Susan Cischke, Ford vice president of environmental and safety engineering, testified at a Senate Energy Committee hearing on U.S. energy security that "we need a strong, long-term focus on policies that increase U.S. ethanol production and accelerate E85 infrastructure development."
She also testified that "U.S. automakers have produced almost 6 million flexible-fuel vehicles. If they all ran on E85 fuel, over 2.5 billion gallons of traditional gasoline could be saved."
BUT THE BIG PROBLEM CISCHKE MISSES IS THAT FORD AND OTHER "DETROIT 3" BUILDERS HAVEN'T PRODUCED E85 VEHICLES WHICH INHERENTLY GENERATE DEMAND FOR THE HIGH OCTANE FUEL! The current flexi-fuel fleet is generally comprised of forgettable, fleet-type vehicles which run about the same on E10 (or E-ZERO!) as E85. So, excluding a few environmentalists, farmers and trendy politicos, nobody really demands more E85.
However, if Ford were to exploit the high performance characteristics of E85 (such as was once-upon-a-time hinted in SVT's "Superstallion" flexi-fueled concept car), then market forces would undoubtedly demand increases in E85 retail infrastructure. Just as GM led and stoked market demand with higher performance Kettering V8s after WWII, Ford should sell its customers "hot" cars that run quicker and faster on E85.
Simply put, Ford should push the E85 market with high performance flexi-fueled products. SVT's GT500 should be a flexifueled vehicle with a more aggressive E85 tune (easy and cheap to do with a supercharged engine). The flaccid, boring Five Hundred should be pumped up with a flexi-fuel blown V8. The '03-'04 SVT Cobra 4.6 should be retooled for flexi-fuel use in PIs (to fend off the Police Charger's huge performance advantage in the Michigan cop car tests) and for other "premium" applications. Marketing of a powerful, forced-induction flexi-fueled Duratec option should be a top prioity for all of Ford's volume subcompact and compact lines. (Ford's gasoline and flexi-fueled vehicles almost across the board are last in both power and fuel economy in their respective classes)
If buyers see a serious performance advantage with E85, they will demand oil companies start carrying it (and even at a higher price point than current E10 premium!).
Energy security and environmental handwringing won't get E85 to the mass market anywhere near as fast as creating real demand with a real market feature such as higher performance on E85.
While Susan Cischke might ought to focus more on salvaging the imploding safety reputation of the Fusion (apparently you'll possibly become a candidate for FUSION if you get into a side or offset frontal impact in one), perhaps she's got a little spare time to hook up Mr. Ford with the few engineers left who understand what a real performance car should be (not the wimp-city heaps like Five Hundred, Fusion, Thunderbird (RIP), Escape Hybrid . . . .)--then maybe we'll FINALLY see E85 applied to its highest and best use in something Ford buyers actually might care about!
