Government Emphasis On E85 Backfires And Results In Increased Fuel Consumption

Uhm somethings wrong here.

"Virtually every agency has succeeded in acquiring more AFVs, but there have been only modest reductions in petroleum use and modest increases in alternative fuel use, due to the lack of available alternative fuels."

"In 2009, Obama’s first year in office, the U.S. government increased gasoline use in vehicles 3 percent from the previous year even as he boosted hybrid purchases to about 10 percent of the federal fleet from 1 percent in 2008"

Hmmmm... why the negative spin on E85? The article's main point seemed to be that there isn't enough of it to go around.

There's nothing positive to spin....E85 is terrible. The subsidies are insane, it is less efficient than gasoline and it drives up the price of food.

This times a million. I think Diesel fuel should receive tax breaks to make everything cheaper and put the gas on gasoline. Nearly everything that transports uses diesel.

The real story here is that while there is sufficient demand for E85 from government-owned AFV's, the need is going unmet by the E85 industry. Why?

The entire point of the AFV legislation is to create demand for E85 which should drive the increase of E85 production which in turn will drive sales of private E85 vehicles and so on. If this cycle isn't happening as anticipated, the real story is why not?

Why is the E85 so popular in Washington (and now where else)? Could it be the first presidential cacuses are in Iowa,hmmmmmmm. I'll tell you this, if New Hampshire could figure out how to burn maple syrup in your car washington would be all over it.

Corn is food not fuel.

Ethanol has NEVER increased the cost of food. People are so out of touch with what really happens on a farm they just believe whatever they are told. Actually do your homework...the price of petrol is what increased the price of food. Do you realize that corn is turned into ethanol by the removal of oils, and what is leftover is fed to cattle? That corn was going to be feed to cattle anyway, they just removed a little bit of the nutrients for fuel and fed the rest. Maybe you should travel to Iowa and REALLY understand what is happening. No one has ever gone hungry because corn was used to make ethanol. Those subsidies sure don't go to the farmers. We subsidies the oil companies, so what is so different about giving some money to ethanol. Ethanol may not be the best answer, but no one else has any other viable alternatives right now. So we use what we have now, and when we develop something better we will switch to that. Travel away from the coasts towards the middle of the country, and virtually everyone uses an ethanol blend.

you heard it here first. Go to Iowa for your unbiased opinion of ethanol production.

I misspoke....I meant sugar is removed, not oil. I've been working 100 hours a week...planing corn, so I was a little out of it when I typed this last night.

I am a farmer....I understand it 100x more than you. What you fail to understand is all of the byproducts of ethanol are sold and are extremely valuable. There is so much extra corn around that if you think ethanol increases the price of food, then what you don't understand is the FOOD MANUFACTURERS are increasing the cost and saying ethanol is the cause. That couldn't be further from the truth. You are just believing what you are told, but those of us that make the product know what is happening.

As I stated before, ethanol is not the best answer, but it's the ONLY one we got. So until something better comes along, we are going to use it. No one has come up with another viable alternative. If you think it takes too much energy to make ethanol, well it's the same thing as all the energy used to make a battery for a hybrid car. You consumers don't really understand ethanol at all.

The price of corn has been driven up by the creation of another market for it (ethanol production). Corn is a basic foodstuff, thus an increase in the price of corn directly impacts the price of a wide variety of food products at the grocery store. True, the cost of transportation fuel has also affected the price of food (and everything else), but that does not diminish the impact of the price of corn.

Do you realize that your box of corn flakes has about 25 cents worth of corn in it, or a loaf of bread has about 15 cents worth of wheat. Very little grain is used in products like these. So if corn prices doubled you should a price increase of 25 cents. How much has cereal gone up? IT'S NOT BECAUSE ETHANOL HAS MADE CORN SO EXPENSIVE....no, it's because petrol has increased so much. How has ethanol made food cost more? You are being lied to.

All the farmers out there that burn E85 in the trucks same over $1 a gallon....that's a big savings.

You people in the big cities are so removed from agriculture you have no clue any longer....which is probably not entirely your fault.

You probably have no idea that a new tractor costs $400,000 dollars. And you thought CARS were expensive.

Just because there is not a lot of "corn" in my corn flakes, does not mean the price increase does not affect me. Corn is largely used as a feed for livestock and when the cost of corn increases because now there is another demand for it in use of AF the cost is driven up for livestock farmers to feed their animals, which means they charge the slaughter houses more, which means they charge the storage and suppliers more, and down the line to the stores and restaurants who increase the price of a NY Strip to Filet Mignon territory.

I personally see NO benefit to an AFV and almsot laugh at myself for seeing cars on the road around New England with that little Flex Fuel badge proudly displayed. I think the closest station that sells it is in South Jersey somewhere, not exaclt a worthwhile trip.

I'd rather see diesel subsidies given not only to diesel fuel but to manufacturers to bring their diesel cars by the shipload and sell in the US.

But what do I know, I also get a smile from people paying extra money for a PZEV vehicle around here when we are nowhere near California and are not required to pay a premium for such a car.