[OT - US/Canada] E-85

"no_name" wrote in message
m...
"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.

Yeah....Places like Bristol. - Snuffy Smith country.....

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
.. .
Bill Funk wrote:

On Sun, 07 May 2006 16:45:22 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:


Bill Funk wrote:


On 6 May 2006 11:46:42 -0700, "Rich" wrote:



It's so clean it scours the inside of the engine, causing drastically
increased part's wear.
Of for the days of tetraethyl lead.


Vehicles designed for E-85 use don't have this problem.
Why? Because they are designed for E-85.

You'd be much better off complaining about E-85's real problems.

Which are what?


Several...
Higher cost; where E-85 is on the market, it costs more than gas.
Higher cost; it's costlier than gas *WITH* more than 50¢ per gallon
direct tax credit (meaning the makers of E-85 get more than 50¢ off
their federal taxes for each gallon of ethanol they make, which is
directly paid by taxpayers).

Er, various sources show it as cheaper than gas. See my other post
showing that gasoline gets at least 12 cents subsidy, but more like 96
(yes 96) cents subsidy if cost of defending the oil is accounted for.


Lower energy than gas (meaning: it costs more at the pump, and users
get fewer MPG, for a cost double whammy).

Despite the lower efficiency, the net (with the lower price) is cheaper
than gas. In Brazil this is clear (at the pump). Not sure what their
subsidy is (if any). They have their own oil supplies offshore as well.

E-85 releases more fumes than gas, making for more pollution.

Which fumes? The corn grown absorbs more CO2 than ethanol generates.

The continental US can't raise sugar cane (which Brasil, often cited
as an example the US should follow, uses), which is far more efficient
than corn as a source for ethanol.
The ratio of energy in/out for ethanol, under current technology, is
about 1:1.25 *at best*; this means we gain little in actual energy
efficiency.

Unlike gasoline ethanol is renewable. After three cycles you're at par,
on the 4th cycle you're ahead of whatever oil can ever deliver. The ratio
is 1:1.38 (BTW).


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.

Nope: Ford, GM and Chrysler sell these at the same price as the non FFV
vehicles. (In the beginning there was as much as $2000 difference; now
most of the them are the same price at buy time). This was also mentioned
on 60 minutes last night and on the doe site you can find which vehicles
carry a premium and which do not. Most do not.

Over 6 M vehicles delivered in the US so far from Ford, GM and Chrysler.


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.

Wrong. At worst is close to par. And as production increased, economies
of scale will continue to reduce the cost.

Cheers,
Alan

Yes, if we can see light at the end of the tunnel this soon in the process,
think what it will be like when every filling station in the land has one
pump that pumps it. There is something very satisfying about the idea that
you can actually grow fuel for your car. That the growing fuel crop will eat
up the CO2 that it will eventually generate when burned in your engine...

"no_name" wrote in message
...
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.

Now there's an idea! - The two products could be made in the same factory by
the same corporation, and from the same crop! One building will distill the
alcohol, and the other will make the diesel fuel...........

"Jennifer" wrote in message
...
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

We are in a transition period, Jennifer. Sure, some cars that were designed
for gasoline don't do well on ethanol. I had to trade in a perfectly good
motorcycle once for a new one, because the one I had was made to burn 100+
octane fuel, and they didn't sell it anymore. The newer model was made to
burn the lousy 85 octane crap they were selling.....
The same is true of the cars... When they have nothing available but
alcohol, you won't be able to run your 2006 gas guzzler on it. But if you
buy your next car with a little vision, you will be able to run it on
ethanol, so try to do that.......

William Graham wrote:
"no_name" wrote in message
...
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.

Now there's an idea! - The two products could be made in the same factory by
the same corporation, and from the same crop! One building will distill the
alcohol, and the other will make the diesel fuel...........


Yeah, and the waste heat will generate electricity, and the pulpy waste
will be pressed into biodegradable garbage cans.

--
John McWilliams

ps Not to pooh-pooh the idea of multiple outputs from such a process;
it'd be stupid to not do so where practical.

"Joe Bleaux" wrote in message Try 25-30% less mileage
(the Energy Dept. estimates 40% less mileage).
Recent reports cite ethanol prices being more expensive than gasoline,
but even if ethanol were selling for a cheaper price than gas it's still
more expensive when you figure in the tremendous drop in fuel
efficiency.

Of course. There are few liquids that contain as much energy per pound than
gasoline. - That isn't the point. The point is we are running out of
gasoline. It will have really lousy efficiency when we don't have any more
of it. This will happen by 2050. Then what do you suggest we do?
I suggest we find some reasonable alternative. Ethanol is one of those.
The sooner we start to use it, and build vehicles that can run on it, the
better off we are. Brazil has been doing this for over 10 years now. - It
can be done, and we should be doing it.

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
.. .
no_name wrote:


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.

When the ethanol makers ferment the mash they extract (before or after, I
don't know) the corn oil. The left over mash (post fermentation and
ethanol "cook off") is made into cattle/hog feed.

IOW it's not one or the other, but both.

The corn oil could be used for biodiesel, but is probably more valuable in
food processing.

Well, we'll put a McDonalds French fry factory between the corn oil factory
and the diesel truck refueling station......I've, got it all visualized
already....:^)

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
.. .

For those of you who wathced "60 minutes" I apologize.

It sucked.

1) It was one sided.

2) It was "over the top". If you think I'm optimistic about this, the
sole proponent they had was completely whacky. Could discredit the whole
thing.

60 minutes sucks. I used to like that show. It's really gone downhill.

Only bright light of the whole thing was the Brazil segment. 40% and
growing conversion to ethanol. Price is less than gasoline by a fair
margine (possibly govenerment controlled, not stated).

I watch 60 minutes every week. Some of the shows are good, and some suck,
but it's better than watching some dumb sitcom, and there's always Andy
Rooney to laugh with/at......

"John McWilliams" wrote in message
. ..
William Graham wrote:
"no_name" wrote in message
...
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.

Now there's an idea! - The two products could be made in the same factory
by the same corporation, and from the same crop! One building will
distill the alcohol, and the other will make the diesel fuel...........

Yeah, and the waste heat will generate electricity, and the pulpy waste
will be pressed into biodegradable garbage cans.

--
John McWilliams

ps Not to pooh-pooh the idea of multiple outputs from such a process; it'd
be stupid to not do so where practical.


Reminds me of the Al Cap "Li'l Abner" strip where he was in school, and the
teacher was telling the class of the three uses of corn....Eatin', Drinkin',
and Smokin'........

On Mon, 08 May 2006 22:43:18 -0700, John McWilliams wrote:


Yeah, and the waste heat will generate electricity, and the pulpy waste
will be pressed into biodegradable garbage cans.
What are you thinking of? They won't be needed and the waste would be made
into animal feed (with modern factories it would be vegetarian meals).

--
Neil
Delete 'l' to reply