More ethanol....nice :(

[wpurple]

http://www.usatoday.com/money/indus...3-ethanol-standard_N.htm?loc=interstitialskip

 

[imp]

Distaste for Ethanol?

Are there valid reasons why almost everyone seems to be "down" on ethanol use as fuel?

After all, alcohol WON every single Indy-500 Race for years and years, until Ford won it using gasoline in around 1963 or so. (gas illegal there before).

Is it Sao Paulo, Brazil, biggest city in that country, which has OUTLAWED all gasoline use in that entire megalopolis? They make their alky out of sugar cane, not corn. But the corn used here is still suitable for cattle feed after it's sugar is fermented out to form alcohol.

I think I have heard a few discourses, lower fuel economy, inconsistent pricing, corn being raised instead of other food crops, etc.

What are the REAL facts? imp

 

[silentchris]

when it gets cool it turns to gum in fuel system, clogs fuel filters, burns pumps up faster, it doesnt burn evenly, it costs more, can cause detonation in older vehicles it costs more, fouls out spark plugs, generates more heat, and just overall sucks

 

[baritoneblaster]

I run E10 in my '01 sport and get 20-25 mpg stock depending on the split between highway and city. I use it all winter down to -15 F with no problems and I don't use any additives. Besides here it is cheaper than straight gas.

 

[IZwack]

when it gets cool it turns to gum in fuel system, clogs fuel filters, burns pumps up faster, it doesnt burn evenly, it costs more, can cause detonation in older vehicles it costs more, fouls out spark plugs, generates more heat, and just overall sucks

This pretty much sums up most of the misunderstanding about ethanol when used within the context of modern vehicles. For example, ethanol does not generate more heat.

 

[Heavymentill]

Ethanol is not good for older fuel systems not designed for it. It breaks down the seals and plastics.

 

[BobWiersema]

I would make my own White Lightning and pore it in the dam thing if I thought it would run. This does nothing to reduce the price of gas at all. It only benefits the people making Ethanol. Take a look at the pump at your local gas station, you have probably been burning e-10 for years. I have never noticed a gas station that did not add 10% ethanol. I need to figure out how to switch this thing over to coal, Kingsford is on sale this time of year.

 

[ranger7ltr]

This pretty much sums up most of the misunderstanding about ethanol when used within the context of modern vehicles. For example, ethanol does not generate more heat.

You are correct: burning ethanol laced gasoline does burn cooler especially with ethanols' affinity for water...Ethanol, just like any alcohol, does absorb water and lowers the octane rating of gasoline and yet the flash point of ethanol is actually higher than gasoline...Other concerns have been the ability to store ethanol laced gasoline for long periods and more corrosion in metal gas tanks and destruction of rubber, plastic, and some metal components in the typical fuel system...

Of course the higher evaporation rates for ethanol and the lower fuel economy as opposed to non ethanol gasoline seem to not bother the motoring public at this point since we have had ethanol in our fuels since about 1979...I guess we have gotten accustomed to the effects...And the latest announcement that thanks to ethanol increase in fuels the value of corn has hit an all-time high makes the addition of ethanol to gasoline affect us in other ways as well...We will be paying more for inferior fuels, spending more for less performance, paying more for maintenance on fuel system components, and paying more for corn based foods thanks to more corn being needed to supply a water soluble solvent that burns less efficiently than gasoline...

 

[rhauf]

I for one am down on Ethanol for one reason only; it's government subsidized BS which hurts the economy far more than it helps.

i also recognize a few other facts related to ethanol, such as the performance characteristics mentioned above, as well as the fact that creating ethanol fuel from start to finish is not an efficient process; it takes nearly as much fuel to create it as you get back. 3 gallons invested = 4 gallons out. not exactly green if you ask me. (considering those 3 invested gallons of fuel are burned etc)

oh yeah, and it drives up the price of food.


if ethanol had any value, it would be successful on the free market. but it doesn't so it isn't. that's why the all-knowing government has to step in and do the decision making for us. as usual.

 

[BobWiersema]

Actually you got that a bit wrong.
Ethanol contains 76,500 BTU (1 gallon)
The amount of energy it takes to make ethanol is 98,000 BTU (1 gallon)
This includes the energy to plant, harvest and produce the fuel.

This is an article everyone should read.

Getting Hosed at the Pump

Adding ethanol to fuel is meant to satisfy politicians' desire, as they tell it, to cut air pollution and reduce the nation's dependency on foreign oil, especially oil imported from unfriendly areas of the world. Ethanol does neither.

 

[rhauf]

Crap, so it got it backwards.. that's way worse!!

hey it's about government control though, right? form over function baby!

 

[IZwack]

Actually you got that a bit wrong.
Ethanol contains 76,500 BTU (1 gallon)
The amount of energy it takes to make ethanol is 98,000 BTU (1 gallon)
This includes the energy to plant, harvest and produce the fuel.

This is an article everyone should read.

Getting Hosed at the Pump

Adding ethanol to fuel is meant to satisfy politicians' desire, as they tell it, to cut air pollution and reduce the nation's dependency on foreign oil, especially oil imported from unfriendly areas of the world. Ethanol does neither.

SOmething else for us to read: a summary by NREL of the study performed by Argonne National Lab (Dept of Energy) concludes that Ethanol requires less energy to produce, the opposite for petrol. It also compares studies done by others and where they fall in the net output vs input scale over the years :
www.ethanolmt.org/images/argonnestudy.pdf

Ethanol is by no means a perfect energy source, but one thing it does alleviate is the dependence on foreign oil. Think of it as a stepping stone towards a more ideal source of energy that is produced 100% "in-house" instead of overseas.

 

[SoNic67]

Drilling in the costal waters and Alaska would be way better. And all those subsidies directed to research of hidrogen storage, not corn BS.

But no, we can't because we hurt the puppies! Bears, birds, whatever...

 

[Turdle]

Ethanol has made my food more expensive.

The whole program drove all grain prices up.

 

[BobWiersema]

SOmething else for us to read: a summary by NREL of the study performed by Argonne National Lab (Dept of Energy) concludes that Ethanol requires less energy to produce, the opposite for petrol. It also compares studies done by others and where they fall in the net output vs input scale over the years :
www.ethanolmt.org/images/argonnestudy.pdf

Ethanol is by no means a perfect energy source, but one thing it does alleviate is the dependence on foreign oil. Think of it as a stepping stone towards a more ideal source of energy that is produced 100% "in-house" instead of overseas.

IZ, if you believe the Government propaganda reports about ethanol then you must ask yourself, why are we using crude oil for fuel when we can produce ethanol for 40% less? According to that government study ethanol should sell at the pump for about $1.75 per gall.

Unfortunately this is all just not true. In 2005 the US government began a five year program to determine the viability of ethanol as a fuel. Many people saw this as an opportunity to make money, and they did, they are making a lot of money from us tax payers. Here is a simple fact to consider. Last year about 10.6 billion gallons of ethanol were produced in this country to be used as fuel. The US government subsidized that with about 12 billion dollars. Another 5 billion was given to farmers and refinery plants as start up grants. So it looks like the independent studies are correct. ethanol can not be produced for less then fossil fuels and since the production of ethanol is dependent on the market value of fossil fuels it will always cost more. Independent studies suggest that without government subsidies ethanol would sell at the pump for $1.75 per gal. more then gasoline. Since it is unlikely that anyone would buy the stuff at that price the entire ethanol system would just shut down.

Government subsidies were scheduled to end by the end of 2010. Obama has vowed to renew the program and shovel tens of billions more into it. The Republican party has promised to end this program as scheduled when they take the house back in November. So time will tell.

And Im not even going to get into what plowing under our farms to plant feed corn has done to world hunger but the whole thing is just shameful and disgusting.

Bob

Are there valid reasons why almost everyone seems to be "down" on ethanol use as fuel?

After all, alcohol WON every single Indy-500 Race for years and years, until Ford won it using gasoline in around 1963 or so. (gas illegal there before).

What are the REAL facts? imp

FYI Indy cars burn pure Methanol, it has an octane ratio of 114 but has a low energy content. So it burns cooler, but at a ratio of 6.42:1 they suck up mass quantities of it.

 

[silentchris]

wow thats allot of info all the problems i listed with it arent gaurenteed (how do you spell that) just problems that are capable of occuring when running ethanol blended fuels in older vehicles much like cash for clunkers its just another way to try and get rid of the american automaker

 

[IZwack]

IZ, if you believe the Government propaganda reports about ethanol then you must ask yourself, why are we using crude oil for fuel when we can produce ethanol for 40% less? According to that government study ethanol should sell at the pump for about $1.75 per gall.

For the same reason you stated Bob - the influence of the industry over the government. Its not so much that the oil industry is "in bed" with the government, the government "is" the oil industry. So contrary to popular belief about "free market", the market is not always driven by the consumer. Sometimes, the producer, through various forms of tactics such as lobbying, becomes the driver and dictates which path society goes down on.

Last year about 10.6 billion gallons of ethanol were produced in this country to be used as fuel. The US government subsidized that with about 12 billion dollars. Another 5 billion was given to farmers and refinery plants as start up grants

Your arguement over subsidies is one sided. You forgot to mention that oil is also subsidized (estimated at $15 to $35 billion a year). This is why our gasoline is much cheaper than overseas. So would you rather have your tax money subsidizing American farmers, or the "multinationals" (which, as a label, opens a can of worms when you factor in labor standards, safety standards, ethics, and so on).

 

[imp]

...FYI Indy cars burn pure Methanol, it has an octane ratio of 114 but has a low energy content. So it burns cooler, but at a ratio of 6.42:1 they suck up mass quantities of it.

Research Octane Number (RON)

The most common type of octane rating worldwide is the Research Octane Number (RON). RON is determined by running the fuel in a test engineEngineAn engine is a machine designed to convert energy into useful mechanical motion. In common usage, an engine burns or otherwise consumes fuel, and is differentiated from an electric machine that derives power without changing the composition of matter...
with a variable compression ratioCompression ratioThe compression ratio of an internal-combustion engine or external combustion engine is a value that represents the ratio of the volume of its combustion chamber; from its largest capacity to its smallest capacity...
under controlled conditions, and comparing the results with those for mixtures of iso-octane and n-heptane.

Motor Octane Number (MON)

There is another type of octane rating, called Motor Octane Number (MON), or the aviation lean octane rating, which is a better measure of how the fuel behaves when under load as it is done at 900 rpm instead of the 600 rpm of the RON. MON testing uses a similar test engine to that used in RON testing, but with a preheated fuel mixture, a higher engine speed, and variable ignition timingIgnition systemAn ignition system is a system for igniting a fuel-air mixture. It is best known in the field of internal combustion engines but also has other applications, e.g. in oil-fired and gas-fired boilers...
to further stress the fuel's knock resistance. Depending on the composition of the fuel, the MON of a modern gasoline will be about 8 to 10 points lower than the RON. Normally, fuel specifications require both a minimum RON and a minimum MON.

FYI, now, this source says RON method: Ethanol 129, Methanol 133; MON method: Ethanol 116, Methanol 105. So, I read it as about EQUAL Octane Rating for either type of alcohol.

What happened here was what I hoped for: Let's open the "can of worms" on Ethanol forced down our throats, and find out some FACTS, instead of all the usual bullsh*t being thrown around! imp

 

[briwayjones]

FYI Indy cars burn pure Methanol, it has an octane ratio of 114 but has a low energy content. So it burns cooler, but at a ratio of 6.42:1 they suck up mass quantities of it.

Actually a year or two ago Indy switched over to Ethanol.

 

[rego]

Ethanol would stand no chance in a free market.