Ethanol eventually to be replaced by isobutanol?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Oct 4, 2010
Messages
5,504
Location
Midwest
First and foremost, this is not a ethanol bashing, food vs fuel, or political thread.

Since most ethanol plants are not in the black this year and most are in the red, a lot of the plants will be idling back production or shutting down towards the end of this year. There has been some talk, though, to take those plants and stop making ethanol. Through a few modifications to the process these plants can make isobutanol. Isobutanol is supposedly to have more BTU and more energy than ethanol as they did not notice any difference in a iso/gas blend when compared a 100% gasoline. 76,000 BTU/gal (ethanol) vs 96000 BTU/gal for isobutanol.

I'm no expert on this but I found this interesting and wanted to share. Hopefully there are some people who know more about isobutanol.

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/pdfs/Biomass_2009_Adv_Biofuels_II_Glassner.pdf

http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20...s-Small-Engines

http://www.hydrocarbonprocessing.com/Art...ll-engines.html

Hopefully in the future we can use waste biomass to make all these fuels and get away from corn.
 
Last edited:
There are plenty of things that can be used for ethanol or iso other than corn. Byproducts or other waste.

Because the US does not export as much corn as we use to, other countries have grown corn to make up for the shortfall, and in some cases cut down rainforest to make room for fields.

Dumb and dumber.
 
The way the drought is looking in much of the US, we are going to see record corn prices. I've heard $10/bushel.

This will either drive the price of Ethanol up big time or bankrupt the Ethanol industry. This is going to get interesting.

This situation might expedite the switch to isobutanol.
 
Last edited:
I don't spend much time in this forum, but I was going to ask about butanol. I've been wondering if there's some big disadvantage to it as a fuel that would make ethanol more attractive. Butanol, at least on the surface, seems a lot better.
 
"Biomass" is growing in demand.

We have yard waste bins that get all yard clippings, etc - plus ALL food scraps, plus all shredded paper, napkins, pizza boxes, paper food bags, etc. Our largest can each week. People around the hood usually have their can full as well.

So it goes to company to make..........tada.....compost. Being the business guy - I find out, we pay the bill to have this picked up, pay the waste guy, etc...then they sell/give (part unclear still) to Cedar Grove, who make and bag and sell the compost to us consumers.....

So the question is: Would isobutanol yield more cash?
 
The news media here in IL is saying the lack of corn crop will effect gas prices. They aren't known for being accurate though.

I've also recently seen a Shell commercial that said they were doing something with ethanol made from sugarcane... investing in it? Not totally sure. I was at the gym and I got "distracted" from the tv...
smile.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Stelth
I don't spend much time in this forum, but I was going to ask about butanol. I've been wondering if there's some big disadvantage to it as a fuel that would make ethanol more attractive. Butanol, at least on the surface, seems a lot better.


Ethanol is whole lot cheaper than butanol. My work does not get price reports on alcohol, so I do not know the magnitude of the difference.

And, I think the Gevo isobutanol is a game-changer for renewable chemicals. Does the ethanol in fuel have to come from renewables?
 
You cannot grow sugar cane in the corn belt, and it needs a lot of water that we don't have here.

Our city turn the biomass into compost that us resident can get for free. I think they are trying to convert to making methane for municipal instead of compost, that would IMO be a better use of these waste.
 
I find it hard to understand why ethanol plants are going in the red. Ethanol is not "free market" and does not compete with gasoline. This is because many states mandate its use. We have to blend it with our gasoline. The market has been created. If the price of corn goes up, all ethanol producers just pass on the costs to the consumers who are forced to buy it with every gasoline purchase.

Who (or what) is putting etanol producers in the red? It's not the price of corn.
 
Originally Posted By: Kestas
I find it hard to understand why ethanol plants are going in the red. Ethanol is not "free market" and does not compete with gasoline. This is because many states mandate its use. We have to blend it with our gasoline. The market has been created. If the price of corn goes up, all ethanol producers just pass on the costs to the consumers who are forced to buy it with every gasoline purchase.

Who (or what) is putting etanol producers in the red? It's not the price of corn.

You are correct. Why the economic principle of "pass through" is not understood more widely is beyond me. So is thinking "Federal benefits" are free.
 
Originally Posted By: Kestas
I find it hard to understand why ethanol plants are going in the red. Ethanol is not "free market" and does not compete with gasoline. This is because many states mandate its use. We have to blend it with our gasoline. The market has been created. If the price of corn goes up, all ethanol producers just pass on the costs to the consumers who are forced to buy it with every gasoline purchase.

Who (or what) is putting etanol producers in the red? It's not the price of corn.


Actually it is the main reason right now, especially with the drought at $7 corn. A gallon of ethanol is usually around ~ 2.50/gal. Its a commodity just like oil. Losing the subsidy did hurt the plants bottom line but they were still in the black until high corn prices hit. Higher input prices with the same output price equals bottom lines in the red. Even though it is mandated, if the plants are going to lose money they wont be running. Unless the price of etoh sky rockets due to the smaller supply and put the plants back into the black. This scenario is more than likely what will happen after some are shutdown for a while and the available supply dwindles. Higher corn = higher ethanol costs = higher fuel costs, eventually.
 
Last edited:
It still doesn't make sense. This flies against what I know about supply and demand. What is stopping the ethanol producers from passing on the costs of corn? Who is undercutting the ethanol suppliers so they can't collectively raise the price of ethanol to cover their costs?

For example, I don't see oil producers going in the red when the price of crude goes up! They simply pass along the cost to the consumers. Same with sugar, coffee, cocoa, and any other commodity.

On another point, I saw it reported that we would have to use 40% of our expected 2012 US corn crop to meet the demands of E10. This is too high a percentage with regard to our food usage. They are asking states to temporarily back off from their requirements of 10% ethanol in gasoline until the crisis from this dismal crop year subsides.
 
Another "subsidy" if you will that ethanol had was in the phase of chewing down the grain reserves...
 
Originally Posted By: Kestas
It still doesn't make sense. This flies against what I know about supply and demand. What is stopping the ethanol producers from passing on the costs of corn? Who is undercutting the ethanol suppliers so they can't collectively raise the price of ethanol to cover their costs?

For example, I don't see oil producers going in the red when the price of crude goes up! They simply pass along the cost to the consumers. Same with sugar, coffee, cocoa, and any other commodity.

On another point, I saw it reported that we would have to use 40% of our expected 2012 US corn crop to meet the demands of E10. This is too high a percentage with regard to our food usage. They are asking states to temporarily back off from their requirements of 10% ethanol in gasoline until the crisis from this dismal crop year subsides.

I stated in the first line in my OP that this was not an ethanol bash or food vs fuel debate. I wanted to know if anyone knew anything about isobutanol and the benefits as an alternative to ethanol. It seems you want to start that debate and I'm not going to be part of it as I've seen it hashed out many times.
 
Not debating. I'm just trying to make sense of a sentence in your original post. I was hoping somebody could explain it. I do realize it was a tad off topic.

Otherwise, I read through the links. They have nothing but positive things to say about isobutanol. So why isn't industry en masse switching away from ethanol to isubutanol? Nobody has addressed the downsides.

Is it more expensive to produce?
Is the octane lower, requiring a higher octane gasoline before blending?
Is the capital to manufacture isobutanol expensive?
Is the feedstock expensive or limited in supply?
Is it a tricky brew to distill?
Health issues?

The articles leave us guessing. I see this too often, where an article touts all the benefits of a technology, without giving us a well-rounded view of all the pros and cons of this technology. It's likely because the magazine is geared toward the petrochemical industry.
 
Why do we need oxygenators in today's modern fuel injected cars? Originally it was for making winter starts and warm up cleaner in cars with carburators. It hurts mpg and I believe it increases NOX emissions. I'll leave my comments at that.

Whimsey
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top