New Ethanol information

[Guest Skyking]

The whole time I owned the car I was getting about 14 mpg city/17 mpg highway (which for that car was extraordinarily good mainly because I had the "375-E" regular gas engine option with lower compression, single exhaust, and a tiny Stromberg carb). Losing 5% off those figures is difficult to notice when you only drive a few hundred or a thousand miles in a year.

10 years ago I swapped out the original 401 engine (high compression) in my Invicta for a '63 LeSabra 401 (low compression less HP) that had very low mileage on it (30,000). I paid $700.00 for the whole '63. It was much cheaper than rebuilding the original engine. I'm lucky if I get 10 in the city........ Maybe it's the Rhode Island gas.:eek:

[Guest Skyking]

Rethink how you cast your vote.

Good answer Restorer!

[Dave@Moon]

So if E15 is the only fuel available where you live, what are you supposed to do?

Real answer: Wake up, rub your eyes, and avoid whatever you had for dinner the night before.

It might happen in a couple of decades that E15 is all that's available out of a gas pump in a given area. It's more likely that sooner than that E15 will have a major price advantage that will make E10 harder to find. Some distant day after that you can bet there will come a time when pump gas for antique cars is not found at service stations. Life changes.

In the mean time, stop worrying. It will be years before this becomes a real problem. ( E15 not coming to gas stations anytime soon ) At this time there are only a VERY few stations that sell this stuff (probably less than a dozen), and all of them are in the deep mid-west.

Now will somebody please start talking about pressuring Congress to allow antique cars to fuel up on av-gas and marine fuel so that some of these people can get some sleep!

[John_Maine]

Rethink how you cast your vote.

Doesn't seem to matter how I cast my vote, the results are always the same. There's very little difference between politicians these days.

[Steve_Mack_CT]

Dave and others, providing the update because I said I would - my brand new chainsaw came with instructions in the manual that indicate ethanol mixes are unacceptable (not approved - to be exact) in it, and goes on to specify E15; E20 & E85. No mention of E-10, but the list of potential issues the manufacturer indicates ethanol can cause was a full paragraph. I am running the E10 basically because I don't believe I have any other options in CT.

Like many I am using marine Stabil now on everything except the new daily drivers.

[Guest prs519]

If one were to use a yardstick to measure a mile, it would indeed be tiring. I measure the conclusion of scientists who say the Earth is warming, by virtue of the only practical thermometer to use at this scale -- the melting of our icecaps. I cannot be very confident that this automatically links to our usage of fossil fuels as the primary cause of global warming, however, because as one correspondent said, the Earth cycles in wide temperature intervals. The melting itself though, is on a scale which can demonstrated; temp swings are far outside the usual cyclic variations! One can argue the merits of policy, but if there is a conspiracy, it is , it appears to me, a conspiracy to try to debunk some very sound science! The transformation of our economies from a carbon-based energy will require very extreme logistical and production changes. Perhaps it is good we are evolving slowly. Follow the money to find misinformation (and that can go either way, just do not refuse to accept the logical), and as Dave stated, if readers will not affirm the FACT that we have global warming, my ranting is meaningless. Why elso would the poles be melting, and glaciers calving off? It is more the rate of the changes that are forboding, more so than the temp change itself. Also, 32F, in my way of looking at things, tends to adjust itself to stay 32 degrees -- feeds back to equilibri-ize. The last sentence I am just trolling for amateur philosophers. PM me if you are one and interested, as I would like your input.

[Steve_Mack_CT]

Regardless of your opinion about "Climate change" or politics, In the countless postings on this topic not one articulates how it is a positive from an environmentalist point of view. I know I asked this early on in this thread, and had no real answer. That said, general consensus seems to be that this does not decrease emissions or increase fuel efficiency. True or false?

thanks

[Guest prs519]

I do not think there is an upside, at least I would not be wise enough to make that argument. My point was that Earth's temp is rising, and that the ice caps are melting, and

that this global warming is not an issue dreamt up by nutcases as some weird conspiracy, as many would have one believe! Ethanol is said to have some very toxic pollutants when it is burnt. The economics of ethanol are also questionable. I think the main potential upside to ethanol blending is to help decrease our reliance on foreign oil, but the cost of so doing may be a poor investment!

Edited November 16, 2011 by prs519
addition (see edit history)

[Dave@Moon]

That said, general consensus seems to be that this does not decrease emissions or increase fuel efficiency. True or false?

thanks

It depends on how you define "emissions" and "fuel efficiency".

Emissions: Obviously ethanol doesn't effectively change anything the car does, and the traditional "pollutants" are relatively unchanged. However, incorporating the modern concept of a carbon footprint, any CO2 emitted from the burning of ethanol is not (geologically speaking) new to the atmosphere. Therefore you reduce the carbon footprint of the car an amount equivalent to the concentration of ethanol in the fuel (minus a small percentage, generally 5%, due to the lower heat content of ethanol).

Fuel Efficiency: That lower heat content will reduce individual fuel mileage for your car about 5% when running on E10. (If it's more than that, something's wrong or you need to adjust the car for the new fuel.) However for the United States as a whole the fuel content of the ethanol produced is steadily improving relative to the fuel expended to generate it. A few years ago we were lucky to get 1.5 times as much energy out of the ethanol as it took to make it. Today we're well above 2 times that amount. So for the country the "fuel efficiency" of ethanol production roughly doubles what is expended to make it (already). That easily makes up for the 5% loss in mileage due to ethanol's heat content.

...and once real production of the material begins using cellulosic sources we should approach the 7X-8X level of energy production to consumption currently seen in Brazil using sugar cane. It is the future that all of this is about anyway, you know.

Ethanol may have powerful, economically motivated friends in the halls of Congress, but that doesn't mean it's a worthless enterprise.

[Dave@Moon]

Ethanol is said to have some very toxic pollutants when it is burnt.

Not true at all:

C₂H₅OH (l) + 3 O₂ (g) → 2 CO₂ (g) + 3 H₂O (g)

All you get is water and CO<sub>2.

</sub>

[Steve_Mack_CT]

Thanks Dave - I was curious what the justification was other than powerful constituents. It appears to me that the value is debatable but I would agree it does not look like it will be going anywhere soon.

Meanwhile, a friend at a marina is suggesting I try a new stabilizer that is supposedly as good or better than Stabil, I have a couple freebie samples to try out...

[rocketraider]

Yet with all the proof of inefficiency and engine damage out there, one of the WRAL peanut gallery still insists it is all propaganda and misinformation, and not even close to reality. Methinks there are a lot of people living in alternate universes or science fiction novels.

New Raleigh gas station pumps B20, E85 biofuels :: WRAL.com

[Dave@Moon]

Yet with all the proof of inefficiency and engine damage out there, one of the WRAL peanut gallery still insists it is all propaganda and misinformation, and not even close to reality. Methinks there are a lot of people living in alternate universes or science fiction novels.

New Raleigh gas station pumps B20, E85 biofuels :: WRAL.com

E85 is 85% ethanol fuel, suitable only for flexfuel vehicles designed to use it.

B20 is 20% biodiesel fuel (80% conventional low-sulfur diesel). Approximately 50% of new diesel engines are certified for the use of B20, and nearly all are certified for B5 5% biodiesel), as are many other recently built diesels.

The article is definitely wrong in stating that this fuel can go in "any diesel vehicle", if it's presumed there are no consequences. It is possible that there'll be issues in some older diesels, and some warranty clauses may void certain aspects related to biofuel use. That's about it for the "misinformation" here. B20 will run in any diesel, but older diesels should be properly prepared to use it. ( Biofuels: Frequently Asked Questions - Biodiesel )

However for about 1/2 of new diesels this stuff is fair game, costs less, and reduces fuel mileage by only about 2% (not bad considering it costs about 10% less). Check your owner's manual or consult the manufacturer to see if your vehicle can use it.

Neither fuel damages any engine properly designed to use it.

[Guest prs519]

"C2H5OH (l) + 3 O2 (g) → 2 CO2 (g) + 3 H2O (g)

All you get is water and CO2."

I believe Dave is absolutely correct about this; I beg forgivenness from any who might have been mislead by my statement. This is a foggy enough subject without my muddying it up extra! I believe I may have been thinking about an additive, something called MDTA or something like that, I think. The products of ethanol combustion are the most positive witnesses of why it (ethanol) should bea good fuel. One cannot get more animal friendly than the reaction products there. Dave or anyone tell me what I must have been thinking? HO (if so, I'll save up for awhile and maybe hire ya full time!) Ho.

[JohnD1956]

- we have found more issues with running the system dry than in leaving fuel in the system. For some reason which no one has yet explained to me; neopreme having once been in a fuel containing ethanol will harden when allowed to dry. ..

Jon.

Jon, What if the carb was run dry, the fuel line disconnected from the fuel pump and fuel blown back into the tank, and then a line was held in a bottle of Marvel Mystery Oil and the engine cranked to fill the fuel pump and carb with the mystery oil?

Do you think the Mystery Oil would be a big problem for the carb gaskets and negate the effects of leaving the carb dry over the winter?

[ted sweet]

when using the marine stabil for several winters with zero problems

[Dave Mellor NJ]

MTBE (methyl tertiary butyl ether,I think) was the stuff they put in gasoline to oxygenate it. It was found to poison lakes and streams among other things.

[Dave@Moon]

MTBE (methyl tertiary butyl ether,I think) was the stuff they put in gasoline to oxygenate it.

...over the objections of the EPA technical staff, who preferred ethanol (which at 5.7% concentration oxygenates gasoline equal to MTBE). Congress was heavily lobbied (largely by Haliburton, who had a proprietary manufacturing process for it) to accept MTBE as well. It was cheaper than ethanol, and made for easier handling because it could be shipped through the same pipelines with the gasoline.

It proved to be highly problematic (as anticipated) because of it's water solubility (rendering it non-potable even in very low concentrations). There are hundreds of lawsuits pending over the impacts MTBE on people's water, and there are frequent attempts in Congress to give the makers and users of MTBE amnesty.

[carbking]

Jon, What if the carb was run dry, the fuel line disconnected from the fuel pump and fuel blown back into the tank, and then a line was held in a bottle of Marvel Mystery Oil and the engine cranked to fill the fuel pump and carb with the mystery oil?

Do you think the Mystery Oil would be a big problem for the carb gaskets and negate the effects of leaving the carb dry over the winter?

John - I don't know. We have tried running the carb completely dry, but only a few times, and had more issues than leaving fuel in the carb.

Basically, we suggest trying to start the engine, and drive the vehicle twice the circumfrence of a tire once a week. This tends to minimize many problems associated with storage.

Dave - I do not claim to be a chemist; however our government, in their own publication "Alternative Fuels", states that one problem with the burning of ethanol is the byproduct of aldehydes and acetylaldehydes.

Jon.

Edited November 20, 2011 by carbking (see edit history)

[padgett]

Just a few thoughts and observations:

1) there is nothing wrong with using alcohol fuels as long as the car is designed for it.

2) the last part is the key particularly for computer cars (since 1980) which have maps based on gasoline burn rates.

3) Which leads to the real question: Do cars designed for gasoline need more/less spark advance for E10 or E15 ?

4) Alcohol is often used as an octane booster. Does this mean that E10/E15 can use lower octane gasoline (cheaper) to achieve 87 PON ? (this relates to (3)).

5) I am seeing the same numbers at cruise (early Reattas have instant and average mpg readouts) which would seem to indicate the major difference is in acceleration/power. Does anyone have E10-E15 dyno figures vs pure gasoline ?

As an engineer, I like to see instrumented data to back up thoughts. Once I have a good idea what is needed, new PROMs are easy. I suspect E10/E15 to need a different advance curve than real gasoline but have no documentation. I do wonder if cars designed for premium fuel might to better on ethanol fuels than those designed for regular (more advance possible). How do Northstar Caddys do on E10 regular ?

[Dave@Moon]

From this week's Motorweek show:

Ethanol & Classic Cars |MotorWeek