Comments on: Pawlenty’s ethanol ‘success story’ a fairy tale

By: tomelko

tomelko — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:58:41 +0000

Thanks Bob. Some of your points relate to where I write that the “real successes of corn-based ethanol lie in creating a supply and distribution chain.”

While a 10% ethanol mandate may reduce gasoline consumption by 8.5% or so, you ignore the financial and environmental costs brought on by that mandate.

By: justpbob

justpbob — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 14:22:24 +0000

Tom, a couple of clarification for your article. First, there are at least 332 E85 retail outlets in Minnesota, not 303. For a variety of factors, the retail cost of E85 is tied to the cost of gasoline. When the price of gasoline goes up, so does E85. The important thing to note, as you point out, if the price difference betwwen the two fuels.

Prices vary per outlet, but at least one Twin Cities chain is selling E85 for 80 cents a gallon less than E10. I recently saw one station selling E85 for $1 less per gallon. No doubt we could find other stations where the cost break is less, as well.

I find the graphic in your article and the term "failures of corn-based ethanol" a bit at odds with each other, at least from an economic viewpoint.

Not only is Minnesota making enough ethanol to reduce its gasoline consumption (by mandating E10), it has become a fuel exporter. Also, the final "consumption" figure is a projection and is not based on actual fuel consumption, as the other figures seem to be. As I'm sure you know, there are many conditions that must first be met before Minnesota's E20 requirement can take effect.

Re: E85 sales, they have increased every year, making Minnesota the leader in E85 sales in the United States. Early trends sugegst this year will be no different.

By: tomelko

tomelko — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Thanks Bob. Some of your points relate to where I write that the “real successes of corn-based ethanol lie in creating a supply and distribution chain.”

While a 10% ethanol mandate may reduce gasoline consumption by 8.5% or so, you ignore the financial and environmental costs brought on by that mandate.

By: justpbob

justpbob — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Prices vary per outlet, but at least one Twin Cities chain is selling E85 for 80 cents a gallon less than E10. I recently saw one station selling E85 for $1 less per gallon. No doubt we could find other stations where the cost break is less, as well.

I find the graphic in your article and the term “failures of corn-based ethanol” a bit at odds with each other, at least from an economic viewpoint.

Not only is Minnesota making enough ethanol to reduce its gasoline consumption (by mandating E10), it has become a fuel exporter. Also, the final “consumption” figure is a projection and is not based on actual fuel consumption, as the other figures seem to be. As I’m sure you know, there are many conditions that must first be met before Minnesota’s E20 requirement can take effect.

Re: E85 sales, they have increased every year, making Minnesota the leader in E85 sales in the United States. Early trends sugegst this year will be no different.