Ethanol conversion?

[Uncle Ben]

Thank you, Brian for a reasoned approach to our mutual problem of
driving economics.

Some of your statements suggest that you are referring to E10.  I had
the same reaction you did and spent time looking around for E0 (no
ethanol) until I tried some experiments.

I am not talking about E10.  I think that E10 gives benefit to the
environment, but no obvious benefit to the driver.  In my 1999 OBW I
first
mixed E85 and E10 at the pump to give an estimated E30. That gave me
some savings AND improved accelaration. I ran that for a few weeks,
and everything seemed fine.

Oregon is not being a leader in providing E85.  Onwww.e85prices.com
you can
see how many stations there are by city.  I count 1 in Eugene, 4 in
Portland, and a scatering of others around the state.  But if you
live
in Portland, the average discount for E85 from gasoline is about 20%.
That should compensate you for a considerable reduction in mpg.

Can I assume that your car is younger than 1990 and that it has a
control system compliant with OBDII?  If so, your milage reduction
with E30 or higher should be in the range of 5 to 15%.  That will
give
you a clear savings in mpd.

The benefit to the environment is well documented.  There is one
study
that was trumpeted in the newspapers saying that running E85 will
increase smog.  But if you read that paper, that result was reached
for LA but not Atlanta, and the reason LA suffered is because when
smog is already high, NOx emissions actually keep it from going
higher, and the ethanol cars had TOO LOW emissions of NOx.

In New York State, the E85 price discount is over 26%, so it is
better
for me.

To go beyond E30, I had to install a converter, and over the weeks of
filling and refilling with E85, I am now up to almost straight E85.
I
love how the car responds.

You should take courage from the people of Brazil who have been
running E15 in unmodified cars for decades or so and have recently
moved up to E24.  Cars made since 1985 or so in the US have been
required to tolerate E10.  So manufacturers improved the elastomers
and gas tank metals.  The results work even with much higher
concentrations according to many who have converted old cars.  There
is a video of the guts of a 2002 car which ran 105,000 miles on E85
without any conversion.  It looked clean and undamaged. (Surely its
CEL was lit up all the way.  The mixture was quite lean, but it did
not hurt the car.)

Since I started these experiments and changes only last month, it
will
be a while before I have a year's experience to show you.  But there
are people who have been doing this long before me.

Realize that there are strong forces working to prevent adoption of
E85, and there is much misinformation on the net about corrosion and
other damage.  After all, as they say, "turkeys don't vote for
Thanksgiving." Exxon/Mobil seems to be an exception.  Two of my 4
sources of E85 in Albany are Mobil stations.

It is wise to be cautious with an expensive machine like your car.
Check outwww.change2E85.comfor more information.  That is who I
have
been dealing with. The converter I bought there has been approved by
the EPA, but California is being more cautious..

If there is more I can tell you, just ask.

Ben- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

 

[Uncle Ben]

Oregon is not being a leader in providing E85.  Onwww.e85prices.com
you can
see how many stations there are by city.  I count 1 in Eugene, 4 in
Portland, and a scattering of others around the state.  

Make that 3 in Portland.

Ben

 

[Brian]

Thank you, Brian for a reasoned approach to our mutual problem of
driving economics.

I do try to listen to both sides sometimes and then draw my own conclusion
as both sides seem to get carried away.

Some of your statements suggest that you are referring to E10. I had
the same reaction you did and spent time looking around for E0 (no
ethanol).

I am not talking about E10. I think that E10 gives benefit to the
environment, but no benefit to the driver. In my 1999 OBW I first
mixed E85 and E10 at the pump to give an estimated E30. That gave me
some savings AND improved accelaration. I ran that for a few weeks,
and everything seemed fine.

Oregon is not being a leader in providing E85. On www.e85.com you can
see how many stations there are by city. I count 1 in Eugene, 4 in
Portland, and a scatering of others around the state. But if you live
in Portland, the average discount for E85 from gasoline is about 20%.
That should compensate you for a considerable reduction in mpg.

Can I assume that your car is younger than 1990 and that it has a
control system compliant with OBDII? If so, your milage reduction
with E30 or higher should be in the range of 5 to 15%. That will give
you a clear savings in mpd.

The benefit to the environment is well documented. There is one study
that was trumpeted in the newspapers saying that running E85 will
increase smog. But if you read that paper, that result was reached
for LA but not Atlanta, and the reason LA suffered is because when
smog is already high, NOx emissions actually keep it from going
higher, and the ethanol cars had TOO LOW emissions of NOx.

In New York State, the E85 price discount is over 26%, so it is better
for me.

To go beyond E30, I had to install a converter, and over the weeks of
filling and refilling with E85, I am now up to almost straight E85. I
love how the car responds.

You should take courage from the people of Brazil who have been
running E15 in unmodified cars for decades or so and have recently
moved up to E24. Cars made since 1985 or so in the US have been
required to tolerate E10. So manufacturers improved the elastomers
and gas tank metals. The results work even with much higher
concentrations according to many who have converted old cars. There
is a video of the guts of a 2002 car which ran 105,000 miles on E85
without any conversion. It looked clean and undamaged. (Surely its
CEL was lit up all the way. The mixture was quite lean, but it did
not hurt the car.)

Since I started these experiments and changes only last month, it will
be a while before I have a year's experience to show you. But there
are people who have been doing this long before me.

Realize that there are strong forces working to prevent adoption of
E85, and there is much misinformation on the net about corrosion and
other damage. After all, as they say, "turkeys don't vote for
Thanksgiving." Exxon/Mobil seems to be an exception. Two of my 4
sources of E85 in Albany are Mobil stations.

It is wise to be cautious with an expensive machine like your car.
Check out www.change2E85.com for more information. That is who I have
been dealing with. The converter I bought there has been approved by
the EPA, but California is being more cautious..

If there is more I can tell you, just ask.

Ben

Fortunately I almost never drive into the greater Portland area. But, that
also means, even if I wanted to go the route of a conversion kit there would
be no immediate benefit, if ever, and Eugene I frequent even less.

My car I drive most often (a couple of hours a day, 365 days a year) is a
'93 Impreza, so no benefits of OBD-II there.

I think I can understand what you mean when you say, "I think that E10 gives
benefit to the environment," but I would also wonder if you have to restrict
that to the final act of combustion. To be as reasonable as we can don't we
need to try to look at the broadest picture possible and not focus on just
one aspect ethanol may have toward environmental concerns? Factor in
manufacture, transport, food costs, new pollutants, new chemical reactions,
and is ethanol giving an overall benefit or is it a costly distraction?

Don't get me wrong though, I am not claiming ethanol as a big shameful
creator of food problems, or trying to deny that it may impact the cost of
food, just trying to gather a few of the arguments I've heard. Not to sound
unsympathetic but folks were starving before ethanol came on the scene and
people will continue to be starving after, whether or not we continue on
with ethanol.

For the moment, I would pay extra if I could purchase gasoline without
ethanol and I may even sleep a little better knowing I've done my part to
help stave off rising food costs, but I can't even do that because
unscientific people have decided for me what is best, so for now, I guess
the extra money goes to charity. Why can't the little guy buy himself a few
carbon credits to offset his scary carbon footprint with the extra we might
pay for straight gasoline? My puny mind doesn't want to see much past
efficiency being beneficial to the environment. More miles per fuel unit
expended, the less fuel I consume, the longer the fuel lasts, the more there
is to go around, and the less people like me whine, so that is even good for
noise pollution as well (which may or may not help the environment!)

I did think about experimenting with Ethanol though, to be honest. Years
ago, a customer where I was working who "brews" his own ethanol got me
interested, and the more I thought about it, the less I liked the idea. For
my purposes it just doesn't seem practical.

~Brian

 

[Uncle Ben]

I do try to listen to both sides sometimes and then draw my own conclusion
as both sides seem to get carried away.
.....

Fortunately I almost never drive into the greater Portland area.  But, that
also means, even if I wanted to go the route of a conversion kit there would
be no immediate benefit, if ever, and Eugene I frequent even less.

You don't live near Happy Valley, do you? They get lots of E85. I
wonder why.

My car I drive most often (a couple of hours a day, 365 days a year) is a
'93 Impreza, so no benefits of OBD-II there.

Putting these facts together, I agree that it may be premature for you
to think about using E85. (I think OBDII came in around 1996.)

By the time you are shopping for your next car, gasoline may well be
$7.00 per gallon. China and India are competing for the oil we
import, and that won't stop. Gas is never going to go back to $2.00.

I think I can understand what you mean when you say, "I think that E10 gives
benefit to the environment," but I would also wonder if you have to restrict
that to the final act of combustion.  ...  Factor in
manufacture, transport, food costs, new pollutants, new chemical reactions,
and is ethanol giving an overall benefit or is it a costly distraction?

Of course. But ethanol has been around a while, and we have answers
to these questions.

The combustion reactions in burning ethanol are known. There is a
tiny amount of formaldehyde and acetaldehyde, but the major pollutants
of gasoline are much worse -- and carcinogenic. Overall, it is
estimated that emissions from ethanol burning are down 70% from
gasoline. The main improvements are less CO and NOx. E10 helps with
this, but I don't have the figures.

The competition for food is all in the news nowadays, but the USDA has
done the study and has found that diversion of corn from food to fuel
accounts for only 5% of the increase in world food prices. The main
culprit is the dramatic rise in the price of fuels used by farmers and
fertilizer manufacturers. When input prices go up, output prices go
up too. And then there is the wave of droughts we have seen around
the world, especially Australia.

In fact, the use of ethanol in place of gasoline exerts a downward
pressure on gasoline and diesel prices.
...

For the moment, I would pay extra if I could purchase gasoline without
ethanol

If I were limited to E10 vs E0, I might do the same, unless I lived in
LA.
....

I did think about experimenting with Ethanol though, to be honest.  Years
ago, a customer where I was working who "brews" his own ethanol got me
interested, and the more I thought about it, the less I liked the idea.  For
my purposes it just doesn't seem practical.

Please explain. I think it is very practical. Brazil, helped by a
new oil find to be sure, imports zero oil; they used to import 60% of
their liquid fuel. They make ethanol from sugar cane for $0.83 per
gallon producer cost and sell it for half of the price of gasoline.
People have the choice and they choose ethanol -- duh! A good fraction
of their cars are flex-fuel now, and those folks go for E85
massively.

Lower harmful emissions, lower price per mile, high performance, a
dent in the $2 x 10^9 we in the US send to overseas oil producers
EVERY DAY, some of which is going to support our enemies -- what's not
practical?

Ben

PS: I have learned that I can fine-tune my FFI converter to improve my
ethanol mpg. Stay tuned.