No ethanol?

[akirby]

Here's a little fuel to the fire. This was a 2007 study done on both E85 and non-85 cars. What they found was puzzling. On "some" non-e85 cars, there was a boost in mileage running E30. They even state in the report that it goes against convention wisdom since there are less BTU's in E30 vs E0.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a pro-ethanol lobbyist. I avoid it in my vehicles where possible. But blanket statements about ethanol aren't true for all vehicles.

 

http://www.ethanol.org/pdf/contentmgmt/ACE_Optimal_Ethanol_Blend_Level_Study_final_12507.pdf

 

I'm guessing it was the octane boost which should be equivalent to switching from regular to premium and if you have a vehicle that can take advantage of the octane boost by advancing the timing then you could see a slight mpg increase. But not enough to offset the cost of an all new fuel system that was ruined by running E-30.

[Guest RRF985]

You (we all) could move to Florida - they just repealed their ethanol mandate. Apparently the corn lobby is weak there.

 

I have a new favorite state.

 

Agreed there...the salesman raves about how reliable the car is and then the finance guy raves about expensive the car will be to fix if it breaks

 

Salesman says its reliable to sell the car; Finance guy says the car is expensive to fix, sells the extended warranty. It's amazing how they can talk someone into buying things.

[Jimcgov3]

I emailed our three local gas stations about when they will start receiving ethanol free fuel. We shall see.

[Bailey151]

Agreed there...the salesman raves about how reliable the car is and then the finance guy raves about expensive the car will be to fix if it breaks

 

 

I have a new favorite state. Salesman says its reliable to sell the car; Finance guy says the car is expensive to fix, sells the extended warranty. It's amazing how they can talk someone into buying things.

LMAO - yeah, how exactly does that work? Next time instead of repeated "no" that's what I'm going to say "only reason I'm buying the car is because the sales guy told me it was the most reliable car on the road.................guess he was wrong so I'll be leaving"

 

See what he has to say then

[Mystiq]

You (we all) could move to Florida - they just repealed their ethanol mandate. Apparently the corn lobby is weak there.

 

And you learned a lesson - false or misleading information = dealership, factual information = fan site (like here).

I wish they'd do that where I live. Long Island has mandated all fuel have ethanol in it. We're up to 10% and there's not a single gas station within like 150 miles that has no ethanol. I wonder how much it destroys the gas mileage in my Fusion Hybrid.

 

I don't understand why it's even an option when the reduction in price doesn't make up for the loss in energy, and it also raises fuel prices. That, and making ethanol is a net loss in energy. Simple math. The price of ethanol doesn't make up for the loss in efficiency and I wouldn't doubt the net production of greenhouse gasses due to the loss of efficiency makes up for the immediate gain at the car's exhaust.

Edited June 28, 2013 by Mystiq

[Bughunter]

So how does the car determine it has 93 octane gas in the tank so it knows to advance the timing. Is there some sensor in the tank that determines this? Just curious...

Edited June 29, 2013 by Bughunter

[akirby]

So how does the car determine it has 93 octane gas in the tank so it knows to advance the timing. Is there some sensor in the tank that determines this? Just curious...

 

It has a knock sensor. It advances the timing as far as possible, then retards it only as it detects knock in the engine.

[Colerpa]

DOE a few years back, did a test with a Jetta TDI engine, upped the boost, changed out some hardware (fule delviery), injectors, tapped the glow plug used a spark plug, used engine computer modified from some other VW.. (not sure about this part). The little engine ran great...maybe 400 hp... could have been 300, in any case fantastic performance. I am not promoting ethanol. Just the opposite. Gas and ethanol are not a good mix, the fuels are too different. Building an alcohol engine could be an option.. but add that to gas, diesel, hybrid and electric. Our long haul deliver system relies on trucks only, possibly some rail. Can not transport ethanol through any existing petroleum pipelines, they will be damaged. So the experiment should end, if ethanol can not stand on its own, it does not belong in the market. We are not getting a great deal at the pump. 10-15% or even E85 seems cheaper, and always less efficient. Do not forget we are paying via taxes all the aid to farmers, ethanol producers, and fuel distributors. We pay with our taxes and we pay at the pump. Just eliminate the subsides, use the money someplace else. Also may not be a bad idea to move all vehicle fuel responsibilities under Department of Energy, and strip EPA of all power in this area. EPA can work with DOE. Just think it would be more efficient to have one agency (if any) and if I had to chose one, I pick DOE.

 

We should all get copy of legislation from Florida, and work with our state legislators, and US Senators and Representatives. Times of for the ethanol subsides to end, should also push for sunset provision for all most legislation... under this concept a given statute (law) would expire after a specific amount of time (typically 5 or 10 years). So when we boost some concept with subsidies, we can put a clock on it. When that clock stops.. so does the subsidy. The only thing needed to make it vanish, is do nothing, no vote, no session.

 

Other fuel options are under development.. look much better than ethanol. Whatever the option I do not want the government to force the option on me. We are not addicted to oil, we are addicted to the cheapest fuel source, now that is petroleum, What we know as gasoline, was not available when early engines were built. No one forced the industry to move to gasoline, it was just a better package at a better price. As we move along at some point when petrol does become scarce, it will get even more expensive, others will want to get in to this.. with alternate fuel technology, something that might be underway now. Point is economic forces move our economy, if you try to force a new technology that does not have an obvious (or fantastic marketing)... it will fail. Our great grandchildren may use an engine and fuel we may thing very odd, maybe. In any case there is no hurry. Really, I hope our government does help foster new technology, maybe even help get some out of the gate. Bottom line it is up to us.. to buy what we need, OK sometimes just want and can hopefully afford. We drive the train, not the government, so lets tell them, no more funding for ethanol. Regards, and have a great 4th of July weekend.

[92merc]

All new plants should switch to butanol. Basically butyl alcohol instead of ethanol. Contains 30% more energy than ethanol. Doesn't absorb water. Can be mixed with gas at the plant and shipped via pipelines. And instead of corn, cellulose based material such as switch grass would be the better base product. It can also be mixed straight into gas with no modification to the gas needed. And since it is much closer to gas in nature, it can be blended up to 16% with current vehicles with no issues or changes to the cars needed.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/24/business/energy-environment/weighing-butanol-as-an-alternative-to-ethanol.html?_r=0

[JoeLr]

All new plants should switch to butanol. Basically butyl alcohol instead of ethanol. Contains 30% more energy than ethanol. Doesn't absorb water. Can be mixed with gas at the plant and shipped via pipelines. And instead of corn, cellulose based material such as switch grass would be the better base product. It can also be mixed straight into gas with no modification to the gas needed. And since it is much closer to gas in nature, it can be blended up to 16% with current vehicles with no issues or changes to the cars needed.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/24/business/energy-environment/weighing-butanol-as-an-alternative-to-ethanol.html?_r=0

 

Sounds good.. Just need an interest group that will benefit from lobbying our awesome Congress/state assemblies to get this done. =) Where I live, I'd have to drive an hour to find ethanol-free gas.

[Jimcgov3]

"We should all get copy of legislation from Florida, and work with our state legislators, and US Senators and Representatives."

 

I finally received a response from a local gas station and they said due to the Federal mandate they would still receive blended fuel. The hurdles that the states have to get over is the very real possibility that by over-ruling Federal mandates they will lose out on Federal funding of state roads, and other transportation funding.

 

I want to see pure gas more than anyone. Unfortunately it's going to take more states getting involved to make a difference.

[jcg1005]

I would gladly take an all ethanol car where I live (or an ethanol hybrid). All they need to do is put a pump out at the road for the giant ethanol plant a few miles from my house. I live in farm country and the farms grow thousands of acres of it simply to feed that plant. So much so that it is driving soybean prices up, and now people are trading fields off for soybeans to take advantage of the high prices.

 

Huge game based on the farm subsidies and the directives to use ethanol for this stuff. Plus, it doesn't usually drive up OUR food prices, it drives up the price of what we sell overseas (e.g. poor, developing nations). I need to find the articles on this. I believe it was the WSJ that had a series on the impacts of ethanol use on the market.

[expresspotato]

Here in Toronto we have 10-15% ethanol blend and we also have no ethanol 94 octane... Don't really see any MPG improvements here - 900 KM to a tank is 900 KM to a tank. Throttle was a bit better on the 94 stuff but its not worth an extra $10-15 per tank.