Are you saying that if you burned the 50 lb of corn you could heat a home for two months???? Do you realize just how impossibly XXXXXXXX this statement sounds???? One pound of corn contains less than 8,500 BTUs of energy. 50 pounds = 450,000 BTUs. Home heating oil is 138,000 BTUs. So a bag of corn = 3.26 gallons and I'm guessing that this wouldn't last more than a few days.
While water will absorb heat when vaporizing it is NOT near what does the job when alcohol evaporates. Water needs 2.7 times the energy to evaporate than alcohol. If you have 27% water and 73% ethanol they would both absorb an equal amount of heat in order to evaporate. I doubt the 85% alcohol in E85 is 27% water. So far and away the alcohol and the 15% gasoline do all the heat absorption.
I didn't say average size home in the antarctic circle. I'm talking from direct experience staying in a friend's single room 350 sq ft "small house" in Pescadero for the past 20 years. The bed is in a loft up in the rafters so it takes very little to heat. My wife and I stay there in the winter (high 30s at night) and we use less than a 2 lb. 1/4 gallon scoop of corn per night. It's a tiny stove with gravity feed hopper and literally looks like R2D2. It's on a thermostat that turns it on and off as needed and uses even less when burning wood pellets.
You and I both made mistakes in our figures though. I used 17.5 gal per bushel vs. your 3.26 gal. I got the correct reference from Oxford dictionary. A bushel of shelled corn per bag weighs 56 Pounds and in dry volume there are 9.4 gallons per bushel. So in reality it would be closer to 4 X 9.4 = 37.6 days or a month and a 1/4.
Mike as always I respect your eye for detail, and that is a contribution to this thread, but did you even read the article I posted? I thought it was pretty damn impressive, informative, and well supported. The quote I used from the article didn't say water is why ethanol runs cooler. It states "it is in part the water content in the E85"
The point I wanted to make was regarding water aiding cooling rather than the myth that ethanol suffers from "water contamination", but I think you know that. I agree what I said in the second sentence of the second paragraph was less than perfectly accurate, but it was clearly stated in the quote I pasted. In paraphrasing it, I should have stated "It is the natural water content in ethanol that helps give it it's vaporization cooling properties." If there is 5% water, the added help would change ethanol's latent heat of vaporization to 1025kJ/kg, close to 3X that of gas. As per the thread subject, for performance minded applications that is a very significant difference.
For those interested in this thread topic, please forgive the inaccuracies, but I hope you get the general idea.