Avoiding ethanol

The effects of ethanol pollution are interesting.

 

Our pumps say up to 10% in Houston area, other states have 15% and isn't E85 85% ethanol? My vehicles would love it if that 1% max was all.

 

The amount of non-food crop ethanol production indeed is steadily increasing, especially those varieties viable on land not suitable for corn or other food crop. Another major plus also being genetically modified crops are much more acceptable here because they aren't a food source.

No body says there won't be economic side effects from this, but economic disruption is inevitable no matter what you do. The world is running out of petroleum and so it is increasingly expensive both economically and politically as reliable producers decline in the world. Food prices will rise as the price of oil rises anyway because our highly-mechanized agriculture is so energy dependent.

Just look at the rise of gas prices since the Libyan uprisings began. I wonder how long it will take Libya to return to full production if Ghaddafi falls; even if he remains. If he falls which Arab oil producer is next? I'd love it if gas goes back even to $2.50 a gallon but the current upheavals in the mid-east are making me think that's increasingly unlikely.

I see the increasing use of ethanol and other bio-fuels as win-win for the US because we have the arable land and the mechanized agri-industry to do this (more jobs for Americans that CAN NOT BE EXPORTED) in addition to reducing dependence on foreign energy.

 

I think he means 1% max tolerance; therefore if pump says 10%, 11% is the absolute max allowed by law. 15% means 16% max. E85 is indeed 85% ethanol, only use that in flex-fuel certified vehicles.

 

I am not arguing in favor of being extorted by a bunch of extremist America haters, just that every "solution" seems to just cause a different but equal problem for our wallets. I think it sucks big turds that those feebleminded countries playin that shit don't realize where their money is coming from, realize our technology enabled that cash flow, that they are not gonna benefit from our economy being in the shitter, that we will only take so much of their bullshit game playin & that if our economy tanks, theirs is right behind. China and India may be developing countries but there is no way they can make up for America not importing what we do. If we fail, the world falls on it face on many levels, not just economic.

 

We dont need our own sugar cane industry to support ethanol production, we just need our government to adopt the free trade principals it pushes on other nations. Brazilian sugar cane ethaol can be imported for less than half of the cost of producing corn-based ethanol in the US. Add to that the fact that all that land could be freed up to produce other crops/livestock.

Why doesnt this happen? Because doing this would save us money, but cost farmers (cheaper food) and government (more subsidies for the whiny bitch farmers), so they make us pay more for it!

Sadly it'll never happen, but if the US pursued truly free trade, like importing Brazilian ethanol, prices on everything would not only drop from buying cheaper stuff, but there would be a race to the bottom among the nations who face losing American business to other countries.

Please dont mistake this for an anti-American rant and label me another BartStar- I love this country. Just shedding some light...

 

Hard to disagree with that. But even if we drill more in the US it's very limited (compared to useage) and only delays the inevitable. Oil recovery from remaining fields as well as coal and oil shale gasification will get us some more time while being still more more expensive. In the mean time, the rest of the developed world moves to other forms of energy to power vehicles and industry. When we wake up, they'll have a 20-30 year head start.

As important as clean air is to humanity, it's not about pollution. It's about survival. It took the US almost a century to build a transportation infrastructure around petroleum fueled internal combustion engines. It will probably take close to the same time to change it to whatever energy source is viable after it's gone. Gotta start now.

 

Why trade energy dependence on flaky Islamic states to flaky Latin-American states?

You can be sure that as soon as Brazilian ethanol imports killed American production they will increase price to just below the amount that keeps American production out of it.

I'd much rather pay for American graft and corruption than foreign. Especially if it brings American jobs.

 

#1 is not a problem since modern vehicles are built to handle 15% ethanol so they don't have such plastics used. It may be a problem for older 'classics'. They will always have to be dealt with on an exception basis, just like engines designed for leaded fuels.

#2 is not much of problem since most people will have been using ethanol since it was new. Not really sure what you're meaning is by ethanol being volatile; gasoline is much more volatile after all. Plus, it's interesting to note that Seafoam's main active ingredient is alcohol... ethanol is alcohol. Just saying.

#3 is only important if you plan on getting lots of water in your fuel; not really a problem in automotive applications as you noted. If you DO get water, then use a water removal additive which is...you should guess it...alcohol. It carries the water through the system and burns it. If you're getting enough water to suffer phase separation then a better solution is to look for the leak or change the gas station you're using.

 

I did state 'as you noted'.. so wouldn't you agree what you said is pretty much extraneous in a General Automotive forum?

I'm perplexed by what definition or conotation of 'volatile' you meant. A strict definition, the tendency of a substance to vaporize, doesn't have much to do with being a solvent, at least in your context. Most people would take it as I did, however incorrectly, as the tendency to burn (explode) in an uncontrolled manner. Ethanol has higher octane than gasoline therefore gasoline burns with greater volatility, i.e., less controlled.

 

This isn't a chemistry forum and so I would apply general word definitions since average joes like me read them: there are many definitions of volatile (check the dictionary) and 'explosive' is one.

But, again, in this forum that concerns fuel injected engines and vehicles with sealed fuel systems that pop a CES light and trouble code if integrity is breached this concern is at best irrelevant. At worst prejudicial, even inflammatory.

I think it might have merit in a chain saw, lawn mower or motorcycle forum, as you suggest. But my point here is this: these red-herring issues pop up as part of the mis-information that clouds the whole ethanol question as used in in general automotive today.

 

cheers to that!

though if i can hop in on this discussion a little - my family business is a grist mill, we grind corn, and keep a very close eye on corn prices and "corn economics" if i can call it that. that being said, if you do your research, the production of ethanol is not helping the oil crisis in any way. any subscribers to popular mechanics can go back and read an excellent, non-bias article about the cost to produce ethanol (over a year ago) . when you factor in the tractors that plant the seed all the way through harvest to trucking, to the plants that convert it, more foreign oil is used to produce ethanol than would be saved not to mess with it. . . and i don't like it cause it makes corn prices go up haha. its a known fact that ethanol is not the solution, and likely will not much advance past the stage its in. its just a political instigated feel good story.

 

Thank you....just another "solution" that solves nothing and creates a side problem.

 

My question is how do they get the ethanol to mix with gasoline? As someone pointed out alcohol mixes with water so I assume it would NOT mix with petroleum without some other emulsifiying additives?

And it may flash faster than gasoline, but obviously does not produce nearly the heat energy. You can barely see the flame and must be relatively close to feel the heat.

I have become a believer after having heard so many first hand accounts of problems with especially small engines and boat motors. Regarding the state by state lists, I have seen several stations in my area that were once listed correctly then the station converted to ethanol mix and no one updated.

 

When put in THAT context...yes, it's relevant to help understand how things are misconstrued!

I don't really know how much of an issue it is. Yes, if ENOUGH water is absorbed it could separate out... but the design and maintenance of fuel systems in cars consider this. If they come unsealed, and therefore exposed to atmospheric moisture, a CEL goes off and the owner is alerted to put the cap back on. In like manner, gas stations are required to be properly maintained and check their stocks for water contamination in addition to integrity much more assiduously now.

So, IME, while it may be an "issue" it's not one we're too likely to have to deal with unless something else goes terribly wrong.

 

Ethanol mixes with gas AND water, up to a point. Once it becomes saturated with water if 'falls out' of the gasoline... that's the phase separation thing.

It doesn't really flash (combust) faster than gas: it's actually more correct to say it flashes slower since it's octane is higher than gasoline. That means it combusts less readily; used in gasoline it raises the octane of the blend and prevents pre-ignition which is too-fast ignition/burning of the air-fuel mixture.

The problems with small engines may be real, the problems in the automotive sector (other than lower specific energy content) are exaggerated or even imaginary.

 

I wasn't trying to give a "solution" i was merely adding color to the discussion. and i have not created any problems, just brought light to an existing detail of the ethanol production process. sorry being contributive haha.

 

This article may be applicable to more than one reply - http://www.businessweek.com/lifestyle/content/may2009/bw20090514_058678.htm

If it is taking more oil to produce a given amount of ethanol than the oil it replaces, the evil brown people will make more money.

As for compelling one to use cornshit, that is only going to exacerbate the above problem.

You seem to have me confused for someone else. That said, do not presume to tell me my business.

I may have to look into this.

If it is taking more oil to produce a given amount of ethanol than the oil it replaces, it is a win-lose. Guess who loses?

Yes it does.

You hit the nail on the head. It's become an industrial complex, and thus yet another avenue by which the current regime is shafting the people.

Finally, I am surprised that no one has brought property rights into the discussion, and whether it is right to compel one to put something in one's engine, regardless of whether it will be damaged. It seems that the Leninist paradigm of politics being who does what to whom has taken root...this is not going to end well for you.