Choose Your Location
|
![]() |
BALTIMORE (Map, News) - Ethanol is the fuel of the future — or so we are being led to believe. In the wake of the top three U.S. automakers’ pledge to build 50 percent of their products as “flex-fuel” vehicles, some industry experts say consumers are being misled about its benefits.
“It’s a total scam,” said Dan Becker, director of the Sierra Club’s global warming program. “The automakers are trying to shield themselves from having to make more efficient vehicles. They’re avoiding the path to cutting oil dependence, curbing global warming, saving consumers money and ultimately saving Detroit from competitors like Toyota.”
The reality is that ethanol, an outgrowth of the Alternative Motor Fuels Act, has done more to spawn a billion-dollar industry than to lessen the total cost consumers will pay at the pump, said David Friedman, research director for the vehicles program for the Union of Concerned Scientists.
Under the act, automakers receive credit for building vehicles that run on alternative fuel, but the vehicles are not fuel-efficient. Ethanol is a win because it costs manufacturers only $50 per vehicle to make it a flex-fuel vehicle.
However, the end product is a gas-guzzling, fuel-inefficient vehicle that will actually create more greenhouse gases than those that run on gasoline, Friedman said.
“There is no doubt that when you operate on ethanol fuel, economy goes down 20 to 25 percent, but it still can cut oil use and reduce global warming if they run on 100 percent ethanol, not a blend,” Friedman said.
“Some people say ethanol is the silver bullet, others that it’s a waste of time. The reality is in the middle — we don’t have enough land to grow enough corn to replace all our gasoline consumption.”
According to Friedman, the hole in the oil drum is the loophole in the Alternative Motor Fuels Act that enables automakers to receive a credit for making vehicles that is not tied to fuel efficiency and the actual use of ethanol. “They are building these vehicles that most people don’t even know can run on ethanol, plus there are only 1,000 stations that sell it, one in Maryland,” he said.
rchappelle@baltimoreexaminer.com



Comments from Examiner Readers
4:50 AM MST on Fri., Mar. 14, 2008 re: "Ethanol's promise may be a ‘scam’"
Report as inappropriate
7:23 PM MST on Thu., Jun. 7, 2007
re: "Ethanol's promise may be a ‘scam’"
Report as inappropriate
6:32 PM MST on Wed., May. 30, 2007
re: "Ethanol's promise may be a ‘scam’"
Report as inappropriate
1:15 PM MST on Wed., May. 30, 2007
re: "Ethanol's promise may be a ‘scam’"
Report as inappropriate
12:57 PM MST on Wed., May. 30, 2007
re: "Ethanol's promise may be a ‘scam’"
Report as inappropriate
11:21 AM MST on Wed., May. 30, 2007
re: "Ethanol's promise may be a ‘scam’"
Report as inappropriate
9:38 AM MST on Wed., May. 30, 2007
re: "Ethanol's promise may be a ‘scam’"
Report as inappropriate
8:27 AM MST on Wed., May. 30, 2007
re: "Ethanol's promise may be a ‘scam’"
Report as inappropriate
6:35 AM MST on Wed., May. 30, 2007
re: "Ethanol's promise may be a ‘scam’"
Report as inappropriate
Examiner Reader said:
I agree. Price goes up when gas prices do. I bought a flex fuel vehicle but I will not buy another
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
I purchased my 2005 Explorer Sport Trac partially due to its flex-fuel ability. Unfortunately its not that much cheaper than regular unleaded gasoline. I get 17mpg with gas, and only 10 with %100 ethenol. I feel I am not saving anything.....money, or the environment.
78 agree | 80 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Alternative Energy Researcher Aureon Kwolek said:
The above article is bias & based on old information & defective studies - not cutting edge knowledge. The Saab 9-5 BioPower is optimized for ethanol. A high compression turbo-charged engine popular in Europe, coming to US, it gets the same mileage & more power than a gasoline version. E-85 is 25-50 cents a gal. cheaper than gasoline & expected to drop. In the next few years, the efficiency of corn ethanol will improve to over 2 to 1. Cellulose ethanol will be over 4 to 1 as will bio-diesel. Biomass refineries are self-powered. They use no fossil fuels. 2 billion tons of biomass WASTE is available @ 85 gal / ton. Ethanol plants are getting off of fossil fuels & converting to renewable forms of energy. 700 gallon per acre Sorghum will soon be as big in TX as corn is in the Corn Belt. Miscanthus grass will yield over 2,000 gal. per acre. 2 types of Algae will yield 10,000 gal. of bio-diesel or ethanol per acre. The people who say it can't be done should not interupt the people doing it.
93 agree | 96 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
An actual READER, not a repeater said:
The problem here is that "greenhouse gasses" DO NOT cause global warming! Using the very data Al Gore presented in his cartoon, the "link" between CO2 and global warming is that increased CO2 levels, rather than causing warming trends, lag behind them by several hundred years.(that's a FACT, check it) The general warming trend we are currently in, the one that is responsible for the receding glaciers, is over 12000 years old. The man-made-global-warming scam is no more real then the 1970s-80s global freezing scam was. Interestingly enough, Mars is following the same temperature trend as Earth. So either there are SUVs on Mars, or maybe that BIG BALL OF FIRE up in the sky is more responsible for warming than is a gas that makes up 0.05% of our atmosphere. Either that, or Chicken Little was right, the sky really is falling, and right after those who didn't drop dead from global freezing finally finish dropping dead from Y2K, the rest can all get busy dropping dead from global Warming.
116 agree | 82 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Simple supply and demand. Feed prices for beef and poulrty increase. Displaced crop prices increase. Aquifers are depleted for the water intensive corn crops. Charitable giving of corn surpluses to famine ravaged areas decrease. What is the net benefit of this massive reallocation of agricultural focus? Ethanols 18% reduction in CO2 emissions is negated by its 18% reduction in fuel mileage. What is the relatively cheap power source preferred by refineries in the production of ethanol? Coal. Is any of this striking ANYONE as being counterproductive?
107 agree | 88 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
China has banned the building of ethanol plants because they don't want car owners (rich people) outbidding the large number of poor people who would be seriously hurt by higher basic food prices. Slightly higher food prices in this country aren't as serious in America. The Chinese will be a customer for our food so higher corn prices will help not only our farmers but also our balance of trade.
93 agree | 88 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
I agree. Ethanol produced from corn does not help fuel efficiency or global warming. It takes a lot of energy to distill the alcohol, but that comes from coal or natural gas so it does reduce our dependence on imported oil. It also has the benefit of raising corn prices which helps farmers here and in poor countries. The US does not compete against poor farmers by dumping our excess corn in their markets.
92 agree | 91 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Electric hybrids are the answer when you look at cost savings, vehicle performance, fuel efficiency, and environmental benefits. Inflated corn and other crop prices are causing my grocery bill to go up by $50 per month. It goes without saying that I'm not too pleased with that.
105 agree | 93 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Bio Diesel is the superior non fossil fuel.
97 agree | 81 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree