Ethanol conversion?

[Uncle Ben]

I recently learned that the energy cost to produce ethanol for cars is
much less than the energy benefit, contrary to popular belief. (In
fact, the reverse is true for gasoline, which has not seemed to
prevent our huge use of gasoline.) Further, if we are at or near
"peak oil," the price of gasoline is never going to come down and stay
down. Biofuels (not hydrogen nor hybrids IMHO) are our only hope if
we are to stop sending boatloads of money to people who would destroy
us.

So I have looked at the pros and cons of using E85 (85% ethanol, 15%
gasoline), which has recently become available in Albany, NY, near
where I live. It seems that Subarus love ethanol, which is close to a
racing fuel for them. The energy density of ethanol is lower than that
of gasoline, but what counts is miles per dollar, not miles per
gallon. (Stories of corrosion damage by ethanol are apparently not
true for modern cars, in which neoprene has replaced lots of the
rubber that used to be used. Methanol is a different story.)

One can buy kits to convert any fuel-injected car for ethanol/gasoline
use in any proportion. The kits are supposed to fool your ECU into
enriching the mixtures without lighting up the Check Engine light.
One intrepid WRX user on another forum just replaced his fuel
injectors with others of a greater nozzle diameter, as I understand
it.

What happens if one fills up with E85 and does nothing to "convert"
his car? I imagine that performance would suffer somewhat, but would
the car run OK although somewhat lean? Is it really necessary to
convert?

 

[Guest]

I recently learned that the energy cost to produce ethanol for cars is
much less than the energy benefit, contrary to popular belief. (In
fact, the reverse is true for gasoline, which has not seemed to
prevent our huge use of gasoline.) Further, if we are at or near
"peak oil," the price of gasoline is never going to come down and stay
down. Biofuels (not hydrogen nor hybrids IMHO) are our only hope if
we are to stop sending boatloads of money to people who would destroy
us.

So I have looked at the pros and cons of using E85 (85% ethanol, 15%
gasoline), which has recently become available in Albany, NY, near
where I live. It seems that Subarus love ethanol, which is close to a
racing fuel for them. The energy density of ethanol is lower than that
of gasoline, but what counts is miles per dollar, not miles per
gallon. (Stories of corrosion damage by ethanol are apparently not
true for modern cars, in which neoprene has replaced lots of the
rubber that used to be used. Methanol is a different story.)

One can buy kits to convert any fuel-injected car for ethanol/gasoline
use in any proportion. The kits are supposed to fool your ECU into
enriching the mixtures without lighting up the Check Engine light.
One intrepid WRX user on another forum just replaced his fuel
injectors with others of a greater nozzle diameter, as I understand
it.

What happens if one fills up with E85 and does nothing to "convert"
his car? I imagine that performance would suffer somewhat, but would
the car run OK although somewhat lean? Is it really necessary to
convert?

If the computer, O2 sensors, and fuel injectors cannot adapt 'rich'
enough you'll be running the engine very lean, which will destroy it
in short order.

I suspect the fellow who changes his injectors may have to run E85 at
this point? If he swapped out injectors that delivered more fuel given
the same 'signal' from the ECU, he may have a problem with the signal
being adapted 'lean' enough to run on 'straight' gas.


Perhaps a useful experiment would be to fill the tank with various
mixtures of 'gas' and 'E85' and see how much E85 it can tolerate?


Dave

 

[Valued Corporate #120,345 Employee (B A R R Y)]

It seems that Subarus love ethanol, which is close to a
racing fuel for them.

How exactly are Subies different from any other modern piston engine
in regards to ethanol?

 

[Uncle Ben]

How exactly are Subies different from any other modern piston engine
in regards to ethanol?

Probably no difference. I was quoting the guy who spent 10 years
messing around with ethanol with his Sube. In any case, I hear so many
complaints about ethanol by those stuck with E10 that I thought it
worth citing an example of excellent performance with E85 when the
conversion is thorough (mixtures right, fuel pressure raised, to
mention two changes I happen to remember).

 

[Uncle Ben]

(snip)

Perhaps a useful experiment would be to fill the tank with various
mixtures of 'gas' and 'E85' and see how much E85 it can tolerate?

Dave-

Good idea. I'll do it.

 

[Valued Corporate #120,345 Employee (B A R R Y)]

In any case, I hear so many
complaints about ethanol by those stuck with E10

What have you heard?

We've had E10 here in Connecticut for ~ 5 years, since MBTE was
banned. I've never heard anyone complain, except for aircraft or
classic car uses.

 

[clare at snyder dot ontario dot canada]

What have you heard?

We've had E10 here in Connecticut for ~ 5 years, since MBTE was
banned. I've never heard anyone complain, except for aircraft or
classic car uses.

And it gives roughly 5% poorer gas mileage on most cars.

 

[Rick Courtright]

If the computer, O2 sensors, and fuel injectors cannot adapt 'rich'
enough you'll be running the engine very lean, which will destroy it
in short order.

Hi,

Over the weekend I was at racing event where one of the "special" events
involved a New Beetle that's being campaigned throughout the US running
on E85.

I asked the fellow what tuning mods they had to do to run it on E85. He
said they'd swapped out the ECU for a programmable aftermarket unit
(makes sense for different track conditions, I suppose) and they had to
enrich the mixture by approx 25%. I didn't ask if he achieved that w/
just the ECU, or if he had to swap out injectors, too.

Now since this is for racing apps, street use might not require THAT
much enrichment. However, I'd probably consider looking at what GM and
Ford have done w/ their "flex fuel" models to see how they handle the
transition between fuels on the street before going too far w/ a vehicle
not originally designed for E85.

Rick

 

[Uncle Ben]

And it gives roughly 5% poorer gas mileage on most cars.

Yes, the estimates run from a few percent to 15 percent worse mileage.
And the price is not lower enough to compensate.

 

[Frank Boettcher]

I recently learned that the energy cost to produce ethanol for cars is
much less than the energy benefit, contrary to popular belief. (In
fact, the reverse is true for gasoline, which has not seemed to
prevent our huge use of gasoline.) Further, if we are at or near
"peak oil," the price of gasoline is never going to come down and stay
down. Biofuels (not hydrogen nor hybrids IMHO) are our only hope if
we are to stop sending boatloads of money to people who would destroy
us.

You might want to share the fully objective learned information that
caused you to draw this conclusion. Be sure to factor in the
unprecedented rise in food prices that you are paying with the
diversion of crops to ethanol production, a not so hidden cost. I
have to eat, I don't necessarily have to drive.

What I've seen recently reported is that Congress is rethinking the
whole subsidy thing considering that they might have been mistaken.

 

[Frank]

You might want to share the fully objective learned information that
caused you to draw this conclusion. Be sure to factor in the
unprecedented rise in food prices that you are paying with the
diversion of crops to ethanol production, a not so hidden cost. I
have to eat, I don't necessarily have to drive.

What I've seen recently reported is that Congress is rethinking the
whole subsidy thing considering that they might have been mistaken.

Biofuels and alternative energy sources have their place but legislating
change is shear stupidity. Only about 5% of those in congress have
degrees in science or engineering. Yet they legislate technical
solutions from lobbyists whose clients profit from their new laws.
Environmentalists have have put a strangle hold on practical, but
environmentally friendly solutions like nuclear and clean burning coal.

If I were op, I would not waste my time. Subaru can make duel fuel
vehicles. There is one E85 station in my whole state of Delaware, about
30 miles from where I live.

 

[Uncle Ben]

....
Biofuels (not hydrogen nor hybrids IMHO) are our only hope if

You might want to share the fully objective learned information that
caused you to draw this conclusion. Be sure to factor in the
unprecedented rise in food prices that you are paying with the
diversion of crops to ethanol production, a not so hidden cost. I
have to eat, I don't necessarily have to drive.
....

OK. The best presentation I have found of the state of things is a
new book "Energy Victory" by Robert Zubrin. To summarize,
the most important use of oil in the US is for gasoline for
transporation, and that requires liquid fuels. I am all in favor of
nuclear plants for generating electricity. but we need a form of
energy that is readily used in cars. The current theory is to
generate hydrogen and compress it or liquify it and carry it around
for fuel cells or combustion.

Hydrogen will never do. If it is in liquid form it will slowly boil
off. I wouldn't want to go into a parking garage full of hydrogen-
powered cars and light a match there. Compression require a heavy
steel bottle to hold it, and that might double the weight of a car.

Hybrids are good, but they are expensive and heavy and they still use
enough gasoline to make them inferior to biofuels. And batteries are a
complication.

Ethanol is produced in abundance in Brazil at low cost using sugar as
a feed stock. We should not be charging a high tariff on its
importation. Nor should we be subsidizing the use of corn for
ethanol; the evidence is not clear that our diversion of corn from
food to fuel is solely responsible for world-wide food inflation, but
in any case, there are many other sources from which to make
biofuels. Coal is one of them if you consider using methanol.

Distribution of ethanol is a hard problem, but if it is important
enough, it can be solved the way Brazil solved it: require all cars
sold in the US to be flex-fuel. It goes against my libertarian
principles, but solves the nucleation problem -- how to get a user
base large enough to repay the massive installation of ethanol pumps.

Flex-fuel cars are pretty much like our gasoline cars; the main
change is in range of mixtures that work. If we have the volume of
production, the cost of a flex-fuel car should not be much more than
current cars. Conversion of current cars should cost only a few
hundred.

This is not the place to try to answer every question about bio-
fuels. Get Zubrin's book!

Uncle Ben

 

[Dominic Richens]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E85_in_standard_engines

 

[Frank Boettcher]

...
Biofuels (not hydrogen nor hybrids IMHO) are our only hope if
OK. The best presentation I have found of the state of things is a
new book "Energy Victory" by Robert Zubrin. To summarize,
the most important use of oil in the US is for gasoline for
transporation, and that requires liquid fuels.

I haven't read the book. However, I consider Zubrin no more an expert
on that subject than I do Al Gore an expert in the area of global
warming, causes and cures. I believe Zubrin has devoted most of his
career to promotion of space exploration

I am all in favor of
nuclear plants for generating electricity.

Ah, where were you when I needed you in the seventies when my company,
the leading producer of nuclear components and the first to engineer a
"pre liscenced facility" was being pounded out of business by
regulators, hollywood liberals, and the media.

but we need a form of
energy that is readily used in cars. The current theory is to
generate hydrogen and compress it or liquify it and carry it around
for fuel cells or combustion.
..

Hydrogen will never do. If it is in liquid form it will slowly boil
off. I wouldn't want to go into a parking garage full of hydrogen-
powered cars and light a match there. Compression require a heavy
steel bottle to hold it, and that might double the weight of a car.

I'm sure there was an expert that said "gasoline and the internal
combustion engine will never replace the horse drawn carriage"

I was fortunate enough to be an evaluator at the local high school
senior projects last week. One of the projects I evaluated was an
electrolisis/fuel cell device. Yes there are problems. No it is not
viable at this time. The one thing that I took away was the
enthusiasm of the student and his intent to major in Engineering with
the hope of working on fuel cell technology.

Hybrids are good, but they are expensive and heavy and they still use
enough gasoline to make them inferior to biofuels. And batteries are a
complication.

Ethanol is produced in abundance in Brazil at low cost using sugar as
a feed stock. We should not be charging a high tariff on its
importation. Nor should we be subsidizing the use of corn for
ethanol; the evidence is not clear that our diversion of corn from
food to fuel is solely responsible for world-wide food inflation

It is clear to me that with crop yield at record levels which usually
causes a reduction in the price of corn, price has risen by
approximately 25%. Direct relation to the diversion of a substantial
portion of the crop to production of ethanol, driven by subsidies.
You of course can believe what you wish.

in any case, there are many other sources from which to make
biofuels. Coal is one of them if you consider using methanol.

Distribution of ethanol is a hard problem, but if it is important
enough, it can be solved the way Brazil solved it: require all cars
sold in the US to be flex-fuel. It goes against my libertarian
principles, but solves the nucleation problem -- how to get a user
base large enough to repay the massive installation of ethanol pumps.

I would prefer to let the free market dictate what direction we go in.
"Requiring" by the government doesn't have a great track record in my
view.

Flex-fuel cars are pretty much like our gasoline cars; the main
change is in range of mixtures that work. If we have the volume of
production, the cost of a flex-fuel car should not be much more than
current cars. Conversion of current cars should cost only a few
hundred.

This is not the place to try to answer every question about bio-
fuels. Get Zubrin's book!

Maybe I will, if I can get comfortable with his credentials.

Frank

 

[John O]

I am all in favor of

Ah, where were you when I needed you in the seventies when my company,
the leading producer of nuclear components and the first to engineer a
"pre liscenced facility" was being pounded out of business by
regulators, hollywood liberals, and the media.

Yeah, no kidding. As a kid back then it seemed so apparent that nuclear was
the only approach with a long-term future. Travel through West Va much
lately? they scrape down mountains, and used to leave behind total wasteland
mining coal...and this is different from a worst-case nuke problem how,
exactly? Coal miners dies by the dozens every year, and their diseases are
nasty...nuke plant workers do very well in contrast.

Anyway, spent fuel is easy if we realize that some part of this planet can
hold lots of it....encapsulate it in teflon and drop it into the deepest
South Pacific trench or under the North Pole. The environmental advocates
may be seeing the light these days.

Go Nukes!

-John O

 

[Frank]

Yeah, no kidding. As a kid back then it seemed so apparent that nuclear was
the only approach with a long-term future. Travel through West Va much
lately? they scrape down mountains, and used to leave behind total wasteland
mining coal...and this is different from a worst-case nuke problem how,
exactly? Coal miners dies by the dozens every year, and their diseases are
nasty...nuke plant workers do very well in contrast.

Anyway, spent fuel is easy if we realize that some part of this planet can
hold lots of it....encapsulate it in teflon and drop it into the deepest
South Pacific trench or under the North Pole. The environmental advocates
may be seeing the light these days.

Go Nukes!

-John O

I have to tell you about a place I used to hunt in PA that got strip
mined. They left behind a golf course.

Twenty years ago, I saw Tennessee Eastman's coal syn gas plant and it
was very clean. They used the syn gas to make chemicals but you can also
make gas or use it to generate electricity. If necessary you can
capture the CO2 for deep well injection or enhanced oil recovery.

Besides coal, nuclear is the way to go. Hybrid cars can have batteries
recharged for enhanced mileage and this is going to require more
electrical power.

A hydrogen fuel economy will probably never happen. Fuel cells using
methanol as hydrogen source may be practical but another 10 years or so
of fuel cell development is needed.

 

[Uncle Ben]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E85_in_standard_engines

Very useful reference. Thank you.

It starts out with extreme pessimism, but if you read the whole thing,
it is quite balanced and encouraging. Just don't get any water
contamination in your E85 tank.

Ben

 

[Guest]

What have you heard?

We've had E10 here in Connecticut for ~ 5 years, since MBTE was
banned. I've never heard anyone complain, except for aircraft or
classic car uses.

You must not know any motorcycle users who had to rejet.
I was there for the switchover. Sucked!

Dave

 

[Carl 1 Lucky Texan]

I haven't read the book. However, I consider Zubrin no more an expert
on that subject than I do Al Gore an expert in the area of global
warming, causes and cures. I believe Zubrin has devoted most of his
career to promotion of space exploration




Ah, where were you when I needed you in the seventies when my company,
the leading producer of nuclear components and the first to engineer a
"pre liscenced facility" was being pounded out of business by
regulators, hollywood liberals, and the media.




I'm sure there was an expert that said "gasoline and the internal
combustion engine will never replace the horse drawn carriage"

I was fortunate enough to be an evaluator at the local high school
senior projects last week. One of the projects I evaluated was an
electrolisis/fuel cell device. Yes there are problems. No it is not
viable at this time. The one thing that I took away was the
enthusiasm of the student and his intent to major in Engineering with
the hope of working on fuel cell technology.




It is clear to me that with crop yield at record levels which usually
causes a reduction in the price of corn, price has risen by
approximately 25%. Direct relation to the diversion of a substantial
portion of the crop to production of ethanol, driven by subsidies.
You of course can believe what you wish.




I would prefer to let the free market dictate what direction we go in.
"Requiring" by the government doesn't have a great track record in my
view.



Maybe I will, if I can get comfortable with his credentials.

Frank

Thank you for posting. I also doubt the long-term viability of most
bio-fuels and certainly feel the present situation is untenable. Ethanol
from corn is highly subsidized (and no, I do not want oil/gasoline
subsidized either) at several levels. It cannot use the current gas
pipeline distribution infrastructure. It MAY be an OK fuel for farm
equipment local to the plant - but it will never be more than a curious
'pet project' for the nation at large. Growing food for cars 'may' be
immoral!

;^)


The future for road transportation in general and more specifically
'city'-type travel will be vehicles that have regenerative braking
capability. At present, those would be; hydraulic accumulators (Ford has
this in a truck IIRC) compressed air (like the MIDI or whatever it'
called) and electrics. Of course these technologies could be combined
into hybrids. If you look at the mileage numbers for the Prius as an
example, other ICE only cars can match it for highway mileage - but the
city number is very high thanx to regen-braking.

I also think the Feds should consider allowing production of a class of
vehicle 'intermediate' to cars and motorcycles. 3-4 wheel, lightweight
enclosed vehicles with reduced 'mandates' in the size, safety and weight
categories. perhaps restricted to adults only or dis-allowing babies, etc.

I feel all-electric cars may very well be the best choice eventually.

Carl

 

[Uncle Ben]

Regarding mandates vs market forces causing the transition to flex-
fuel cars:

I am all for market solutions where they exist, but there are cases in
which the market gets trapped into a sub-optimumal solution. It is
like a liquid cooled below its normal freezing point -- supercooled.
In these cases it takes an external event to help the liquid find its
lowest free energy state, or to help the market find the best
solution.

When oil gets to $500 per barrel and gasoline to $15 per gallon, the
market might yield to the pressure, but it will be less costly if we
convert to biofuels now, with the aid of legislation if necessary.
The reasons go beyond personal economy: safety, the environment, and
national security.

Requiring flex-fuel cars will cost the makers of automobiles less than
what we pay OPEC for oil in one week.

Ben