[OT - US/Canada] E-85

Bill Funk wrote:

The current move to get away from oil for motor fuel is mostly fueled
(pardon the pun) by a desire to cut energuy costs; E-85 does the
opposite, something that is definitely not being told to the public.
As well, it's seldom mentioned that E-85 requires an expensive vehicle
conversion (or purchase of a new vehicle), further raising costs.

While it's possible to push E-85 as a way to cut oil imports, it's
*cost* that will hit the average buyer, and E-85 fails in the cost
department.

Ah but are you calculating the costs of war?

On Mon, 08 May 2006 16:37:52 GMT, Paul Furman
wrote:

Bill Funk wrote:

The current move to get away from oil for motor fuel is mostly fueled
(pardon the pun) by a desire to cut energuy costs; E-85 does the
opposite, something that is definitely not being told to the public.
As well, it's seldom mentioned that E-85 requires an expensive vehicle
conversion (or purchase of a new vehicle), further raising costs.

While it's possible to push E-85 as a way to cut oil imports, it's
*cost* that will hit the average buyer, and E-85 fails in the cost
department.

Ah but are you calculating the costs of war?

Nope.
Do you? If so, please show your work. :-)
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"

Alan Browne wrote:


For the North American audience
60 Minutes will present a segement on E-85 (Ethanol) fuels,

Sunday May 7 (19:00 EDT, CBS).

I halfheartedly apologize for the OT posting, but you know how sensitive
I am on this topic.

E-85 is 85% ethanol. The vehicle must have a fuel mix sensor and
controls. This is a growth trend area in North America which, while it
doesn't reduce consumption, it at least displaces it with a renewable
fuel that burns cleaner than gasoline.

Cheers,
Alan

I've been wondering if anyone has compared E-85 with using the same corn
to make corn oil and using it in a bio-diesel? I know the original
diesel design was created to burn peanut oil.

wrote:

it must be _trucked_ to its destination


Isn't all gas trucked to its destination?

And if the trucks use the same fuel...


Most petrochemicals are piped throughout North America to regional
distribution centers. Trucked from there.

Don't know if diesel engines will run E-85.

"William Graham" wrote in news:sf-dne0Lgt-
:


Yes. Thousands of people do, especially in the Ozarks, and Great Smoky
mountains.....:^)

Not so much in the Smokeys, too damn many tourists wandering around.
Wilkes & Johnston counties are a better bet in NC.

In TN, try up near the border with KY & VA.

Bill wrote:


This may come as a shock to you, but most "gas stations" get their fuel
from a transport truck hauling a tanker.

But that tanker gets its load from a terminal that's filled from a
pipeline.

Alan Browne wrote:

William Graham wrote:


Also, while pumping pure ethanol through a pipeline may be difficult,
there is no reason why pumping the sour mash before final distilling
can't be done via pipeline, and then do the final distilling
locally......


The mash is pretty "pulpy" so I don't think that would work well.

Google "concrete pump"

Bill Funk wrote:

On Sat, 06 May 2006 20:41:25 -0400, Bill wrote:


I too like the idea of using ethanol, but the government will have to
step in or the oil companies with their massive resources will continue
to derail the use of ethanol.


Why can't the oil companies get into the ethanol business?

They are.

Bill Funk wrote:

On Sat, 06 May 2006 19:57:22 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:


Is there any truth to the rumor that the pollution created and energy
used in the manufacture of E85 offsets the savings?

Nope.
http://www.ilcorn.org/Ethanol/85__Et...__ethanol.html

Suggests a net 33% gain (and improving).


But the "savings" aren't there, either.
Ethanol as a motor fuel costs more than gasoline. While this might not
be reflected at the pump in the case of E-85, that would only be true
because of (IIRC) over 50¢ direct tax credit per gallon produced
(which means the pump price reflects over 50¢ less than the actual
cost).
Since ethanol contains less energy per unit, mileage goes down, too.
So, it costs more per gallon, and returns lower MPG. No savings there.

OTOH, at least some of that higher cost could be offset by economies of
scale. As production ramps up, and as initial costs are amortized ...

I live in a state where ethanol is produced. Nearly every gas station
here is being FORCED into carrying it. It is garbage gas. If your car
isn't made to use this type of fuel, don't use it. It will damage your
fuel injectors. Don't use it in your lawn mower either thinking you'll
save money, you'll damage your mower. It runs the engine too hot.
They're selling us a bill of goods on this "gas". You'll get less
gas mileage from it too.
I'd rather convert my car into running on used fryer oil than put
ethanol in my car anyday.

J