Pacific Ethanol, Inc. (PEIX)
Loading...
Symbols:
PEIX Forum Topics
- All Comments on PEIX
- General Discussion on PEIX
- Study Shows Ethanol Energy Efficiency Is Growing [view article]
- Pacific Ethanol: Market Growth and Increase in Production to the Rescue [view article]
- Why I'm Selling Pacific Ethanol [view article]
- Ethanol Stocks: The Good News and the Bad [view article]
- Ethanol: Our Answer to Reducing U.S. Dependence on Foreign Oil [view article]
- Ethanol Stock as Cheap as an Ear of Corn? [view article]
- Alternative Energy Investors See High Oil Prices as Temporary [view article]
- Best and Worst Performing Stocks Seven Months Into 2008 [view article]
- Growth in Corn Harvest Means Good News for Ethanol Producers [view article]
- Cramer: "Ethanol Is a Fuel That Doesn't Work" [view article]
- US Markets Rise as Alt. Energy Indices & Commodities Fall (Wk Ending 8/8) [view article]
- Wall Street Breakfast: Must-Know News [view article]
loading ...Recent PEIX Articles
- Study Shows Ethanol Energy Efficiency Is Growing
- Why I'm Selling Pacific Ethanol
- Ethanol Stocks: The Good News and the Bad
- Pacific Ethanol: Market Growth and Increase in Production to the Rescue
- Ethanol: Our Answer to Reducing U.S. Dependence on Foreign Oil
- Growth in Corn Harvest Means Good News for Ethanol Producers
- US Markets Rise as Alt. Energy Indices & Commodities Fall (Wk Ending 8/8)
- Wall Street Breakfast: Must-Know News
- EPA Rejects Congress's Ethanol Waiver
- Ethanol Stock as Cheap as an Ear of Corn?
- Full List of Articles »
Trading Center
Hedge Fund Jobs
Job Seekers: Search jobs by category, get job alerts by email or live feed, apply online See full list of jobs »
Employers: See all recruitment options, get applications online or by email Post a job »
Ethanol: Our Answer to Reducing U.S. Dependence on Foreign Oil [view article]
Dear RickH: Yes, that's why I put in brackets "(or, ultimately, how far it can move a vehicle with a given volume)". I realize that engines vary in the fuel-economy hit they take with different ethanol blends. But there is also a lot talking up of the kind of fuel economy vehicles COULD achieve if their engines were optimized for ethanol. Meanwhile, in the real world, E85 reduces fuel economy in FFVs by 25% ... at least according to the EPA. ReplyEthanol: Our Answer to Reducing U.S. Dependence on Foreign Oil [view article]
Dear Sub,Do you know the difference between potential energy and realized energy? Reply
Ethanol: Our Answer to Reducing U.S. Dependence on Foreign Oil [view article]
For what it's worth here's an alternative take on Tim Plaehn's article:www.thetruthaboutcars..../
"E85 Boondoggle of the Day: Good To The Last Cob
By Edward Niedermeyer
August 27, 2008
It's always fun to see analysts justify their way to a predetermined conclusion, especially when the facts do not come close supporting it. At the usually on-point SeekingAlpha blog, Tim Plaehn tries his hand at another round of corn juice justification, this time with a new twist: cobs, baby. Claiming that high food prices create incentives for "efficiency and innovation" rather than say, cutting the cord, Plaehn lays out the roadmap for the ethanol industry's next big thing.
Since everyone and their senile grandparents know that cellulosic, not feedstock-based, ethanol is the future, Plaehn appropriates what little future the biomass-based fuel has into the ethanol farm subsidy racket. He points to a company (POET) that uses cellulosic ethanol extraction to squeeze some extra juice from corn cobs, rather than non-feedstock biomass crops, arguing that the expensive technology will extract 27 percent more ethanol per acre of corn.
If we're talking about investing in cellulosic extraction, it makes far more sense to base it off of such low-impact, high-efficiency crops as switchgrass. Except that this far more logical approach would mean the end of government ethanol subsidies to corn producers. So what other miracles does Plaehn forecast to allow ethanol to reduce dependence on foreign oil? More expensive technology of course, only this time we're talking blending pumps which could dial in the exact amount of ethanol consumers want in their gas. Choosing between E20, E30, E40, etc sounds great, but at what cost an all-new infrastructure? That's precisely beside the point for the ethanol lobby, who know that infrastructure-buildin... is just another great way to get the government to subsidize their marginally-viable product.
But this is exactly what you should expect from a heavily criticized, multi-billion-dollar pork project that claims to be chasing "efficiency and innovation" without ever truly exposing itself to market influences."
(And, no, my name is not Edward Niedermeyer.) Reply
Ethanol: Our Answer to Reducing U.S. Dependence on Foreign Oil [view article]
Dear RickH,My comment on methanol was not a recommendation to use it. I was merely referring to it to illustrate my point that the energy content of a fuel (or, ultimately, how far it can move a vehicle with a given volume) matters much more than simple volume, so when people speak of the contribution than any alternate fuel is making to total transport fuel demand they should adjust for its lower energy content. Reply
Ethanol: Our Answer to Reducing U.S. Dependence on Foreign Oil [view article]
Dear Sub-Eye,Methanol is a known carcinigen and poisons the ground water. You cannot substitute it for Ethanol without getting your butt kicked in court. MTBE would have made the Asbestos judgments look small if the oil companies had continued using it. Reply
Ethanol: Our Answer to Reducing U.S. Dependence on Foreign Oil [view article]
You can't be concerned about the "Dead Zone" and worry about the food supply! Pick one. ReplyEthanol: Our Answer to Reducing U.S. Dependence on Foreign Oil [view article]
Mr. Plaehn, you are changing the subject. But, since you asked, I do pay attention to gas mileage. Brazilian's know the difference in fuel economy between pure ethanol and (blended) gasoline, and make their fuel-purchasing decisions accordingly. If you are suggesting that "people mostly just care how much it costs to fill up", and don't notice that they are filling up more often, then you must have a very cynical view of the intelligence of American drivers.I repeat: what matters is energy, not volume. If cars could be modified to run on a mixture of gasoline mixed with 2% water (with a corresponding loss in gas mileage per gallon), would you trumpet water as contributing to reducing dependence on oil?
Cars can also run on blends of gasoline and methanol. But methanol has only half the BTUs of gasoline, instead of ethanol's two-thirds. So if an equal volume of methanol as ethanol were being used, would you consider their contributions the same? Reply
Editor
Ethanol Stock as Cheap as an Ear of Corn? [view article]
ADM's not a one-trick pony like PEIX. In addition to corn processing, the company engages in agricultural services, including grain handling and storage, and oilseed processing. Ag services brought in less profit because of merchandising slowdowns and oilseed processing margins have narrowed. The poor performerance in these sectors negated any improvement in corn processing margins.Reply
Ethanol Stock as Cheap as an Ear of Corn? [view article]
With the price of corn going down and ethanol in demand (right?!), why isn't ADM as one of the large ethanol producer doing well? The stock has dropped like a rock over the past 3 months... ReplyEthanol: Our Answer to Reducing U.S. Dependence on Foreign Oil [view article]
Mr. Eye. When you put gas in your car do you figure the energy equivalent basis or just gallons and price? People mostly just care how much it costs to fill up and if they are filling with U.S. produced fuel at a lower price they feel pretty good about it. ReplyEthanol: Our Answer to Reducing U.S. Dependence on Foreign Oil [view article]
So, Tim, you mean 10% on a volumetric basis. If so, you should say so when you refer to the number. Ten percent on a volumetric basis is not as impressive as on an energy-equivalent basis. What matters is how much transport is provided, not how full the tanks are filled. ReplyEthanol: Our Answer to Reducing U.S. Dependence on Foreign Oil [view article]
My bad, although it took 30 comments before someone pointed it out. Annual gas consumption should be 140 Billion gallons. I have also read 180 billion gallons, but I took the number from the last source I was using.For all of you sugar fans, did you read U.S. Sugar gave all of their Florida sugar land back to the U.S. government to stop the destruction of the Everglades.
Using E-blends greater than 10% voids a new car warranty. After the warranty period it does not make a difference. How many diesel pickup owners run biodiesel in their trucks (against warranty)? Google it sometime.
Mr Eye: At current total production of 9 billion gallons per year every gallon is being bought immediately and ethanol imports from Brazil are growing rapidly and will exceed 700 million gallons for 2008. And 10% is 10%. No equivalent anything. 10 gallons of ethanol + 90 gallons of gasoline. Coming to every gas station near you! Reply
Ethanol: Our Answer to Reducing U.S. Dependence on Foreign Oil [view article]
Don't live, cause you're going to die! ReplyEthanol: Our Answer to Reducing U.S. Dependence on Foreign Oil [view article]
Corn Ethanol=higher food prices, NO2, destruction of water tables(Nitrogen Fertilizers) and burning to death.Ethanol fires require specialty chemicals not found at 99% of Fire Departments. Don't remember where I read this.
Reply
Ethanol: Our Answer to Reducing U.S. Dependence on Foreign Oil [view article]
GM 's sudden stewardship of the environment is simply a way to continue to make gas guzzlers thanks to E85 an extremely inefficient fuel. The CAFE standards call for all car companies to achieve an average MPG for all vehicles. I believe the most recent number is 27 MPG. Well if you make the biggest money off of 10 miles per gallon SUV's you would hate to say good bye to them wouldn't you?The CAFE standards has a loophole, that being that an E85 vehicle operating on E85 miles per gallon are ONLY figured against the actual amount of gasoline in the blend (15%) if you divide 100% fuel by 15% gasoline you get the multiplier to the mpg (666) therefore a gas guzzling 10 MPG SUV is given credit for 66.6 MPG. If you sell one SUV like this you can have 5 vehicles only achieving 20 MPG and this gas guzzling SUV and you average more than 27 MPG overall while not one of their vehicles really met the standard.
GM is not the only one taking advantage of this free ride Ford and Chrysler are too. The big three are heading down the toilet and this is just their hands clinging to the rim. Reply