E85 - 85% Ethanol 15% Gasoline

[JanGeo]

Looks like they always talk about how great it is but forget to mention how much damage it causes to the engine.

Recent post in ETList

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ETList/message/5918

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E85#Risks

Gearing up for more production and the recent reports claim a 20% gain in energy when used compared to what it takes to make it. Of course you get less gas mileage with it so it doesn't work out anyway. Just wondering what byproducts are generated from making it . . . we could be up to our eyeballs in corn husks and mash.

[diamondlarry]

Looks like they always talk about how great it is but forget to mention how much damage it causes to the engine.

As someone who grew up in farming country, I like the idea of helping out farmers by using ethanol. But, I just can't bring myself to do it because of all the negative effects it can have on most cars. If this change is going to force people to buy new cars to be able run this fuel it brings up another question: How much pollution is produced in order to produce that new car versus properly maintaining and holding on to an older car? Just a thought.

[Matt Timion]

As someone who grew up in farming country, I like the idea of helping out farmers by using ethanol. But, I just can't bring myself to do it because of all the negative effects it can have on most cars. If this change is going to force people to buy new cars to be able run this fuel it brings up another question: How much pollution is produced in order to produce that new car versus properly maintaining and holding on to an older car? Just a thought.

You bring up an interesting point, but unfortunately America (for the most part) only cares about pollution if the pollution happens in America. If these cars are produced outside of America pollution will be a non-issue. At the current rate, America's future as a major automotive manufacturer is not looking good.

[rh77]

OK, so Ford has been making "FFV"s for a few years that take either an ethanol-blend, or gasoline -- you may have seen the little leaf logo on the side of the Taurus or a Ranger perhaps. President bush makes his speech about using more Ethanol during the State of the Union.

Now, GM has this huge campaign of "Be Green - Go Yellow" or something like that with ads on TV and a huge display with pamplets at the Auto Show, so now the Tahoe can use E85! Like it's a brand new idea. My concern is that GM rushed it (as usual) and didn't fortify the vital seals and components like they should. Remember the Olds and Cadillac Diesels of the late 70's/early 80's? I predict the vehicles will have several recalls, put a bad taste of ethanol in America's mouth (no pun intended), and we're back to using dino juice.

As for the price of E85, I remember 2 years ago in Iowa, it was similarly priced to 87-octane, because the taxes were lower and may have been subsidized.

What America probably won't realize is they're going to get crappy mileage with E85. It has less energy than gasoline. So they're going to figure out -- well, my Tahoe EXT 4WD is getting 12 mpg instead of the 16 when I use gas. What's the point? Well, emissions for one, but people see dollar signs at the pump, not emisions. I think this is going fall flat on its face. To little, too late, bad start.

RH77

[Matt Timion]

excellent points rh77. ONe other thing to consider with e85 is that it is CHEAP to produce. I remember reading that gasoline takes more energy to produce than you get out of it, but e85 actually produces more energy than it takes to produce. This is mainly due to the fact that soy and corn take little energy to grow. They also get free energy from the sun.

The mileage aspect, as well as the price will be major hurdles to overcome in the war of public opinion.

[SVOboy]

excellent points rh77. ONe other thing to consider with e85 is that it is CHEAP to produce. I remember reading that gasoline takes more energy to produce than you get out of it, but e85 actually produces more energy than it takes to produce. This is mainly due to the fact that soy and corn take little energy to grow. They also get free energy from the sun.

The mileage aspect, as well as the price will be major hurdles to overcome in the war of public opinion.

Brazil, which is moving to full energy independence in the realm of their cars and petroleum and junk, has done so mainly with the aid of ethanol. Drivers down there realize they get worse gas mileage, but the cost of the ethanol still ends up saving them money. Hopefully South and Central America will get a small bit of economic independence out of this stuff, I dunno how much we people with money are going to worry about change when we don't need to, however.

[Matt Timion]

Brazil, which is moving to full energy independence in the realm of their cars and petroleum and junk, has done so mainly with the aid of ethanol. Drivers down there realize they get worse gas mileage, but the cost of the ethanol still ends up saving them money. Hopefully South and Central America will get a small bit of economic independence out of this stuff, I dunno how much we people with money are going to worry about change when we don't need to, however.

Brazil, however, has the advantage of abundant sugar cane and a longer crop season. I think I remember reading that if all available farm land were converted to corn we still wouldn't have enough room to make enough ethanol to power America's fleet.

[SVOboy]

I think I remember reading that if all available farm land were converted to corn we still wouldn't have enough room to make enough ethanol to power America's fleet.

Sounds like it's time to make our fleet a little more efficient.

[diamondlarry]

Brazil, which is moving to full energy independence in the realm of their cars and petroleum and junk, has done so mainly with the aid of ethanol. Drivers down there realize they get worse gas mileage, but the cost of the ethanol still ends up saving them money. Hopefully South and Central America will get a small bit of economic independence out of this stuff, I dunno how much we people with money are going to worry about change when we don't need to, however.

Brazil, however, has the advantage of abundant sugar cane and a longer crop season. I think I remember reading that if all available farm land were converted to corn we still wouldn't have enough room to make enough ethanol to power America's fleet.

I have heard the same thing. Actually, I think I heard that if EVERY square inch of land-farm& non-farm- were planted with corn there wouldn't be enough. I'm not sure we could make our fleet efficient enough to make it work.

[SVOboy]

I doubt we could make it efficient enough but we could try, at least. Or just eliminate a large portion of it.

[krousdb]

A related article

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/2006-02-14-e85-usat_x.htm

[MetroMPG]

My concern is that GM rushed it (as usual) and didn't fortify the vital seals and components like they should. Remember the Olds and Cadillac Diesels of the late 70's/early 80's? I predict the vehicles will have several recalls, put a bad taste of ethanol in America's mouth (no pun intended), and we're back to using dino juice.

in GM's defense (i drive a pontiac, after all... and pontiac builds excitement), they've actually been building E85 capable vehicles for years. this is just a marketing program to raise the profile of an existing (inexpensive) engine option. one which, i assume has no known reliability issues.

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2004/08/gm_e85_promotio.html

[diamondlarry]

A related article

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/2006-02-14-e85-usat_x.htm

The information in this article is why I think that ethanol/E85 is not a good idea. Ethanol burns much cleaner-I like that part- but if you have to burn so much more of it to go the same distance, ethanol could end up producing more pollution overall. Thoughts?

[SVOboy]

The one oil person did say that it is better for the environment, despite the fact that you need to burn more of it.

[diamondlarry]

The one oil person did say that it is better for the environment, despite the fact that you need to burn more of it.

I think ethanol probably is cleaner burning than gasoline. Burning one gallon of ethanol probably puts out less pollution than burning one gallon of gas. The problem seems to be, according to the article, that you would have to burn close to a gallon and a half of ethanol to equal one gallon of gas. I think ethanol could, in time, be a good thing. I just wish the officials would at least admit these problems exist. It's the same with seatbelts when they were made mandatory in our state. The officials made it sound like we would suddenly be safer by just wearing our belts. If you don't add driver education things could actually get worse because people could say, "Oh well, I got my seatbelt on. I'll be ok." So if we just switch to ethanol without changing people's driving techniques/attitudes, we could end up being right where we are or worse with ethanol's decreased efficiency. Ok, now to climb off my soapbox.... :-)

[JanGeo]

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ETList/message/6022

To the anxiety of many energy-watchers, America is switching all its gasoline by May 5 to a new blended gasoline that uses 10 percent ethanol to create its octane rating.

The old octane booster, MTBE (methyl tertiary butyl ether), has been virtually outlawed as a cancer-causing pollutant and won't be used after May 5.

"Ethanol doesn't travel well - in pipelines it separates into water and liquids - and has to be trucked wherever it goes."

The blending is also done at the retail level, usually at the wholesale tank farms just before it's trucked locally to service stations.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Get your testing done ASAP looks like we are all going to get screwed.

[SVOboy]

What solution do you propose? To ignore that MTBE causes cancer?

This is what the japanese government has done with their trash...Ignore that burning it creates dioxin and kills tons of people through cancer, because they want to run less trash trucks and save some space.

I have yet to see someone who hates ethanol to propose something better, pay the ****ing 50 cents a fill up, geez.

[brick]

Very interesting article about E10 going nationwide. I've been misinformed for a while about oxygenate, and just thought that MTBE was a winter thing that went away for warm weather.

If we could produce ethanol more efficiently (like Brazil, which has a very innovative system) I would be all for it. Not only does it burn cleaner, but the CO2 that is produced during combustion is effectively recycled when you grow your corn/soy/sugarcane to produce more ethanol. It is nearly ecologically neutral.

On the topic of bad gas mileage, there is a very good reason that our "FFVs" don't do well on ethanol: they aren't optimized for it. It is true that it has less energy per unit volume than gasoline, but keep in mind that the thermodynamic efficiency of a gasoline engine is at best 30%. This means that, in theory, you could make up the difference through improved efficiency within the engine itself. For example, gasoline engines designed for 87 octane need to have a relatively low compression ratio (CR) to keep the fuel from autoigniting and ruining the engine. However, the lower the CR the lower your theoretical thermodynamic efficiency. Ethanol's relatively high octane rating allows for a higher compression ratio, helping out your fuel economy.

I'm not up on the other properties of ethanol relative to gasoline, but there is more to be considered. Ignition energy requirement, flame speed, and the equivalence ratio (fancy term for a/f ratio) over which a fuel will burn play an important role as well. For example, ethanol might lend itself to lean-burn engines better than gasoline. That would be huge! Look at the numbers for the MT Insight vs the CVT version and you can see what I mean. Gas mileage is significantly better for the MT version, owing primarily to the lean-burn mode of operation when less power is needed.

Just food for thought. My background in this is decent but limited so I don't really know what's possible. I do, however, believe that there is a sound engineering solution to every problem. Just keep in mind that it may be you guys tinkering in your garages on project cars who pin it down first. Auto companies will do what's profitable, enthusiasts will do what works.

/soap box

[JanGeo]

Well I gassed up today and noticed a sticker on the pump that says that this fuel contains Ethanol so I asked inside about it and they said that they have had it for a few weeks - which may have been the last time I gassed up there or not - don't remember. Anyway the 11.9 gallon tank filled to the brim last time took 11.109 to fill to the brim again. Will definately see how the mileage does this time with the Synlube in the Power Steering, Engine and Transmission and I am still GP7 and Acetone and Xylene.

[krousdb]

Well I gassed up today and noticed a sticker on the pump that says that this fuel contains Ethanol so I asked inside about it and they said that they have had it for a few weeks - which may have been the last time I gassed up there or not - don't remember. Anyway the 11.9 gallon tank filled to the brim last time took 11.109 to fill to the brim again. Will definately see how the mileage does this time with the Synlube in the Power Steering, Engine and Transmission and I am still GP7 and Acetone and Xylene.

How do keep up with all of that stuff? Is the added expense worth the FE increase? How much per tank does it cost for the additives?

[JanGeo]

The Synlube is a no brainer - the cost is about half the total cost of conventional oil at todays prices of good oil over the life of the engine - who knows what the price of motor oil is going to be in 5 or 10 years. The wear is reduced so everything last many times longer. Then there is less time wasted in changing the oil and disposing of it plus it is made from non-petrolium materials so nothing goes to the oil companies. Finally the fuel savings from the reduced friction more than pays for the Synlube many times over especially at todays gas prices. As far as the Acetone it cost about 25 cents per tank full and I just paid $32.34 for a tank of gas, if it gives me 1% increase it pays for itself.

[popimp]

So what about the fertilizer and pesticide that is needed for the corn? These are oil based. What about the farm vehicles that are used to harvest the crops? And the refining process? As mentioned earler ethanol has to be trucked in. I think it has a negative energy factor when you realize what it takes to get the final product.

[SVOboy]

The most credible numbers I have seen say that ethanol takes less to produce per gallon than gasoline, but I haven't researched it much. It is rather up in the air in my lazy mind.

[ELF]

Ethanol doesn't burn pure and clean there is a downside.
Acetaldehyde is created when ethanol is burned in a gasoline engine. It's from the burning gas hitting the cold cylinder wall. It's a respiratory tract irritant and known carcinogen .

However I think 5-15% ethanol in the gas is much better than MTBE.

[zpiloto]

Ethanol doesn't burn pure and clean there is a downside.
Acetaldehyde is created when ethanol is burned in a gasoline engine. It's from the burning gas hitting the cold cylinder wall. It's a respiratory tract irritant and known carcinogen .

However I think 5-15% ethanol in the gas is much better than MTBE.

That's the tough part about trying to figure which way to go. Emissions are reduce on average 20% for NMHC(non methane hydrocarbons), 25% for NOx, 18% CO.

There's a 80% reduction of Benzene, 80% 1.3 butadiene and as you stated a 20% increase in formaldehyde and a 20x increase in acetaldehyde. Of the 4 acetaldehyde is the least carcinogenic.

So is it better to have a pretty healthly reduction on all but the the least troublesome. Or is increase in acetaldehyde so much that the benefits outway the cost? It's never easy.:(

[ffvben]

from what I learned on e85...
it burns 40-50% cleaner than gas engine
one unit of power to make 1.2 units of e85 so its a little better.
105-110 octane
lots of oxygen content that burns fast so the gas mileage is lower
my ffv truck is made for the high corrosive e85 fuel
17 mpg e85/ 23mpg with 87oct
my ranger has bigger injectors to compensate for the e85
the price per gal. is comparative to 87oct., $2.80-3.15 in may 2007 while e85 2.99 all the time.
15%gas in summer and up to 30% gas blend winter, this helps with the cold starts.
elderbroc aftermarket performance company makes a e85 carburetor for your hot rod if you like high octane.
basically i got tired of running to the only gas station in my state. with e85 fill ups every 2 days, i went back to reg gas.
a bunch of states out west have e85 about .75-1.00 cheaper than reg gas.
www.e85fuel.com was on the pump if you need more info.

[WisJim]

Ethanol is generally governmetn subsidized so that it can compete with gasoline. I think that the state of Wisconsin subsidizes it at 50 cents per gallon, and I don't recall what the feds do.

[popimp]

So what happens when a crop fails?

[atomgonuclear]

Out of all the posts on here........ Brick was the most right out of all of them

If you run E85 in a current engine the chances are it is not optomized with an air/fuel ratio for E85. Regular gasoline is about 14.7 to 1 ratio for a stoichiometric mix (Most complete Burn) and Ethanol is all the way down at about 9:1 Air - Fuel Ratio. This is a big difference in the amount of "Lean" you are going to be getting from the engine. In time, with an improperly tuned car this will deteriorate the life of the engine because of the effects of carbon buildup.(lean does save gas, but it ruins engines) And to the guy that said it uses huge amounts of air..... you are wrong.... it uses less, that is why it is cleaner, generally speaking...burning larger amounts of anything is worse. That is unless its hydrogen powered, but that is another story

Ethanol is 35% Lower than that of regular Petrol per unit of energy. The only time that Ethanol should really even be used is in a high compression engine since it is stable in most engines UP TO about 19:1 compression (High Octane only) vs the classic petrol engine which can MAX out around 12 - 13:1 compression (low-mid grade octane). Seeing as how a high compression engine would be used only in a performace environment....... its probably not the best when it comes to saving gas or the environment.

Now.... this argument could be justified if we were dealing with properly tuned AND ONLY engines with higher compression and/or boost...... this is because the octane would be high enough to keep the engine nice and cool (at idle, cool enough to the touch believe it or not) and the engine would be protected from predetonation (not like typical gasoline). Also, the upside about the CO2 output is that the offset by the plants greatly reduces it.

Its all about our education really, this technology has been around forever but we are so resistance to change, partially because of ignorance and partially because the oil giants just dont want change right now. America is not ready for E85 and I dont see it being ready anytime in the near future unless the cars have a selectable gas mode switch for tuning. Then and only then, with high boost levels and low air temps can the engines actually get efficiency out of E85

Another ALTERNATIVE would be the aftermarket manufacturers that make a product called Water Injection systems which use 50/50 Water and Methanol injection system (windsheild wiper fluid), this keep engines VERY cool and VERY efficient for around 200 bucks and uses it on an AS NEEDED basis (accel conditions)..... its worth looking into if you still want to use regular pump gas, gain a cooler and more efficient ride, thats healthier for the environment. Water is NOTTTTT bad for your engine when it is atomized. Dont be mistaken, you will not hydrolock your engine unless an injector leaks... but that can happen with any fluid, even gas.

And as a last note...... on the next rainy and humid day, when you are driving your car try to see if you can feel a better throttle response. That is the atomized water in the air giving you that couple of extra ponies. (Sort of how the WI system works)

[gaswaterman]

Discover The Biggest Secret They're Trying To Keep From You:
"How To Convert Your Car To Burn WATER & Gas,
Cut Your Costs by 60%, Enhance Engine Power & Safety
and Clean up The Environment...

http://shmyl.com/qtjqson

[theholycow]

http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages/2/413004.jpg

[SD26]

You can't transport any ethanol fuel via pipe line. It has to be done by truck. Very inefficient. That requires diesel. And we can't loose site of the fact that corn is a food product.

My family was in farming for years. While I support the American farmer, farming needs to be a profitable gig on its own. Ethanol is a subsidy. You can exchange the name subsidy for welfare if you like. There are certainly those that are getting rich beyond oil on this in two ways: one, fuel, and two, because of food commodity prices increasing dramatically.