allow local politicians to say "look what I did for the North Dakota farmer".


----------



## Invector (Jan 13, 2006)

scissorbill said:


> Dick Monson is right on ,wildlife will suffer greatly. Invector .your response is sad and shows you do not have a grasp of reality.


Here is a grasp on reality for you. WHO said I was going to go out and drain the wetlands to grow more corn?

There are laws in place to restrict types of draining. Or dont you know that. For a farmer to do so they have to get it approved. If that is not true then why does my good friend have a job? You sir need a grip on reality and think before you post.


----------



## DJRooster (Nov 4, 2002)

Ethanol is not a cure all but it is only one part of the equation. It helps but it is not going to solve all of the energy problems facing the world. The American consumer who thinks, "I am only one person and cannot make a difference," is the number one problem concerning world demand for oil. We are our own worst enemy and will not admit it.l


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

If everyone of us bought one extremely fuel efficent vehicle for running around in when we don't need a big one our fuel demand would be cut in half, at least. How many times do you see just one person in some huge gas guzzler( I used to be one).

I don't want a govt mandate but I would like to see the president ask the people to give it some thought. Similar to the compromises our people did during WW2 to help with that effort.

We need to face the reality of our energy dependence on people that are not our friends, and make the necessary compromises in our lives to reduce their control over our economy.

With the situation in Iran, Venuzuela, Al Quaida focusing on the oil production of Eygypt, and Iraq on the verge of civil war the possibility of fuel sources dissappearing overnight is very real with dire consequences to our economy and probably any hope of world peace.

The president needs to appeal to the partriotism of the American people.

development of alternative fuels like ethanol should be step number two its going to take a little time


----------



## Invector (Jan 13, 2006)

As far as bush goes...hes got his hand in oil so why would he want to see gas prices drop, fuel efficent cars, and new types of fuels such as ethonal?

Second Bob you are right. I know it would be a lot easier on my money flow if my ride got in the 40mpg range. That would be close to 900 miles I could go on the 22g tank I got. The prob is that like most of us out there we have trucks not cars. Even at my work we need somthing that can so more work then a car can. With the heavy loads comes big engines. Those engines come bad fuel economy. Hm but lets look back a few years. Anyone KNOW about the Z06 vet? Those cars were great. They had a 350 in it. Most of you Chevy guys know what I'm talking about. That V8 has been around as long as some of us have or longer. But in the GM and Chevy truck they got marginal to poor gas milage. But in the Z06 that was not the case. That car was rated at 4 seconds from 0-60 mph. Now the kiker. It was estimated to get close to 30 mpg (again estimated by whoever makes those estimates). So why do our trucks that we pull and need for work get suck bad gas milage. For me my truck gets around 10-11 for an average. So who or what is making the technology to get the milage but still have the power absent from our cars and trucks?


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

I'd be very interested in reading something that supports Bush's hands in oil, if it exists.

As to the Vet....... the roof is four feet off the ground and the undercarriage has five inches of clearance on the road. Not to mention it is extremely streamlined and made of fiberglass. It also comes from the factory with synthetic lubricants through out. On the other hand a truck is shaped like a brick outhouse going down the road.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Invector

I don't think it is a conspiracy theory by the oil companies that has caused poor gas mileage in newer vehicles. I agree that with E-85 power and mileage are poor especially when pulling a boat or camper. I tried it. I was not impressed. For the little "Buzz Bait" city vehicles that seldom leave town E-85 is pretty good.

I think it is more the cultural changes that affect the gas mileage. Case in point. I had a 69 Dodge Hemi Charger when I was a kid. it got about 3 or 4 miles per gallon because my foot was always welded to the floor boards. If I drove it decent I could get to Bismarck on less than a quarter tank of fuel. If I drove it like I normally did back then I would burn over a half tank :lol: that was a hoot!! lotta family members were pretty sure I wasn't going to make it to 20 :lol:

Today it isn't much different If I drive my truck 55 on the highway I get way better mileage than I do at 80.

Now add all of the EPA required junk that is put on cars and trucks now and add it all up and the end result is poor gas consumption. You have to admit we are a very impatient society now days and for many instant gratification is the name of the game.

Ethanol has its good points and bad points. In my mind the bad points outweigh the good.

Just my two cents.

Bob


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

> So who or what is making the technology to get the mileage but still have the power absent from our cars and trucks?


The germans, with high pressure fuel rail type small turbo diesels. The Sprinter van they now market here under the Dodge moniker is a full size vehicle capable of carrying several thousand pounds and towing 5000lbs. That would cover almost all the tradesmen in this country.

they get low to high twenties for mileage and have lots of power, drive one.

And my point was not directed at people that need trucks to make a living it was directed at all the commuters carrying nothing but their lunch and briefcase to work. Thats most people.



> As far as bush goes...hes got his hand in oil so why would he want to see gas prices drop, fuel efficent cars, and new types of fuels such as ethonal


?

Bush is traveling all over the country touting alternative energy sources and the need to get off the oil tit right now, but lets not turn this into a partisan political discussion.

The fact is all of us need to look in the mirror and ask ourselves if we are part of the problem or part of the solution.

I used to drive a F-350 crew cab dually I now drive a toyota tacoma. For my job it works quite well and is saving me more in fuel money that it costs me for the payments. My mileage has doubled and if we had small diesels in trucks like mine my mileage would have tripled.

If chevy or ford built a fuel efficient small diesel engine like the germans have in the sprinter van and put it in a midsize pickup I would buy one tomorrow. And so would a lot of other people, but no they brag about having the most horsepower in their class. Then the idiots wonder why they are losing market share, really blows my mind.


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

Bobm, I can't see the diesel thing,what kind of milage are you getting with your Tacoma? I've been driving gasoline pickups for years and can't see any reason for a diesel. I currently have 3, 4x4's all with the smallest gas engines. One has over 500k miles on it the other 2 are at 180k. I avg. 16 mpg all around driving. Now unless I was to pull a lot of heavy loads and drive a bunch of miles the extra cost for a diesel does not add up. Diesel engines cost more up front I can't see your logic for only upper 20's milage. I believe a gas will do the same.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

My tacoma gets 24.5 combined city and hwy driveing with a 2.4.lt inline 4 and an automatic trans. But its small light vehicle not a real truck like a ford or chevy full size truck. Its a good vehicle and I like it but...

Small turbo diesels can provide very good performance and similar or better mileage in large full size trucks like yours 24 average mpg is a reasonable figure with a small high pressure fuel rail type diesel.

In the five hundred thousand miles your truck has traveled, that translates
if you use an average of $2.00 per gallon your truck has burned 31,250 gallons at a cost of $62,500.00.

the same vehicle getting 24 mpg would burn 20833 gallon at a cost of
$41,600.00 a savings of about $20,000 there are other factors of course like maintenance but even if the differential was only 90% of what I came up with you still will save $18,000.00. And thats with 2.00 per gallon fuel.

I simplified that a little for ease of comparison, but for someone like you and I that keeps vehicles for a long time diesels are particularly cost effective.

Now consider that Honda markets their diesel accord in Europe and it gets 70 mpg, now you are talking a real savings for the average person thats driving and doesn't need a truck.

Something like 60-70 percent of the car sold in europe are diesels because the high compression ratios combined with very finely atomized fuel give great efficiency.

I am not advocating getting rid of big trucks, I'm just advocating not using them for basic transportation. And wondering why our american manufacturers cannot seem to see the future.

I hate to see all those people losing their jobs because we cannot ( really will not ) build fuel efficient vehicles. Ford and Chevy are closing plants in Atlanta right now.


----------



## Robert A. Langager (Feb 22, 2002)

Here is a summary of Toyota diesel's MPG. These are the current offerings in the UK.

http://www.greenconsumerguide.com/profi ... page6.html

The Corolla gets about 50.

The Rav 4 gets 46.

The Land Cruiser gets 25 in a 5 speed and 22 with the auto. That is a big piggy too. I would kill for a 5 speed diesel Cruiser! It would complement my 1964 FJ40 so nicely.


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

Bobm, Not trying to be a smart a$$, but I'm talking a full size pickup here. I haven't heard of many diesels running 24 except on highway. Most I know of are running in the 19 to 20 mpg. I'm not going to sit down and do the math but you must also figure 5k up front for diesel option,and diesel is running about a buck higher than gasoline. I know you love diesels and thats fine, I just feel gasoline engines can do almost as well. for less money. Lets look at american technology, look at the C6 Z06 Corvette the things unreal. 505 hp 28 mpg doesn't even classify as a gas gussler. I know thats a little extreme for you but its what I like. When I want to economize I take my C4 Vette for a cruise set the cruise at 85 and get 28 mpg. I love it Bob :beer:


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

No offense taken, I'm talking about a full size truck also and you are correct there are no AMERICAN trucks like that.

The Germans and the Japanese do get that kind of mileage because they are more rational about engine size. American Diesels have been outfitted with 6 to 7.3 liter diesels the foreign ones are about 2.8 liter. And don't let their smaller size fool you they make 240 lbs of torque in the 1600 to 2500 rpm range where most sensible people run their engines in daily driveing. T

(Thats more torque than a 350 chevy gas engine for comparison purposes.)

thats my complaint our manufacturers don't offer a competitve model built in America.

My point still stands the American consumer is illogical and doesn't demand fuel efficient vehicles. We get all starryeyed with horsepower figures that are sally meaningless because of the rpm that those numbers are rated at. Its just doesn't make sense.

I bet the corvette is a blast I've always wanted one. Its gets its great mileage from its light weight put that engine in a truck and we would be back to 16mpg. I guess I'll just have to keep getting my adrenaline rushes from motorcycles :lol:

Diesel is higher now although the spread down hear isnt anywhere near a buck, but it has been lower than gas at times also


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

Bobm, Damn you took the words out of my mouth. I agree, I don't need a 7 litre diesel engine. I drive 1/2 ton 4 wheel drives, to go to a diesel not only will I have the expense of the engine for 5k I will also be paying more for a 3/4 ton which I do not need. So unless I do a lot of pulling I can't justify the diesel. No if a smaller version was offered I maybe interested. Although we have other problems up here its called cold weather. Higher expense again needs to be plugged in or in a heated garage,number 1 or a blend fuel 5 months of the year. Its not as rosey as it looks.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

The German diesels start well in cold weather Germany is a cold country there is a different blend for cold climates.

Fed x and UPS have gone exclusivley to german deisel vans. I bet they have a pretty good ability to analize cost benefit ratios.

I have been thinking aobut getting one of the sportsmobiles based on the Sprinter van
Heres some reviews by actual owners

http://www.sportsmobile.com/2_sr_comments.html

Look around the web site there is no reason this diesel couldn't be adapted to a full size 1/2 ton pickup with similar efficencies.

I think they are cool, but you all know I'm weird :wink:


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

Only one problem I see Bob,the maximum speed is only 85. With a 75 mph speed limit out here and a 10 mph cheat factor leaves you nothing left. :lol: Looks to be a fine engine then it should its a Benz


----------



## Cinder (Sep 2, 2003)

Not a big deal, but I have a question about ethanol that I am curious about. The price of ethanol seems to follow the price of gasoline. If you make the assumption (and maybe it is wrong) that the price of ethanol is related to corn not gasoline there is a bigger profit on ethanol when the price of gasoline spikes upward.

What I am curious about is who makes the profit. Is it the gas station selling it, the ethanol plant that makes the ethanol, or the distributor that blends it and sells it to the gas stations. Do ethanol plants sell directly to gas stations or is there a middle man? If you were going to invest in ethanol would you do it in the ethanol plant or someone like ADM that does both?


----------



## indsport (Aug 29, 2003)

As you have seen on my other posts, my VW diesel gets over 49 mpg, city and highway combined. and I am a big supporter of diesels. Even with only a 90 hp engine, I have had it on a track and it will easily do 110 mph and still be 1500 rpm below red line. AS to winter starting, I can use number 2 with diesel treatment but generally use a blend. The "glow plug" preheat only takes 15 seconds to run even at 30 below and I have never had a problem starting in cold weather. Other than particulate and Nox emissions, diesels are much cleaner than gas engines particularly for CO2. Diesel here in our area is 0.10 more than gas. While in Europe I drove other diesel vehicles up to and including full size pickups that got at least the upper 20 mpg's and cargo vans that got mileage into the 50 mpg in town, carried thousands of pounds of cargo. Granted, some were only rated to 75 mph, but in my experience, did 75 mph without any problem with full loads, up and down hills, etc. because their torque was so high. Purchase costs of a diesel car in Europe are almost identical to gas
Finally, wait until 2007. new rules for diesel emissions go into effect in Europe. The emissions will be less than any requirement in the US including Kalifornia. Everyone but Ford and GM already have diesels that meet the standard. (Gee, I wonder why GM and Ford are having trouble with market share??). 
As far as I am concerned, US automakers missed the boat a long time ago on diesels, driven mostly by their unreasonable assumptions about American consumers and an uneducated American public who thinks bigger is better. Since it is unlikely that gas will get back to the 0.30 per gallon when I first learned to drive, it won't take long for GM and Ford to sail into the sunset and Toyota, Honda and other makers to take over.


----------



## Bert (Sep 11, 2003)

There is no doubt in my mind that better to phenomenal mileage vehicles can be produced. I have no doubt that it can be done affordably. The initial cost to switch everything would be astronomical and that is why we have stuck to making a few in the Middle East as wealthy as they are for selling us dirty, stinking oil.
Next time you are in a metro area or even on the interstate, count how many vehicles you see with one occupant and then realize that we are in a low populated part of the world.
It doesnt make any difference if you drive the Ford F-3000000. 
In the 40s it was common for a family to have one vehicle or none at all depending on where you live. People were less mobile.
I live 15 miles from town and have 2 kids and a wife all going different directions. That is 4 units driving a minimum of 30 miles a day every day.
I am part of the problem.


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

Bert, Just look at what those NoDakers burn up in a weekend at the lake. Conservation? :wink:


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

So was I, but I'm trying to change...

big vehicles are necessary for big jobs, not momma going to get groceries, we all need to use consumer demand to change the automakers


----------



## Bert (Sep 11, 2003)

I am trying to change too.
Point is that we are more affluent, mobile and fearless of credit. Anybody can have multiple vehicles and toys due to credit. My dad wanted a car? He saved and bought it with cash. Who does that anymore?
50 gas guzzlers dont do the damage of 500 economy rigs.
Gonna be tough to get society to get out of this mindset.


----------



## indsport (Aug 29, 2003)

Guess my wife and I must be old fashioned since both our vehicles were bought with cash. We also paid 25% down when we bought our home, pay off credit cards every month and have saved at least 20% of our net income every month going back over 35 years to part time jobs in high school.


----------



## NDTracer (Dec 15, 2005)

indsport your not alone entirely. I don't quite save as much but I am generally around the 20% (including 3% match by company 401). I also OWN both vehicles (04&97) along with my 04 camper. Now I don't own my house yet but in another 5 years or so I will. I have the cash where I could pay it off but with the interest rate don't. I think the reports we hear about are amplified due to some who are way over their head in debt.

As for conservation I guess I am part of the issue too. I had a minivan but sold that for an SUV that my wife drives. It was rated to be the same as my van for milage but falls about 2mpg short of the van. But it is big enough to pull the camper without any conconcerns on my part. I also only commute about 12 miles total per day (work to home including lunch) so I don't worry about my pickup burning about a gallon a day. Now if I were to move to say 30 miles out and drive it everyday. I would probably buy myself a VW Jetta TDI and get the upper 40's or 50's with the little diesel.

Now do you think they will move the Jeep Liberty's diesel into the Dakota or Grand Cherokee or will it just die and not be offered in the Liberty?


----------



## honkbuster3 (Jan 11, 2006)

I am more of a Diesal guy my self :thumb: I think this ethanol stuff would be good but is probably not practicle. I would think about it if they had it at every gas station in the country. It just won't work if there is only 20or30 stations around the Country :beer:


----------

