"Ethanol"

Yeah it kind of boggles my mind it's taking so long to gain traction. We've been going down the low displacement high CR/boost road for at least a decade now so it has to be close but every time this debate comes up there are tons of nay-sayers talking about farming logistics and all this other crap no one cares about. It may not be as green as it was originally presented but it's cheap alcohol fuel, no one said a damned thing about being green.

 

I guess it depends on where you stand. The environment is much more important than the tiny boosted community.

That is why all the naysayers show up.

I understand the pros and cons but I am choosing to ignore the big picture cons.

 

Or Mitsubishi forums. We own Subaru all day.

I've been running it in a turbo car for 15 years now. E85 is race gas on the street.

Literally identical car (minus some fuel mods) made 300/300 whp/tq at 17psi on 93 octane 10.0 aft and 12* timing and was right at the brink of detonation.

E85 tune made 405/425 whp/tq at 30+psi, 12.0 afr and 20* timing. Zero detonation.

 

god I need some e85 in my life. Just wish it was closer than 33 miles away. My AEM Will run dual fuel maps but I've been hesitant to do it.

 

Farmers are not growing it to make green fuel. Farmers are growing it because it's a heavily subsidized crop. Unfortunately the more you grow, the cheaper it becomes... so you have to grow more in order to reap the same revenue... but you just grew more so you just made it cheaper which means you have to grow more in order to make the same revenue, and so on and so forth.

So we end up with a major surplus of corn. So what do we do with it? We turn it into ethanol to burn in vehicles under the greenwashing guise of "more environmentally friendly." It's mere lobbying by Big Ag and politics as usual. They also feed it to cattle and pigs which is another entirely different discussion considering those animals aren't really meant to eat corn.

 

Yeah we have it all over. Dual map for us to run gas just to clean injectors. Research e85 goo. After 10 years of e85 on SS (e85 safe) fuel lines the car had some issues. Lines and all fittings rotted out. Rubber in line just poored out the SS when we pulled it.

Now it runs nascar e99 lines and fittings. Like $400+ for parts.

 

And that is my only hesitation to run e85, the rubber issue.

 

Because the oil industry hads been nothing but forthcoming and honest lmao. Back to my principal point, being economical hasn't been mentioned a single time by ethanol support. Can we stop harping on it?

 

I think you failed to understand my intentions. The strawman introduction of "oil industry being more forthcoming" has nothing to do with what I've been saying. If anything I've been incorporating politics into the whole debacle that is the ethanol/gasoline industry.

When you mention ethanol being "more economical" are you talking about the manufacturing of it or with regards to our wallets at the pump?

And I won't stop harping on ethanol because I think the whole industry around it is crap and there are far better ways to subsidize farmers to grow crops that we actually eat.

 

It's clear you have failed to understand my point. You're presenting arguments to points no one is making. I'm not the one talking about economy, you are. No one who supports ethanol has made a single remark about it being a green fuel.

My comment about the oil industry is the exact same as the comment you made previously about the ethanol industry. You're taking about "green washing" and lobbying towards ethanol as if it hasn't been happening in oil for decades.

The bottom line for virtually 100% of ethanol supporters is that it's cheap alcohol fuel. Whether or not it's more environmentally friendly than gasoline or what ever else you're talking about is an entirely different debate.

 

So true. Good info can be found looking at Brazil. They use only corn fuel. But they make it from sugar cane instead of corn like us.

 

I don't think anyone argues that it's cheap top fuel for boosted engines. But at what expense? It's cheap because it's subsidized by us, the taxpayers. No way in hell I'd want to run ethanol in any of my engines by choice. Even less in any of my tools that use small engines.
It just appears in your statements that you couldn't care less at the expense of who or what it takes to get that 'cheap' fuel. I know you never stated that, to me that's the sentiment that the posts give off. That's all. And even if you don't care how ethanol affects the other aspects brought up besides your purchase price of it, that's cool too. Murica.

 

The logic of burning MORE fuel (lower MPGs with ethanol in gasoline) so farmers get money from the government to grow something we don't need, escapes me!

 

I honestly have no idea what you're ranting about.

Literally the first sentence of the first post of this thread, eg the subject, reads: "Please let me hear what everybody thinks about Ethanol"

Pretty sure that opens up the full gamut of debate for discussion.

You're an ethanol supporter. Cool. You don't care about farming logistics and this "other crap." Cool. But there are a lot of consumers that consider all that "other crap" because it ties into our economy, politics, environmental issues, etc.

 

Then why do I pay the same amount for 10% or 15% ethanol fuel than I do 100% gasoline?

 

The initial principle of weaning off foreign oil wasn't a bad concept. It wasn't an emissions plan, it was a political one.

So corn subsidy continued (it already existed, for other reasons, it just got bigger).

It's well proven that it takes more energy to make the fuel than is saved by it's displacement of crude. Which was ok when 'weaning' was the objective. But as a conservation measure it stinks.

It's also well known that vehicles suffer about a 10% MPG hit running e10. Another loser in the conservation think tank.

But the political grasp and the corn subsidy for corporate farms is great. I mean getting paid not to grow something is awesome too.

So yea, it's outlived it's usefulness as it was originally intended. Time for it to go, but it won't. No one in the right position is bold enough to lead the charge. There is a lot of gnashing of teeth over the dismantlement of the EPA, but I doubt that this topic is even on the radar, and certainly not the short list.

To the OP, as far as use in our engines, no harm is done, other than MPG loss. But even buying e0 has no ROI given the price delta.

But e10 will never darken the gas cap of my infrequently run small displacement motors, like lawn tools, generator, boat, etc. Long periods of sitting do really bad things. Fresh e0 is all they get.

If you have a lawn business and your units run all day everyday, e10 is fine. It's the stuff that gets stale for the casual guy that causes issues.

 

Aurora is always facing that problem. It's what happens when the population (in a high altitude semi-arid desert, no less) exceeds supply. Although the primary reason is simply a matter of water rights management on the east side of the continental divide. Downstream water rights owners are guaranteed their acre-feet before upstream owners.

The reason for that is even simpler, you live in Boulder. EVERYTHING is more expensive in Boulder county &/or the city of. Especially that station on 28th & Valmont. They pad their profit margin by raising the consumer purchase price of the ethanol blends to near the same price as their non blended. If I need E85 in Boulder county I head for the Western station on Main St. in Longmont. If I'm on I-25 I hit the Kum-n-Go stations as they are consistently the cheapest.

Current local price for 100 oct. E-0 aviation fuel is $6.58/gal., 91 oct. E-10 is $2.55/gal & 105 oct. E-85 is $1.79/gal. If I blend my own 93 oct. at the pump using my 1:4 ratio, the price is $2.20/gal. The considerably cheaper price of E-85 more than makes up for the loss of 10% MPG.

As far as changing anything to do with changing/eliminating US Gov't agri subsidies that have been around since 1922, good luck with that. You'll have more success changing the US to the metric system. My reasoning is thus: Why not be taking advantage of it instead of merely being forced to contribute to it?

 

You can rattle off negative consequences of the oil industry all day long, and don't get me wrong I'm not the type to do so. My point is all of the negative aspect of ethanol are mirrored across any and all alternative so to me those kinds of arguments are just pointless banter. All that matters to me is whether or not it's an effective fuel for my engine. It is, case closed.

 

Gotcha.

 

How in the hell does 8 bushels of corn feed a person for a year?