Ask the Car People.SM


The Inconvenient Truth About Ethanol

1067 messages,  Last post on May 04, 2013 at 2:12 PM

You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum.

What is this discussion about? Alternative Fuels

Messages Page 102 of 108

#1003 of 1067 Re: More Deception [gagrice] by jkinzel

Sep 14, 2010 (11:15 pm)

Replying to: gagrice (Sep 14, 2010 9:19 am)
Thanks Gary, this is good information.
 
Forgive me for getting off topic, but why should we put the same bad stuff in our bodies that we have to put in our cars. Well, unless it's sipping whiskey, one of the few good things to come from corn.

#1004 of 1067 EPA approves an increase in the ethanol scam by elias

Oct 14, 2010 (10:05 am)

EPA Approves Use of More Ethanol in Gasoline
 
AP
 
WASHINGTON – The Environmental Protection Agency has approved blending higher concentrations of ethanol into gasoline for newer vehicles, allowing mixtures with up to 15 percent of the corn-based fuel at the pump.
 
The current maximum blend is 10 percent. The EPA announced Wednesday that the higher blend will be approved for vehicles manufactured since 2007.
 
The move is politically popular in rural farm areas. But ethanol faces strong opposition from the auto industry, environmentalists, cattle ranchers, food companies and a broad coalition of other groups.
 
The EPA has said a congressional mandate for increased ethanol use can't be achieved without allowing higher blends. Congress has required refiners to blend 36 billion gallons of biofuels, mostly ethanol, into auto fuel by 2022.

#1005 of 1067 Re: EPA approves an increase in the ethanol scam [elias] by texases

Oct 14, 2010 (10:13 am)

Replying to: elias (Oct 14, 2010 10:05 am)
I was initially concerned about this, but I'm not now. It is a very limited approval, for 2007 and later cars, to be dispensed out of separate pumps clearly labeled E-15. Very, very few gas stations will go to the trouble of installing extra pump(s) (and, I assume, an underground tank) to sell E-15 gas to a small fraction of its customers.

#1006 of 1067 E-15 by skywatcher1973

Oct 29, 2010 (3:32 pm)

I am new to all of this stuff. I have only read a few things. So can someone explain this to me a little more? I also come across this website. http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/2010-10-13-ethanol-standard_N.ht- m
From what I have seen this adding of the ethanol up to 15% is going to mess up some cars & cause us to get lower mpgs. Anyone want to share what they think?

#1007 of 1067 Re: E-15 [skywatcher1973] by gagrice

Oct 29, 2010 (4:51 pm)

Replying to: skywatcher1973 (Oct 29, 2010 3:32 pm)
The current E10 cuts my mileage by about 10-15%. So I imagine it will drop more with more ethanol. Though my understanding is they will have to have a separate pump and only newer cars will run without damage. I don't want the junk in my vehicles. I would like US to go back to real gas again.

#1008 of 1067 Re: E-15 [gagrice] by berri

Oct 29, 2010 (5:44 pm)

Replying to: gagrice (Oct 29, 2010 4:51 pm)
Ask some boat or tractor owners about how ethanol sludged up their engines. Same for lawnmowers. Don't expect this 15% issue to back off because regardless of party the politicians are just as owned by companies like ADM and big corporate farmers and agricultural firms. Everyone uses the arguments about energy independence and clean air to justify this rip-off, but the only cleaning up is the fattening of the politicians wallets and the only independence is what they are looking forward to with their lobbyist contributions. Personally, I'm sick of having this ethanol crap shoved down my throat with no other options. If they are going to mandate fuels, then mandate that the gas stations must carry ethanol and non-ethanol alternatives so that the market can decide which is the better deal.

#1009 of 1067 to avoid ethanol in your fuel, burn diesel instead of "gasoline" by elias

Oct 30, 2010 (5:15 am)

one consideration for me for engine-type is which type of fuel is required to be more adulterated.
 
so for a commuter/high-mpg vehicle, a diesel vehicle with or without "adblue" additive is looking preferable to a gas-powered vehicle.
 
diesel fuel has actually been improved (ULSD) by US federal regulations, while gasoline is getting crappier and crappier.
 
(for a performance vehicle, higher % of ethanol can increase power, but it increases cost-per-gallon and cost-per-mile.)

#1010 of 1067 Too bad if the US chose a lousy solution by galonga

Oct 30, 2010 (6:19 am)

It is just too bad if the US chose to produce ethanol from corn, which is by far the worst solution when compared to all others (sugarcane, cellulose, etc)
 
Even worse if it chose to continue depending on the arabs to supply it with oil and for that created a surcharge on the much cheaper ethanol from Brazil.
 
Ethanol btw which is being used there in a proportion of 5% since 1941 and now is up to 24% and no car was ever hurt. So there´s plenty of HISTORY to prove it works.
 
And the same ethanol which allowed the country not to import oil anymore, and is now more consumed than gasoline.
 
And the same ethanol which is used reguarly in Sweden as well with no food, environmental, motor, etc problems the so called "experts" love to claim.
 
The fact of the matter is that claiming that ALL ethanol is bad is like saying that ALL knifes are bad because some people use to kill others.
 
ONLY AMERICAN ethanol is bad: let´s be clear on that!
 
And to those who still disagree TRAVEL A LITTLE and see it working. Get off your lazy asses from that couch, visit and study how other countries did it and learn from them!

#1011 of 1067 Re: Too bad if the US chose a lousy solution [galonga] by gagrice

Oct 30, 2010 (6:58 am)

Replying to: galonga (Oct 30, 2010 6:19 am)
You have presented some interesting facts. You left out the most important fact in my opinion. The MPG difference between E85, E100, E10 and Regular Unleaded Gas.
 
According to the US EPA Fuel Economy tests, a new Toyota Sequoia will get 12 MPG on the highway with E85 and 17 MPG with RUG. That is a 29% reduction in mileage.
 
I just paid $2.95 per gallon for RUG. The closest station with E85 is selling at $3 per gallon. A round trip to San Francisco about 1000 miles will cost me $77 more in fuel with E85 vs RUG. Plus an extra stop to refuel. As Elias pointed out a diesel makes a lot more sense. The same 1000 mile trip in a diesel SUV will cost $147 less than E85.
 
I am glad you pointed out how foolish making ethanol from corn is. Also the 53 cent tariff on Brazilian sugar ethanol is idiocy put on US in the late 1970s, to protect the corn farmers and ethanol producers.
 
Until we stop the corporate welfare on ethanol it will continue to be a huge waste of tax dollars and will not save US a single gallon of Saudi oil.
 
Maybe we will start buying some of your surplus oil and make diesel. Still the best use of oil I can think of for motor vehicles.

#1012 of 1067 Re: E-15 [skywatcher1973] by kipk

Oct 30, 2010 (7:26 am)

Replying to: skywatcher1973 (Oct 29, 2010 3:32 pm)
Just spend some time looking through this thread and you will find claims of 8%-15+% worse fuel mileage with 10% ethanol , vs straight Dino fuels. Ethanol contains less energy per volume than Dino gas.
 
Lets use 10% for the sake of argument.
 
If you get 10% less mileage with E10 fuel, then you will need to purchase 10% more fuel to go the same distance.
 
Say your car averages 20 mpg on Dino and you drive 200 miles. You will consume 10 gallons of fuel. But it will take 10% more E10 to drive that 200 miles. Therefore you use 11 gallons. Of that 11 gallons, 9.9 gallons is Dino and 1.1 gal is Ethanol
 
So for all practical purposes you used the same amount of Dino + a gallon of Ethanol. So you bought the Dino and a gallon of Ethanol. I don't understand how saving 1/10 gallon of Dino is going to help us become independent of foreign oil.
 
However the feds levy taxes on every gallon of fuel purchased. So now they can tax 11 gallons instead of 10 gallons.
 
Now figure the fuel it takes to plant the crops, fertilize the crops, irrigate the crops, harvest the crops, Transport the crops, convert the crops to ethanol ( with sugar that under went similar expense to produce), transporting the ethanol and/or the dino and more energy to blend the two before it is ready for fuel. No telling how many gallons of fuel that took.
 
Some will say,"Well it takes energy to produce dino!" Yes it does, but we are using the same amount of Dino PLUS the ethanol.
 
Some person or persons in Washington are living large on uh...Donations, I expect.
 
Kip

Messages Page 102 of 108

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement