Sign In Join 



Will ethanol E85 catch on in the US? Will we Live Green and Go Yellow? - READ ONLY

2104 messages,  Last post on Oct 27, 2006 at 5:34 AM

You are in the Hybrid Vehicles - Archived Discussions Forum. Your Host is pf_flyer

This discussion is ARCHIVED. To reactivate the discussion, post a request in the Lost? Ask the Hybrids Host for directions! discussion.

What is this discussion about? Chrysler, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz, Mercury, Chevrolet Impala, Chevrolet Monte Carlo, Chevrolet Avalanche, Alternative Fuels, Hybrid Cars, Coupe, Hatchback, Truck, Sedan, SUV


Messages Page 210 of 211
1
...
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#2086 of 2104
E85 pumps lose UL safety rating by rockylee
Oct 19, 2006 (4:03 pm)
Stations may have to halt sales of fuel
 
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061019/BUSINESS01/610190316/10- 14/BUSINESS01
 

 
Rocky
#2087 of 2104
Re: E85 pumps lose UL safety rating [rockylee] by gagrice
Oct 19, 2006 (4:48 pm)

Replying to: rockylee (Oct 19, 2006 4:03 pm)

Very interesting indeed. Same reason Toyota is balking on FFVs. Corrosion of anything aluminum. Good thing FFVs can run on regular gas.
 
A move by the nation's largest product-safety laboratory to remove its approval of ethanol fuel pumps has frozen the rollout of new ethanol stations and cast doubt on the legal status of the roughly 1,000 stations already selling E85 fuel.
 
Without certification from Underwriters Laboratories, the company that tests thousands of products for safety and manages the "UL" symbol, state officials and ethanol industry executives say E85 pumps may run afoul of state and local fire codes that require "listed" equipment for pumping fuel. A fire marshal in Columbus, Ohio, ordered two E85 pumps shut down last week because of a lack of UL approval and Michigan officials are wrestling with the question as well.
 
Mark Griffin, president of the Michigan Petroleum Association, which represents 1,500 stores, said state officials were still wrestling with the question of whether the pumps at Michigan's 26 E85 stations still met state standards, and new pumps wouldn't be available until UL clears up the confusion, which "could be a matter of weeks. It could be months or years."
 
"Somebody asked whether this thing is heading toward a train wreck," Griffin said. "Well, I don't know."
 
In a statement, UL said it had no reports of problems with E85 systems, but withdrew its certification due to concerns about how ethanol can corrode parts of the fueling system.
#2088 of 2104
Re: E85 pumps lose UL safety rating [gagrice] by rockylee
Oct 19, 2006 (4:51 pm)

Replying to: gagrice (Oct 19, 2006 4:48 pm)

gagrice, as you already know pal I like to add topics to the forums pal. I try to read every post I can most of the time when I'm on my days off from work.
 
Rocky
#2089 of 2104
Re: E85 pumps lose UL safety rating [rockylee] by gagrice
Oct 19, 2006 (4:58 pm)

Replying to: rockylee (Oct 19, 2006 4:51 pm)

This may be a blessing. It will make the price of ethanol come down and gas with it. Much of the last gas price run up was refiners looking for sources of ethanol to mix with gas. To fulfill the mandate for 2.97% ethanol in all unleaded gas.
 
Keep reading and posting interesting auto stuff.
#2090 of 2104
Re: E85 pumps lose UL safety rating [gagrice] by rockylee
Oct 19, 2006 (6:03 pm)

Replying to: gagrice (Oct 19, 2006 4:58 pm)

Keep reading and posting interesting auto stuff.
 
Will do my best when time permits.
 
Rocky
#2091 of 2104
Re: maybe we should revert back to something from an earlier age [kw5kw] by stevedebi
Oct 19, 2006 (6:49 pm)

Replying to: kw5kw (Oct 19, 2006 10:33 am)

"The Freestyle was intended as one of the Bold Move vehicles to get them on a turn-around path, but it turned out to be little more than Bold Talk. The next Bold Move will probably be to Mexico."
 
You might better explain that to Indonesia, where the forest fires are making it impossible for planes to land.
 
You are proposing burning items that are carbon based and will produce a lot of CO2 and other pollutants, including ash.
#2092 of 2104
Re: Stupid US Consumers.. [snakeweasel] by jae5
Oct 20, 2006 (9:47 am)

Replying to: snakeweasel (Oct 16, 2006 10:08 am)

I'm out in aurora now, so this past summer has been cooler than last year. But my thing is sitting in traffic to/from work, which is very hairy on the way home. I'm looking at a minimum 38 mile loop. So a range of 50 miles would not do it for me. I'd like more than a 10 mile cushion. Most likely this would be a summer car for me, like a toy to drive on good / not so bad days. In the winter I'd probably park the thing.
 
Again, there are things about an EV that I really don't like and need these things figured out and presented in an all-around manner. Meaning, just don't give me the good, give me the con as well. Myself and others would be more accepting of it if alternatives were presented in that manner.
#2093 of 2104
Re: maybe we should revert back to something from an earlier age [stevedebi] by kw5kw
Oct 20, 2006 (10:57 am)

Replying to: stevedebi (Oct 19, 2006 6:49 pm)

Where you have uncontrolled combustion, i.e.: the forest fires, building fires, &c. one will have polution. I'm not advocating uncontrolled fireboxes as in the past but very specific, very conrolled combustion.
#2094 of 2104
Re: maybe we should revert back to something from an earlier age [kw5kw] by stevedebi
Oct 20, 2006 (12:55 pm)

Replying to: kw5kw (Oct 20, 2006 10:57 am)

"I'm not advocating uncontrolled fireboxes as in the past but very specific, very conrolled combustion."
 
What do you propose to do with the by products?
#2095 of 2104
Re: maybe we should revert back to something from an earlier age [kw5kw] by rorr
Oct 20, 2006 (1:34 pm)

Replying to: kw5kw (Oct 20, 2006 10:57 am)

"I'm not advocating uncontrolled fireboxes as in the past but very specific, very conrolled combustion."
 
We have that already. It's called the Internal Combustion Engine.
 
And the efficiency (BTU's in the fuel converted to forward motion) is SUBSTANTIALLY higher than burning a fuel (whether it is gasoline, wood pulp, paper, or recycled cow farts) in a steam boiler (particularly if you are trying to have a boiler in a closed system driving a generator to produce on-board electricity to drive a motor).
 
There's a big reason that locomotives converted from coal-burning steam power to big diesel electrics. It's called progress.

Messages Page 210 of 211
1
...
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

New? Join Now!

Forum Tools

Please sign in.
Email Address:

Password:

Forgot Password?

Search Forums

Enter Keyword(s)

Advanced Search

Browse by Vehicle



View All Vehicles
Advertisement
Ask the Community
See What People Are Asking

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic


View All Topics

Today's Chats

Advertisement