More Alcohol... and not the good kind

[longhornchris04]

MSNBC: More alcohol allowed in fuel

I figured I'd give everyone a heads up to watch out when you fill up... E15 is going to start being phased in.

Its bad enough that I can't get anything but E10 here without driving ~30mi out of the way, I sure hope this doesn't become mandatory. My '05 specifically says not to put anything higher than E10 in it... I'm sure E15 won't do good things to CIS.

Consider yourself warned.

Oh, and obligatory stupid politicians, corn lobby, green-washing, etc comments go here.

[KNS]

I'm glad to see that there are enough people opposed to it, maybe it won't happen after all.

[Brando]

Crap. And you can rest assured that CA will impose a higher percentage of Ethanol in their fuel blends. It's ridiculous that we pay (here) $3.19 per gallon, most of that cost attributed to the [expensive] processes to blend ethanol into our gas.

Other factors make this a bad idea, such as:
• Reduced fuel efficiency (alcohol has less potential energy than regular gasoline)
• More damage, wear and tear on engines
• More spent by consumers in additives to neutralize Ethanol
• Higher expense of gas!!!

[tj90]

I see a drop in MPG in the winter months here in SOCAL when they change the blend to more alcohol. I wonder how that change compares to 15% ethanol. One of the comments in the story says that MPG will drop 25% with E15. I bet the consumer doesnt see a 25% in the price per gallon. Yet another tax......

[techweenie]

Ethanol is pretty inefficient stuff to produce, meaning there won't be any offsetting savings.

The corn lobby has to be one of the most successful of all. They forced Ethanol on us, and lucked out with their timing because it became a national security issue. However, I for one am more than happy to have less of our dollars going to people who don't like us -- like the Saudis.

[RSTarga]

shouldn't they give cars before 2007 an alternative. The article says for cars 2007 and newer, so where is the option?

[longhornchris04]

Originally Posted by techweenie

Ethanol is pretty inefficient stuff to produce, meaning there won't be any offsetting savings.

The corn lobby has to be one of the most successful of all. They forced Ethanol on us, and lucked out with their timing because it became a national security issue. However, I for one am more than happy to have less of our dollars going to people who don't like us -- like the Saudis.

I'd almost be OK with this if that were the case, but for most ethanol its not. Between the fertilizer used to grow the corn (derived from petroleum), and more importantly fuel used to transport ethanol, because it can't be shipped via pipeline, it only puts a minor dent in oil consumption. If the energy for fermenting and refining comes from coal, then the environmental benefits pretty much go away. Sugar ethanol (like Brazil) or the mythical cellulosic ethanol that's '3-5 years' away (tech speak for 'science says it should work but we haven't figured it out yet') actually have both ecological national security benefits. Unfortunately it doesn't (currently) have the political benefits (sugar) or the science (cellulose).

Throw in that E10 and E15 give worse mileage than straight gas, beyond the change in energy content, and I find myself asking 'whats the point?' Originally E10 was brought in as a substitute for MTBE. MTBE had 2 original purposes - first as an anti-knock agent replace TEL (lead), and more recently as an oxygenate to reduce emissions. TEL and MTBE were phased out for ecological reasons, which were valid. Ethanol provides the similar benefits... but are they really benefits.

The increased octane and knock protection are moot in most vehicles, and those that really need it weren't designed to handle the corrosive effects of alcohol.

As for the oxygenate, it was intended to reduce emissions in pre-1984 cars without O2 sensors. A car with an O2 system maintains exhaust gas ratios, so increasing the oxygen content in the fuel forces the engine management to change the air-fuel mix to get the exhaust to meet spec. How many pre-1984 cars are still on the road?

Having previously lived in a place with 'winter blend' gas (El Paso, TX) with added oxygenate (MTBE at first, later E10), I noticed a significant drop in fuel economy when the switch happened (loss of 2mpg in an SUV that was about 18 city), and this was regardless of weather which rarely played stuck to the state's schedule. Come spring, fuel economy would come right back up. Unfortunately now its E10 year round, at least here.

At least I can find a silver lining... if this crap eats my CIS it gives me justification to install carbs... I just hope the gaskets the good folks at PMO use are ethanol resistant

Ok, rant over.

[RWebb]

Originally Posted by RSTarga

shouldn't they give cars before 2007 an alternative. The article says for cars 2007 and newer, so where is the option?

the option is to just keep doing what you've been doing for earlier cars

this is being blown way out of proportion

[JeremyD]

BoatUS.com - Seaworthy Magazine

Ethanol Decision Will Raise Meat, Poultry Prices, Tyson Says - BusinessWeek

[rfn026]

Don't get all worked up. Gas stations can't sell it yet. See this article.

Richard Newton
Porsche Parts Pictures

[KNS]

The EPA gave their approval for vehicles only manufactured after 2007. If this goes through, gas pumps will have to carry two labels - E10 and E15.

[chuckr]

I also have to drive 30 miles each way to get real gas !
I can tell a difference. I do have a Steve Wong chip for 93 octane gas
I tried using Redline fuel System cleaner but am concerned about long term use
between oil changes.What abut the Sta-Bil additive ?? I've read some of you here
are using that, does it negate the E-10 without causing issues with the oil ?

[JeremyD]

Sta-Bil works - I use it all the time on the boats. If you have carbs or CIS I would not fill up without it.

I also use it in any gas I use for the mower or weedwacker although recently switched everything over to marina gas (E0)

[GothingNC]

Will the gas stations need to install 2 pumps?

One for Pre-2007 and the E15 for 07 and newer?

So the fuel economy will go down again, food prices will rise

[Wil Ferch]

I bring up a similar issue in this thread.....not so much the moisture effect that can be countered by Sta-Bil and such....but by the way high-% ethanol eats away the rubber parts of our fuel systems...still haven't found a good answer and "Yes"....would like an "alternative" too for our older cars, but I guess we're not getting any--->

Ethanol Fuels

[JeremyD]

Make sure your rubber lines are marked with the designation J-1527 which means that they are compatible with ethanol and will not dissolve.

[RWebb]

Wil - as I posted earlier, Goodyear makes some high zoot hose that is designed to withstand high EtOH concentrations.

If you mean rubber diaphragms and what not, I dunno know, but I suggest making a list of every non-metal part that contacts fuel; figure out what it is made of (e.g. rubber, nylon, etc.) and go from there.

[Wil Ferch]

Both of you are right if we need to focus on "hose"......but there are a lot of other rubber and elastomers throughout the system ( as you correctly noted, diaphragms, etc)...that also get eaten away by the ethanol.

[gumby]

I urge you ...write to the EPA

This will be bad for the majority of all cars

My2 cents...

[Grady Clay]

Here is a 356Talk thread:
“EPA Denies E15 Use in Pre-2001 Cars”

356Talk :: View topic - EPA Denies E15 Use in Pre-2001 Cars


Best,
Grady