I find that those who are against it have used it very little.

 

Don't look at me. I've only read about it from secondary sources. I really became interested in it when the local Shell posted a 10% Ethanol included sticker on their gas pumps. Before that I was dehybridizing a store bought packet of corn. Now I'm just a poor student waiting until I can pay for my own motor fuel. I'd prefer ethanol especially if it came from a more efficient/economic base but I'd choose electric via coal over gasoline any day.

 

A lot of us use ethanol everyday. You can't avoid it in the Midwest; they add it to the gasoline.

Those of us who are against it didn't form that opinion out of ignorance. We have valid reasons for feeling the way we do.

 

I haven't filled up with an alcohol free gasoline in years (they have that even in Idaho) and I'm nowhere near to the Midwest.....

 

It's used to improve the octane.

 

Its a cheap way of improving octane which often results in poorer mileage, and the octane improvement is marginal. Down here every Shell station has it and we don't fill up at Shell. My wife's Freestar pings with Shell, and my truck performs very poorly with it.

 

Sounds like there is more to that story than alcohol. It works fine in the west, with no noticable milage penalty.

 

Even the EPA states there is a mileage penalty to alcohol based fuels. So while you may not notice it its likely there. Its a fact that the BTU content of alcohol is lower.

 

Differing blends for areas and times of year confuse the issue. But a 10 percent blend makes so little difference to mileage it is hard to measure. The energy content of "gasoline" varies with the local blend also.

 

I had another computer reflashed to run on E85 in my 2001 camaro SS for the summer. I used it too save money when I was driving 122 miles a day and my gas bill was between $30-$32 each fill up. I would have had to add about 12-14 dollars if I'd have to use premium gas (car has 11 to 1 compression). My car responded better too the E85 had a heck of alot more mid range power and didnt have one problem with the car while running it. I ran that fuel for 4 months and would go back too using it if I was going to be with the car this summer but I'm going to the persian gulf in a week for a yr or more and wont get too use it untill i get back. hopefully E85 will become a more mainstream fuel at least available in all states for those that are wanting too use it. I have nothing to gain out of this fuel due to the fact I'm in the Navy and dont get anything more then saving the money by using a biofuel. I'm converting my ford trucks to run on E85 as well while I'm gone so that my wife can save that money as well.

 

Okay... so, if alcohol fuel is a positive, why isn't the US government pushing methanol instead of ethanol? It producible from a wider variety of organic material (everything from waste grease to trash to plant matter) that is more readily available and takes less energy to produce. The simple fact is... regardless of the benefits its being pushed to buy mid-western votes. Its a scam and the farmers who get the subsidies are government welfare recipients.

If their product is competitive they wouldn't need to be propped up. What we need to see at the pump is M10, M15, M85, etc.

As to premium at the pump costing you 12 - 14 more per tank. In order to do that, premium would have to run about $4.50/gallon verses, for example, $3.00 for E85. If E85 were $2.50 gallon premium would have to run $3.75. So, while your car may be responding well to it, your numbers are false.

I hope someone didn't charge you for a "custom" E85 tune because you could have done it with a generic off the shelf tuner by bumping up the timing and leaning it out just a bit.

What irks me most about ethanol based fuels is its another example of wealth redistribution. Taking tax dollars from all over the country and funneling them into areas which have subsidized E85.

 

well like I said before when its a dollar a gallon cheaper then that means that if premium is 3.49 then E85 is 2.49. putting 12 gallons in means a 12 dollar savings per tank. If I used your numbers meaning a 1.25 difference then that would have been a 15 dollar diffence. My E85 tune was a custom one that spent alot of time fine tuning it. theres more to it too it then just timing and leaning it out. you dont lean it out you have too richen it up hence the drop in mileage. If you lean it out then you will blow the motor. Stoich for E85 is right around 9.7 to 1. Now one other bennefit is my oil stayed a heck of alot cleaner for longer periods of time. Not saying that E85 is a perfect fuel but it is a good alternative. Its not the replacement. I will be the first to admit that. but again it is a good alternative. My numbers are not scewed and I was reluctant to run the fuel but I have too say it impressed me with the savings that I got. Now as far as the money funneled into a specific region I dont know I dont care and quite honestly theres money funneled into every portion of this country for one reason or another. Again its not the replacement but an alternative. Its really the only alternative thats viable for mainstream thats not electric.

 

Premium is $3.49 there? That's insane. Its a lot cheaper here. No wonder my math was wrong.

You're right about richening. I type 90+ wpm and sometime fat-finger what I'm saying. I've tuned thousands of vehicles when I had my shop. Generally, custom tuning from an outside company isn't needed for E85, if the person gets a wide-band and uses tuning software which allows a/f adjustment. You're looking at close to 14.13 stoich for E10, 9.7 for E85, etc.

Ethanol is not viable for mainstream at all. Niche only. That is why it is only widely availabe in low volume areas of the country. We don't have the land-mass to produce it, and the subsidies required to make it competive would bankrupt the country.

What are you going to do to the trucks to make them run on E85 without losing fuel economy? Are you going to do something with the heads/pistons to bump up compression, turbo charge them, ??? Timing and a/f alone won't take full advantage.

I acknowledge you don't care about where the subsidies are coming from... that doesn't diminish the fact that its being taken from other Americans on a daily basis.

Farmers often brag about their work ethic but many of them are the biggest examples, per capita, of government sugar-****.

 

well I'm leaving my expedtion alone. I wouldnt really gain anything out of converting it due too it being a stock machine and a gas pig. my 79 on the other hand is actually geting a 6.0 Vortech with a six speed from a camaro. Yes I know I will probubly get banned from here for that but I should get around 22mpg with regular unleaded and a really good tune. I get 30mpg in my camaro on the highway and its pretty built. I will have a tune done in another computer like I did with the camaro so that I can run E85 in it as well. I'm not sure why we dont run methanol instead of ethanol. maybe cause methanol is very corrosive. I honestly dont know. dont take this as me being a smart ***. I'm not trying too be. Govt. help thou goes through out this country. If farmers get a break like this its because they deserve it. The price of equipment for them is outrageous. and they only use certain peices of equipment once maybe twice a yr. But they need it too grow the crops that we eat. govt helps out in case of natrual disasters. they subsides heating oil in the northeast. huricane's, floods, earthquakes. very rarely do they do anything for a tornado. I dont know about you but if I had too live on what a farmer makes net income wise with out help from the govt then I wouldnt do it. Then we wouldnt have people that grow our food. Then we would be at the mercy of some farming nation as well. The by product of ethanol is animal feed. and a smell of baking bread.

 

Ken: "Ethanol is not viable for mainstream at all. Niche only. That is why it is only widely availabe in low volume areas of the country. We don't have the land-mass to produce it, and the subsidies required to make it competive would bankrupt the country."

Ethanol may not be viable for an immediate switch-over without notice. However, if it were made a goal and manufacturers put on notice to make all vehicles flex-fuel there is no reason that we could not adopts ethanol over time. By that, I don't mean that gasoline should be unavailable, just not regarded as our primary fuel.

The land mass argument is simply not valid. There are a number of different crops that can be used for alcohol fuels and they can all be used, not one single crop. Sugar cane, switchgrass, sugar beets etc.

Subsidies may be needed to get the industry geared up and I am OK with that because the goal is not wealth redistribution, it is national security, balance of trade, and also the vital goal of switching over to cleaner burning renewable fuels. Not to mention the boom in the US economy because of the jobs created by doing this.

And if you don't know that the war in Iraq is a trillion dollar oil industry subsidy, you are missing the whole point of Bush foreign policy. If there were no oil in the middle east, the US would NOT be concerned about what went on over there. Which is not to say that I admire US farm policy, I don't. Consider also, why do we have an IMPORT tax on ethanol fuel but not on gasoline?

Foreign ethanol is subject to a 54-cents-per-gallon tariff and a 2.5 percent duty. This discourages imports, such as potentially cheaper sugar cane-based ethanol from Brazil and other countries, that could undercut domestic producers.