Your 23-year-old vehicle was made and designed well before on-road fuels with a significant amount of ethanol were developed. The ECU doesn't know to look for ethanol and isn't smart enough to know what to do with it if it did find it (your car was new when a 66 MHz 80486DX2 with 4 MB of parity EDO RAM was hot stuff.) Your fuel system isn't compatible with it either. That's the same issues people here are complaining about here with their older vehicles, chainsaws, lawnmowers, and outboard engines. Very few people are stupid enough to put diesel fuel in a chainsaw and expect it to run. However you hear about people putting high-ethanol blends in them and then complaining about how they run poorly. Duh, you put the wrong fuel in. It doesn't mean the fuel is bad, only that it's not compatible...just like diesel fuel.

Automakers certainly will warranty vehicles that run on higher ethanol blends. The thing the automakers won't do is warranty their non-redesigned E10 or less vehicles to run on >E10. That's a HUGE difference than refusing to warranty "any new car sold." The automakers simply would have to put in a few different parts (mainly a lambda sensor, a different fuel pump, and slightly larger fuel injectors) and put in the appropriate ECU flash and voila, the vehicle is now able to properly run on anything from straight dino gas to E85 without any issues and with a full warranty. How do I know this? Ford has been selling these vehicles for years; they're called "flex-fuel vehicles." Every 3.7 L and 5.0 L 12th generation F-150 has this capability as a matter of fact. Introducing E15 would just mean that there would be more flex-fuel capable vehicles out there.

One thing you are forgetting is the rise of little bitty turbocharged engines like the four-cylinder EcoBoosts. A high-octane ethanol fuel would be ideal for that application as the added octane would allow for better performance from such small powerplants. (Or in the EPA's mind, even smaller engines with even more boost to make the "same" performance.) Remember, we're living in the era of "doing the same with less" or more accurately "doing somewhat less with a LOT less" with our engines due to the asinine EPA mandates. More octane will help to keep us from experiencing the 1970s and early 1980s all over again. We can't run leaded gas for a lot of reasons (fouled sensors being the one big non-EPA-related one) and the cost of 100 octane unleaded is insane unless it's got a bunch of ethanol in it, then it's cheaper than 87 octane pee-water.

 

I browsed through seven years of posts and wow, some real intense talk going on here, coupled with information, disinformation and heaven only knows what else. I do find it interesting that folks who are anti bio-fuel expend so much energy dissing it. It boggles the mind!

Years back, I used to run my much modified Windsor and Cleveland small blocks on Sunoco 260 and 115/145 Aviation gas in a 90/10 mixture. It worked pretty well at giving me decent performance through a slalom without pinging. Of course, Sunoco 260 was $0.48.9 per gallon back then, oil would never run out, and life was good.

Then, a couple things happened. The residents of one part of the world figured out that they could hold folks on the other side of the globe hostage through playing with production and price in the oil market. They've now got that down to a fine art, where the REAL price we pay today at the pump is based, not on what that actual oil cost, but rather on a roll of the dice, projected future price. Of course, we in the U.S. don't feel it as badly as our European neighbors do, because a lobbied, bought and paid for government provides billions annually in subsidies to the major players in the oil game to keep the price artificially down. This allows them to make obscene profits, all at the taxpayers' expense.

The other thing that occurred was the discovery that throwing tons of lead into the air every year was not really great for people and other living things. Then, there were other pollutants, and before long, gasoline was not what it used to be, and those engines I built back in the day would cough, sputter, and spit up their innards running this new, lower octane, unleaded fuel.

Fast forward to today. Face it, we are not going to be going back in time. The world has reached peak oil, and getting the stuff will only get harder as time goes on. Of course, we could all bury our heads in the sand, pretend that either no problem exists, or that it will automagically fix itself and we will be able to continue on as we've always done. The other choice is that we all start looking at alternatives. This, is the course I've decided to take, personally. YMMV.

With high gas prices, and a continued desire to go fast, I began to look at the little turbocharged four cylinder engines that Chrysler was building. These could be made to put out gobs of power for relatively small investment, and could still get respectable gas mileage while doing so. Eventually, I would come to own my second numbered Shelby while playing with these.

I began wondering if the same kind of inexpensive power gains could be had using a turbocharged diesel engine. That was when I was really introduced to alternative fuels. It turned out that a neighbor in my small town was running his Volkswagen on used fryer oil that he'd gotten for free. This was his second WVO powered VW TDI, the first having been totaled at 350,000 miles. That car had run on WVO since new, and his current VW, at the time, had over 225K on the clock, all on french fry oil. I ended up finding an old Benz 300D-T, and performed a DIY conversion. It was great. I was getting good mileage, and after the initial investment, I was driving for free, on a completely renewable resource. Then, my job location changed. I began making a 50 mile one-way commute, through the Chicago metropolitan area. I also was having to put in more overtime hours. This seriously cut into the time that I could devote to collecting and filtering WVO. I sold the project and moved on.

At present, my health has given me more free time. Not a good thing in many ways, but I've always tried to look at the positives in a given situation. So, I have my little FFV Ranger as my daily driver, and I just bought an old school F-250 diesel as a new project. I want to start making my own fuels, for both vehicles, using high yield oils that are much more efficient than corn or soy.

This is definitely not a route for everyone, just as experimenting with small computers was not back in the 1980s. Many folks told me I was wasting my time back then as well. Of course, the intervening years did prove them wrong, just as the blacksmith was proven wrong by the automotive engineer.

Anyway, thanks for the lively discussion folks. Good reading all.

 

Much of what you have said I concur with personally, but...as an fyi in reference to making your own

To start with...get a good attorney.

When you collect, store any product that is combustible, flammable or poses a potential environmental effect in quantities of 30 gallons or more, you are required to have a secondary containment system, spill control and a permit, issued by local, state and/or federal EPA or public health agency (local). This is required under both the CERCLA, the international fire code (adopted by local and state agencies) Article 79 and 80, and permit is required by Article 4 and the National Fire Code (which is a standard for which state and federal courts/DA's/SAG, etc. function from when other laws do not apply.

You must also purchase caustics (sodium hydroxide aka Lye) and alcohol (or a derivative such as methanol) to distill the product....a permit is also required for any purchase of sodium hydroxide or methanol, mixing, dispensing and distillation process (since you have to heat the mixed product to well over 100 degrees- well past the ignition point of the product- same codes all apply. These same codes also require you to have Class I, division 1 or 2 electrical wiring for any inside mixing, storage and dispensing....to keep a flash fire/explosion from happening. Why, as an example, if lye comes in contact with aluminum, hydrogen gas is produced, if hydrogen gas (a flammable, used in the Hindenburg) comes into contact with any ignition source (including heat, static charge from rubbing your hair) at minimum you are looking at a flash fire, at worst case, an explosion.

Even inhaling minor, the smallest particulates of lye damages the lungs, eventually creating a chemical induced pneumonia- to which there is no cure or treatment. If you think a respirator will take care of that exposure, oops again, your pupils of your eyes and ear drums are direct depositories into the blood stream- absorbing those particulates into the blood stream and transporting them to your liver, kidneys, bladder attempting to be filtered (but not) and re-distributed through the metabolic systems including the bone & bone marrow- where a host of results will (not if) occur…of which cancer would be your least concern…..but it does take 10-30 years for those effects to show…even with the best laboratory equipment.

As you pour one liquid into another container, you are creating “static charge” by the mere action of the liquid. Without proper, verified bonding & grounding, the re-routing/reverse of a single static charge will result in a fire or explosion (if it reaches a container)- this evens happens in car when due to a design flaw (such as in the 1990’s) when GM experienced 2 fuel tank fires in their 2 newest “high mpg” cars because a single static charge was generated during re-fueling, the charge exited the vehicle tank but the newly designed low resistance tires prohibited the charge from “finding the ground” and returned to the vehicles fuel tank. Back in the 70’s (IIRR), the USAF also experience this with a 747 in Texas, causing a fire in one fuel tank and explosion in the center fuel tank which was almost empty.

While it is not illegal in most states to sell the equipment to make the product, it is illegal for anyone to sell the caustics & methanol to you in the quantity required for this process without a business license and other permits- including for transportation (under the Federal code of regulation, part 40 & 49). if you are reported by anyone, they will receive a 10% reward from the national "We-Tip" program- the average (total collected fine and investigation) fine for a "small business" is $1 million dollars, the average clean-up including disposal, assessment and temp permits is $2 million...and this can be instituted by any environmental, public health, fire department, law enforcement agency, district attorney and any local, state or federal agency.

While many will chime in that there's nothing wrong in doing this, or I may be "mistaken", check out Tuscan AZ, 2002 the feds came in and arrested a homeowner not for making bio-diesel, but because of the process used to make it. They went to jail for child endangerment (seems they had a little fire- I don't recall if it was related to the bio-diesel or not), but the local gov did the reports, the state & feds choose to clean the mess up and prosecute and fine and take everything the guys homeowners insurance would handle...then guess what, although the judge ordered restitution and reduced the charge from a (multiple count felony) felony to a single misdemeanor, they are tagged within the north American insurance industry meaning they can’t never get homeowners insurance...from any company- meaning yes you could not only loose financially everything from an human, technical, environmental event but unless you had the cash to pay for a home, forget ever having that ability- no homeowners insurance, no home loan.

It's really not worth it.

 

In the actual manual it states not to use fuels containing over 10% ethanol alcohol. There was alcohol used in 1991, it just wasn't mandated to have it in there, nor required to post it on a pump. Your also right most cars won't sense Pure Gasoline, or Gas with E-10. Maybe Flex fuel vehicles have a sensor for it but most cars won't tell if there is or isn't. Most cars will sense A/F ratios. Older cars like mine with a Digifaint II engine management can only allow so much ECU interaction for A/F ratios that are off. But I am sure most regular cars today with ODBII and Enginmanagment system have more versatility with Timing advance and spark control.

 

Flex fuel vehicles do have a sensor that can determine the ethanol percentage. It's called a lambda sensor and it is how the engine determines the correct A/F mappings and why the engine can run on any concentration of ethanol from 0-85%.

Older vehicles won't be able to run optimally on >10% ethanol without retrofitting because they're not compatible with it. But that isn't what was being discussed in the thread- it was somebody saying that NEW vehicles can't be made to run on E15. My answer is that yes, they can easily be made to do so. So the answer in my mind at least is that it would make sense to let station owners sell E15. They can already sell <=10% and 20-85% ethanol blends but for some reason the >10% but <20% range is forbidden. Station owners would however be dumb not to also sell <=10% ethanol blends older vehicles could use and people with older cars would be dumb to use anything with more than 10% ethanol in it. I suppose what people are worried about is E15 and up being mandated and <=10% blends being banned? That would be a very poor idea.

 

A lambda sensor is not the same thing as a fuel composition sensor. A lambda sensor is another name for an O2 sensor.

Lambda is the ratio of the sensed air/fuel ratio to the stoichiometric air/fuel ratio, meaning a lambda of 1 is stoich with rich mixtures being less than 1 and lean mixtures more than 1. Lambda is also completely independent of the fuel being used, so an engine running a stoichiometric air/fuel ratio of E85 or an engine running a stoichiometric air/fuel ratio of straight gasoline will both have a lambda value of 1.

 

You missed the point, Legisaltures and I do believe EPA were trying to push E-15 mandate at the pumps. The Auto manufactures Said No thanks, Dump E-15 into a car, at the time 2013, that isn't Flex fuel, or specifically suited for e-15 your warranty is void.

Also, E15 Fuel Sale Banned in the US | RideApart

One thing you are forgetting is the rise of little bitty turbocharged engines like the four-cylinder EcoBoosts. A high-octane ethanol fuel would be ideal for that application as the added octane would allow for better performance from such small powerplants. (Or in the EPA's mind, even smaller engines with even more boost to make the "same" performance.) Remember, we're living in the era of "doing the same with less" or more accurately "doing somewhat less with a LOT less" with our engines due to the asinine EPA mandates. More octane will help to keep us from experiencing the 1970s and early 1980s all over again. We can't run leaded gas for a lot of reasons (fouled sensors being the one big non-EPA-related one) and the cost of 100 octane unleaded is insane unless it's got a bunch of ethanol in it, then it's cheaper than 87 octane pee-water.[/quote]

 

One thing to remember is that the EPA responds to the dictates of Congress, not the other way around. With ethanol, the EPA is responding to congressional mandate from the Renewable Fuels Standard that dictated x amount of renewable fuels in our fuel supply in a given year.

Of course, since we're using less gas than before, they're having to change some numbers b/c they can't require the same total volume of ethanol to be used in a smaller pool of fuel without increasing the percentage. And we all know how the automakers and consumers have reacted to that possibility.

 

Frikkin' Hooah!

 

Oil logistics means we import and export petroleum products to get the most convenient solution for the people who own and sell the oil. There are some interesting maps for the Googling if one cares.

US companies aren't going to build or retrofit refinery options which don't look to pay well. Their fiduciary duty to stock holders is to be profitable. Consumer convenience, not so much.

Prices are driven by global demand and exporter volumes. That's one reason the US showers military aid on KSA and the Gulf Emirates. They can cushion price shocks by exporting more oil.

U.S. Oil Exports Surpass Imports as Production Rises Rapidly - Businessweek

Why increased US domestic oil is negative for crude oil shippers - Market Realist