Regardless of your political views of the use of ethanol as a fuel or as a fuel additive, it is most certainly not an "inert filler" - an engine can (and many do) run on ethanol alone.
Furthermore, a 90/10 gasoline/ethanol mixture does not reduce fuel economy by 10%; it is closer to 3 to 4% in a standard gasoline-engine vehicle.
Back when I could still buy real gasoline in neighboring counties, I watched my mileage bounce between 27 and 30 depending on where I filled up. This was consistent over years. Looks a lot like 10% to me. I don't care what Big Agriculture tells you, I have personal experience. 10% ethanol = 10% power loss/mileage reduction...looks pretty inert from where I stand. A total crock.
I always wondered what kind of fuel mileage a car designed to run on ethanol can get. Seems there is a south american country or two that uses domestic ethanol/alcohol? instead of gas. Supposedly, there was also a flexfuel ULEV version of the Miata that was sold in limited quantities in a few US locations. California maybe? All I remember about using alcohol in gas was that it collected moisture, and also lowered the combustion temperature. In the early 1960's, an Olds F-85 "sport" model with a V6 had an alcohol/water injection system to do just that.
I believe the scientific term is either "energy density" or "specifi energy" I forget which and I'm too tired to go look it up.
In a nutshell, a gallon of alcohol has about 30% less energy content than a gallon of gasoline. E10 being 10% alcohol, a full fuel tank of E10 will contain 3% less energy than 100% gasoline. (If Big Agro has ever claimed improved mileage I'd like to see that ad.)
On the other hand alcohol has lower emissions, absorbs the moisture in your tank, and cleans the lines. In many cases people can make up that
3% by being meticulous with their tire pressures.cheers
Don
Not when you include all the diesel fuel burned to produce and transport it. It's a net loss for both emissions and energy efficiency. It's a gigantic boondoggle, nothing more.
And gasoline is produced and transported at zero cost and emissions? C'mon! You should check out the emission figures for those huge oil tankers plying the oceans. Seriously.
I agree about the boondoggle but let's not blame alcohol itself, it's the subsidies, the greed, the politicians that can be bought...
I like E10, I don't think food crops should be diverted to ethanol production.
I'll sacrifice my brussels sprouts...
Actually, it has nothing to do with what "Big Agriculture" says or does, my comments were simply based on published scientific facts, tests, research, documented results, notwithstanding your personal, anecdotal observations (which, btw, do not even begin to resemble my personal, anecdotal observations, which are no more germane to the conversation than are yours.)
Nor did I make any comments wrt the political merits or marketplace efficacy of such fuels.
i have certainly heard arguments that defy the assertions of corn ethanol being green. and a quick google search coughs up lots of reputable articles that say the same. here's just one from t a well known source...
Corn is best used for moonshine!
Well, that and tortillas.
Tortilla chips go well with moonshine.
but driving does not ;)
No doubt. I was not, have not, and am not discussing that. Which is the follow-up point I was trying to make, but alas, that, and the original point seems to have been lost.
The ONLY points I was making are that:
I apologize if this is somehow all too complex to be understood via simple text messages.
Depends on whether you're drinkin' it or runnin' it.
My pappy grew up runnin' tortilla chips across the county line....
Sure it does, drink enough moonshine and you won't be scared of the traffic, the traffic will be scared of you!
By observation, the E10 blend has lower mileage than the same brand and grade of gasoline. As to the exact reduction--?? 10% seems ballpark. A "flex fuel" car may have different results. A "normal" cars computer is tuned to some agreed upon fuel. When the fuel is changed, the computer has little or no knowledge, and adjusts as if the fuel was what it was programmed for. We had a 96 Chevy Impala a car or so ago. It required a computer program change to run properly with E15, and ideally, even with E10. (Not to mention replacing some parts not designed for E15, that just tolerated E10.)
As I mentioned earlier, personal observations are anecdotal in nature and differ from one individual to another. Documented research indicates that an E10 blend results in approximately a 3% decrease in fuel mileage in today's cars.
We all have google to help us, the research is publicly available, and I did look it up before I commented.
However, common sense would seem to indicate that replacing 10 percent of a volume of gasoline with a substance that has about two thirds of the energy per unit of volume of gasoline would result in a fuel that has about 96-97% of the energy of a gallon of unadulterated gasoline. It would take a poorly designed ecu indeed to reduce the utilization of that energy by another 6-7%; making a gallon of E10 perform exactly as if the ethanol had never been added in the first place, or had been spilt out on the ground, effectively leaving the consumer with 9/10's of a gallon of gasoline, after all.
"Normal" cars are, in fact, designed to happily process E10, and have been for some time. (Warning: Anecdotal observation follows) I know that my 1997 Miata has no problem with it, and certainly doesn't get 10% worse fuel economy on it than it does on 100% gasoline. Today's cars have MUCH more sophisticated fueling maps than does my 13- year-old car.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required