ETHANOL is stupid.

[kaisen]

The size of the boom is smaller (less energy, as stated), the propensity for pre-detonation is better (octane rating).

I think the octane rating on the pump is the true rating, regardless of formulation.

[David]

So do think they're using crappier fuel for super unlead and getting the octane from ethanol? My hopes of better turbo performance may be dashed.

[legion]

Should I run 104 in my 951 because it contains no ethanol? (And it won't break down my 20-year-old German rubber fuel lines?)

[kaisen]

Originally posted by 125shifter
So do think they're using crappier fuel for super unlead and getting the octane from ethanol? My hopes of better turbo performance may be dashed.

At every pump I have seen they do have disclaimers that say something like: "may contain up to 10% ethanol"

Rarely have I seen the disclaimer on premium/super (92-95), just the regular and plus (85-90).

Racing gas (~104 octane) is great for modified turbocharged engines, but won't help a modern stock computer controlled car at all.

I regularly use 87 octane on my current supercharged car and the knock sensors retard boost so it makes less power, but it does just fine otherwise. When I want to flog it, I'll run higher octane.

[Craig 930 RS]

Running 10% ethanol blend gasoline will result in a reduction of 1-2 mpg, and a theoretical increase in octane of just over a point.

[hytem]

I've been using the 10% ethanol by necessity (only gas available)for the past four months, and haven't noticed any effect. About 800 miles.

As for the 15% ethanol, I think they would have to offer that as an option. I doubt the older cars are equipped for it.

Wish there was more discussion of this topic in the media.

[kaisen]

Honda co-develops process to make biomass ethanol

Reuters / September 14, 2006 - 6:49 am

TOKYO -- Honda Motor Co. said today it has co-developed the world's first practical process for producing ethanol out of cellulosic biomass in what would be a big step toward using non-edible plant materials as fuel.

Ethanol is a major source of motor fuel in Brazil and is gaining popularity in the United States, but the renewable fuel is produced mainly from sugar cane and corn, raising the issue of balancing supply against the use of the crops as food.

Honda and its partner Research Institute of Innovative Technology for the Earth, or RITE, a nonprofit entity set up by the Japanese government and private enterprises, said the new method allows large volumes of ethanol to be produced from widely available waste wood, leaves and other so-called soft biomass.

Current technology for converting cellulosic biomass yielded impractically low levels of ethanol due to the interference of fermentation inhibitors with the function of microorganisms that convert sugar into alcohol. The fermentation inhibitors are formed primarily during the process of separating cellulose and hemicellulose from soft biomass.

The new process uses a microorganism developed by RITE that helps reduce such interference, allowing for far more efficient ethanol production.

"This achievement solves the last remaining fundamental hurdle to ethanol production from soft biomass," Hideaki Yukawa, chief researcher at RITE's molecular microbiology and genetics lab, told a news conference in Tokyo.

Honda's research unit Honda R&D Co. said it aimed to set up a pilot plant in 2008 at the earliest to test the technology for practical application. Commercial application has not been discussed yet, a senior managing director at Honda R&D said.

Ethanol, or ethyl alcohol, is on its way to becoming a mainstream world commodity as soaring prices for crude oil and gasoline push consumers to use more "green" fuels produced from renewable resources.

Ethanol production is also attracting the attention of investors. Producing ethanol from corn yields profit margins of over 20 percent, Yukawa said, citing U.S. government data -- much higher than selling the crop as food.

Bio-ethanol is also carbon-neutral since carbon dioxide released by the combustion of the fuel is offset by the CO2 captured by plants through photosynthesis.

Japan hopes to replace about 3 million barrels (500,000 kilolitres) of transportation fuels with bio-ethanol a year by 2010. In the United States, the Bush administration has called for improving technologies in order to reduce U.S. oil imports from the Middle East by three-quarters by 2025.

[kaisen]

Originally posted by Craig911
Running 10% ethanol blend gasoline will result in a reduction of 1-2 mpg, and a theoretical increase in octane of just over a point.

The common figures are 3% reduction in fuel economy for E10 blend. Therefore, 1 mpg on a 33mpg car. The differences are typically so low most wouldn't notice.

Blend E10 is how most gas goes from 87 octane 'regular' to 89 octane 'plus'.

[Craig 930 RS]

Yep.

[jluetjen]

Something that hasn't been mentioned much so far is that Brazil has been using Ethanol for years. I had forgotten about that fact until I just saw it above. Apparently it's cleaned up the air quite a bit in it's cities (Californians take note, high octane and clean air!).

As far as the economics are concerned, I kind of discount the arguments on both sides a bit. But if it is such an incredibly bad idea, I would think that we would have seen some evidence of that in Brazil over the last 20 years -- and it just doesn't appear to have happened. The big hurdle is that there really isn't any infrastruture in place, and as long as there isn't infrastructure, the economics won't look good.

But if ultimately the technology can reduce our (and by extension the world's) dependancy on middle-eastern oil, it can only be a good thing. I think it's a pretty safe conclusion that if we were to deflate middle-eastern economies of their oil revenues some, that the amount of money flowing into the purchase of AK47's and funding of bomb-makers in the area will quickly dry up.

[Craig 930 RS]

Sure.....Brazil is the ideal place to use it.

Make your own fuel when you hardly have any - lots of crop space and crops.

Not the same here in the US

[dd74]

So...ethanol was stupid yesterday. With all this avid defense and illumination of the product since then, is it still stupid today?

[kaisen]

Originally posted by Craig911
Sure.....Brazil is the ideal place to use it.

Make your own fuel when you hardly have any - lots of crop space and crops.

Not the same here in the US

True, but I'm questioning the 'hardly have any fuel' statement. I don't know the answer, and not trying to be argumentative, but isn't Venezuela one of the top oil producing nations in the world? And isn't Venezuela neighbors with Brazil? It makes me wonder why Brazil would have a supply problem.

[kaisen]

Originally posted by dd74
So...ethanol was stupid yesterday. With all this avid defense and illumination of the product since then, is it still stupid today?

Maybe we won't know if it is stupid or not for quite a few years

[legion]

There is a common misconception that because Brazil is "energy independent" it uses exclusively ethanol in its cars. This is not true. Relatively few cars in Brazil run on "gasohol". Brazil is energy independent because it has a huge, state-run oil company and exports more oil than it uses.

By the same standard, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, and Venezuela are all "energy independent".

[jluetjen]

Actually I think that the number is closer to 50% run on ethanol, with the balance running gasohol.

I wasn't suggesting that Brazil is "energy independent", and I"m not sure if it even makes any difference in this discussion if they were. My point was that I didn't hear about widespread breakdown in the social structure as a result of Brazil's using ethanol. In fact I don't hear about there being any real issues with it at all.

As far as Brazil being the ideal place for it, I don't see why. Personally I think that it would be very beneficial if we were to convert some of US production of the sweetener corn syrup over to ethanol, we'd all be better off. We'll have fewer fat kids, and more fuel for our cars.

[fastpat]

Originally posted by cegerer
Government subsidies are not a legitimate argument when comparing petroleum fuel to ethanol or bio-diesel. One would need to factor in the enormous and on-going 'subsidies' of ‘keeping the relative peace’ in the Mideast over the past 40 years. That’s our sole interest in that part of the world – they’ve got the friggin’ oil that makes the wheels turn! How fun would it be to be completely free of Mideast oil dependancy - our military would have a literal field day over there without concerns of maintaining the flow of oil ....

No, while you're correct that the US government has expended huge sums in various adventures in the mideast for almost 80 years, almost none of the oil used in America comes from that area. The actual level is approximately 7-8%, which has been the case for decades. The US government has wanted hegemony in the area for the purposes of empire building and for enhancing the merchantilist corporations that are entertwined with the US government overseas. In short, if the US government stopped it's mideast empire building, it would have little or no affect in America at all.

Would it be too obvious then to suggest that a national energy policy be set to allow companies to drill for our own oil on our own land? We’ve got incredible reserves – more than we can use. OTOH, if our policy is to continue to rely on foreign oil and all the baggage that goes with that, then ethanol/bio is probably the way to go to get us through in the short term.

The national energy policy should be to have a 100% hands off government as far as oil or any other "thing" that we use here. The last thing needed is for increased government expenditures for "directed" energy research and development. No government has ever successfully managed a national market for anything on the planet.

Further, to state it once again, it costs more in fossil fuel to produce ethanol than the fuel value derived from it. That means that ethanol makes the petroleum "issue" worse that it would be without ethanol at all. And we haven't even discussed the waste products problems of ethanol production, and there are a few, at any length.

Last, there's the lack of economy in the use of ethanol in transportation.

[fastpat]

Originally posted by dd74
So...ethanol was stupid yesterday. With all this avid defense and illumination of the product since then, is it still stupid today?

Yes, in fact, even more stupid than it was yesterday.

[fastpat]

Originally posted by hytem
I've been using the 10% ethanol by necessity (only gas available)for the past four months, and haven't noticed any effect. About 800 miles.

As for the 15% ethanol, I think they would have to offer that as an option. I doubt the older cars are equipped for it.

Wish there was more discussion of this topic in the media.

Ethanol/gasoline blends above 10% don't work very well. The slightest bit of water that gets into the fuel, from condensation in your fuel tank, causes the blend to separate into the two major components. At that point the alcohol absorbs the water and immediately begins to corrode or rust any metal it comes into contact with. Or, your car stops running when the alcohol/wter mixture is all that's left in the tank.

[fastpat]

Originally posted by Nathans_Dad
From what I understand, the people against ethanol argue that if you include the energy costs involved in growing and harvesting the corn into the equation along with the energy needed to actually produce the ethanol, then it takes more fossil fuel to produce the ethanol than you get out.

Another interesting point which was made on NPR this morning is that the corn which would go towards ethanol production is currently sold cheaply as animal feed. Therefore, if we start making more ethanol the price of things like pork and beef will increase.

I'm all for alternative fuels, but I think we should look at these things critically and really choose the best one.

I'd love the marketplace to come up with a better fuel than that made from petroleum. I don't expect that to occur within several normal human lifetimes because petroleum is cheap and abundant, has a large infrastructure in place, and is very efficient. There is some inroads being made in biodiesel, I am using B20 diesel now, and it's easily found around here. I'm not sure, though, that it's as fuel efficient as standard petrodiesel fuel is.