I kept noticing that my mileage was going up and down from gas station to station. I asked my stepdad who runs a BP ( Amoco ) here in North Carolina about this. In NC the stations can mix up to 10% ethanol with the gas and they do not have to post this to the customers.
I ran into someone else who let another person drive their car and they decided not to buy one due to the gas mileage. When he heard of this he took the car into MB to see why he had a mpg drop they said to try a Shell gas station and his mileage went back up. The percentage of ethanol varies from station to station and sometime the same brand of station may or may not have it.

 

The evidence so far on this story is that ethanol will reduce milage as it carries less energy per gallon.

I am visiting my brother-in-law here in IOWA, the heart and soul of corn country. Perhaps they are biased but his wife claims almost 2 MPG increase in her Mercury Marquis with ethanol on a recent 550 mile trip.

I have not had the same results in any of my cars. Perhaps it is different in different engines.

To validate your friends experience, I have tested Shell on seven separate 1,100 mile trips from St Louis to Hartford CT and found 10% to 14% improvements with Shell vrs BP or other fuels with Ethanol. Hardly scientific but reasonably believable.

There are several threads from March and May of this year discussing this. Check out "end the ethanol scam" in the politics section and search "ethanol."
In the Coupe section look at " how many miles per gallon?"
Kurts, Maxwell and others have some good stuff there.


roadster with a stick

 

Ha ha ha funny you mention IOWA thats where I moved from in 1979 and my father is from there.
The friend I ran into has a new SMART Fortwo and his father in law had the low miles. I am getting a SMART in Nov to sell for extra $$$.

I've seen the other threads. Here in NC we have E85 pumps just in the Eastern part of the state. The closest one got shut down until they can change their hoses.

 

Here's a news flash that point's out the unintended costs of ethanol.

Catfish farmers in Mississippi have shut down because at $280.00 per ton, the cost of feed, ie Corn, is too high. The $462 MM annual industry has essentially shut down taking about 10,000 American jobs with it.

Ethanol still gets almost $1.00 per gal of tax payer's money as a subsidy to support this nonsense.

Thank your congresssmen, Al Gore, Sen. Harry Reid and Speaker of the House, Nancy Palosi.

Corn farmer's however, are delighted.


roadster with a stick

 

It's mostly about votes...getting the farm votes. And, they can say they are doing something to reduce imported oil. I hate it when politicians think we're too dumb to see through them.

 

As are corn traders! Met a guy recently with a pimped out Z06, bought with corn futures money

 

Meanwhile, you, I and the average Joe are melting our credit cards at the pump.

107 days from today,
Throw the B*astards out! All of 'em.

roadster with a stick.
BTW, I should have included the current White house in my list. Sorry, my bad.

 

Holy partisan bias. Let's not forget to thank Bush for his support of corn ethanol. Environmentalists have never been a fan of this type of ethanol, especially Gore. They favored corn ethanol as a bridge technology to cellulosic ethanol made from switch grass.

Your point is correct, though, ethanol from corn is just a horrendous idea as a widespread energy source. Biofuels are nothing more than a distraction anyway. Electricity is the way to go. Wind, Solar, and Nuclear power are more realistic in terms of overall implementation feasibility.

 

How about this idea? Let's drill for oil on our own ground as a bridge to alternative technologies which, it is clearly apparant, are not as yet ready.

You will note that under my sig, I did scold Bush for this. An edit done moments later in an succeeding posting. Nothing partisan about it, I have laid blame on both parties. In many of my posts. To get re-elected they listened to the farm lobby which is not made up from farmers but Agri businesses like Monsanto, Con Agra, ADM ectera. They want to grow corn.

We made corn into fuel, raised the price of base food stuffs as much as 75% around the world (as reported by the UN World Food Bank) causing riots amoung the poor and starving in many countries.

Burning food in our cars is simply immoral. It does nothing to prevent climate change or help the environment. It didn't reduce our dependence on foreign oil, not a drop. And it costs Taxpayers a bundle. But it is now mandated in many states and despite evidence suggesting, no screaming, to at least take a second look, the program is expanding.
But most important, it is contributing to food shortages around the world.

And we wonder why they hate us.

BTW, if environmentalists weren't pro ethanol before, where did that Carbon cycle BS come from. They changed their tune when the predictions of a few sane anti ethanol folks proved to be correct.
roadster with a stick

 

Here is our next answer to the fuel crisis? Who owns the Ocean? If I own a houseboat does the water beneath it belong to me? lol I'm looking for a salt mine to buy, anybody have one?

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=Tf4gOS8aoFk

 

Interesting... Be great if it works.

The answer to your question, who owns the Ocean(?) seems the Russians want to show us.

Basicaly, I think it will come down to who has the biggest guns and who is willing to use them. If we try to negotiate epliotation of the oil reserves we found in the artic circle why would any nation conceede that the US should have any share of it since we won't drill there anyways.


roadster with a stick

 

Anybody got enough huevos to tell the Chinese to get out of the Gulf of Mexico? What's the proof of Ethanol btw? Anything like Everclear? Don't waste it driving....

 

I haven't quite figured out why the oil companies aren't drilling in the gulf with all the profits they are making. I can't believe its the government that's slowing that area down. Seems to me there is plenty of room for a few more oil rigs. Maybe they need to build them on the ocean floor. I think there was a movie about that. lol

 

The oil companies are not making what you think. You are actually making money off yourself. The majoraty of the oil stocks in the US are owned by you. Your 401k and 403bs are the largest holder of oil stock in the US.
My stepdad makes .01 cent per gallon sold and the oil company ( BP ) makes less than a $1 per gallon sold. Yes the oil companies show a profit but it also cost a ton to keep the oil flowing.

The reason they can't drill off the coast is a bill that was passed during Clintons run. Bush just reversed that but it will take years to build up new oil wells.

 

I believe that President Bush reversed the Executive order. Drilling won't start unless Congress acts in the same manner. They chose not to do that last week, tableing the issue untill they come back from vacation.

As for ethonal, the tide may be turning as some candidates have seen the collateral dmage of this awful program and are reversing positions. Sarah Steelman has looked and come to the conclusion that mandated Ethanol is a boondogle. Her opponent, Kenny Hulsolf is still in lock step with the Washington crowd.

I've supported Hulsolf for most of his political life. But he is from DC now and, in my view, doesn't represent Missourians anymore.

Hope this is happening elsewhere as more Americans realize that ETOH didn't help the poor little family farmer as much as it helped Monsanto and ADM.


roadser with a stick

 

I've been trying for months to understand the motive of our Congressional leaders who simply refuse to admit the simple logic of the US drilling for more of it's own oil. The Left continuously fights any exploration/expansion of our own energy sources telling us we can conserve our way out of the dependence on foreign oil. Besides, us gluttonous Americans "need to cut back and be responsible to the planet."

They then shut down debate and the lights and get in their limos for a ride to their private jets and home for a well deserved vacation. The thought of Majority Leader Harry Reid and Speaker Polosi getting into their limos makes we wonder how small a carbon footprint these two stewards of the environment have. I would imagine it to be only slightly larger than Al Gore's.

So I've been looking into this offshore drilling thing and have completely changed my stance. Instead of forcing a debate on the issue, perhaps it would be better if we let things alone. You see, the congressional ban on offshore drilling is over, out, caput as of October 1st of this year.
Nancy and Harry don't want you to know this. And apparantly neither does the other side. They would rather keep fighting the good fight while you and I melt our credit cards at the pump.

If we don't do anything, it just goes away. However if we debate a bill, it may end up including compromises such as a 50 mile ban. This would prevent drilling in such lucrative waters as the Gulf of Mexico where the Destin Dome and other deposits promise 1.2 billion barrels of lightsweet crude. American, light sweet crude.

The Left is calling for a large, comprehesive energy bill. Even some republicans are willing to compromise to get "something" through. If there is a list of scary words that should never be part of a congressional bill, comprehesive would be near the top.

Tell your congressmen and senators to knock off the nonsense. Forget the debate. Just let the offshore ban die and industry and the free marketplace will solve the issue. Oil is already dropping like a stone.

Not because Americans aren't driving. (World wide oil suppiles have outstripped demand since January of this year). Not because of Ethanol. (Ethanol contributed less than 3% to the overall fuel requirements of transprotation last year. Obama says we can do that by just filling our tires). Not because of anything Congress has done recently. (they have been to busy fighting, finding blame, and getting re-elected). Oil prices are sinking because of recognition of the producers and the speculators that the American public is on to their scam. And so, the oil bubble is breaking.

OPEC's only response will be to limit production to keep prices up. Again the logic of depending on foreign countries, who rightfully have their own interests to consider, for a neccesary comodity is suspect.

Don't send money to your representatives. Send him/her a note demanding they do their job. Send the money to energy exploration companies and alternative technology companies who are looking for real solutions. Buy their stock, buy their products.

Keep Washington out of it.


roadster with a stick

 

If I understand correctly, there isn't enough oil in our own reserves to supply our demand.

1.2 billion barrels sounds like a lot, but the US imports more than 3 billion barrels per year.

I believe this is the primary reason that the legislation isn't supporting exploiting our own oil reserves. Our reserves are there for a reason - they are our reserves. Once they are burned they are burned.

Think of a day when the middle east runs out of oil. Or stops supplying it. Or Russia takes over. Or China takes over. Or if something bizarre happens in foreign politics that isolates the US from any friendly source of oil. There has to be enough to pull us through war, diplomacy, whatever it takes. Our oil reserves are basically a savings account that never goes away, until we use it. It would be a really bad situation if we had nothing to fall back on.

 

[Sorry, double post.

 

Sonoros, You are the master of facts. I would, in almost any case, tip my hat to your grasp of the material. But this time I must politely disagree.

I'm, not sure what you would consider 'big" but the Bakkan field in N Dakota is considered one of the largest continous finds ever in North America and is only 2.9 Billion Barrels.
The 1.2 billion barrels is from one small known reserve we can't touch right now. It is part of the 1500 mile gulf coast that with a 50 mile limit would amount to 75,000 square miles of ocean where we know there lies good prospects for domesticaly produced oil. Congress, the "gang of ten" and the Democratic leadership may make this area off limits as a comprimise to extending the deep ocean drilling ban currently in place. My point, which I clearly did not elaborate well is, we should stop arguing this in Congress and let the existing law expire.

I agree with you that using up our own reserves is not good planning. But not having our own available ie; ON TAP, allows the OPEC nations to exploit us. We have no choice but to beg for their product and send our money overseas. And pay whatever they ask.

As a consumer we must compete with India and China who will pay any price to continue their massive industial growth. They also have no choice until they create their own oil supply system, something they are building' as we speak, right off our coasts.

Think of it this way, if OPEC had to compete with domestic producers, in order to get the US to buy any oil they would have to price it competitively. As it stands now, they just set the price. That is because despite the oil glut that currently exists, we have to buy it from them.

As to the "reserves' you mentioned. Under the conditions you suggested, ie; war, OPEC runs dry etc, having unproven reserves in the ground would be useless. We need to be exploiting them, proving them and then judiciaously using them as leverage to get the best pricing, or the best strategic positioning.

Because, as Putin just proved in Georgia, control the oil, control the politics. Europe is nervous to help the pro western nation of Georgia because one third of their oil comes from Russia. And much of the rest comes from her friends. While Norway could fill much of the gap, having only one vendor means what to the price of crude?

Truth is I don't know all that much about the oil business but I put my money where my mouth is. I said a while back that we need to explore and drill here in the US for oil. We need to drill off shore. we need to pursue alternatives in fuels and in energy production. We need to develope new transportation technologies. Big meaningless words unless someone is willing to really do something. So I am.

Many would happily just let the government do it. I say that is lazy and foolish talk. So I am doing my research, my due diligence and putting my energies to that end. I'm learning a lot about oil and NG and geology and companies that are willing to take the risks to try and solve the problem through entreprenuership and practice, not theory and committees.

The money I would have donated to political candidates is being redirected to small cap companies that want to explore and exploit energy resources and alternatives here in America. I'm looking for that unsung little hero that investment banks and government grants wont fund because he's to busy trying ideas to fill out the paperwork or create a business plan. When the idea becomes real hardware, I want to be there when it lights up the room.

I don't have much cash to work with but then I started my company on a $600.00 limit credit card. I would guess there are a lot of people who's small investments if combined, could make a difference. But only if we get government , eco terrorist and the Gorebamites out of the equation.

Get the government out of it. The little guys in the garages will make the electric car either go or go faster.


roadster with a stick

 

As the price of oil goes up so does the cost to produce goods outside the U.S. I think we are seeing some adjustment simply because the Arab world is beginning to realize they are de stabilizing all the third world countries by forcing production of goods back to the U.S. In the long this could be dangerous to the health of the Araab world. Could the pendelum be swinging back the other way or are we just ending a peak demand cycle? Are we just waiting for the holidays to see another round of price increases as the demand increases?