new ethanol studies

I found this to be interesting if it is good research.
Gasoline Research findings released last week strongly suggests that there is an
"optimal blend level" of ethanol and gasoline -- most likely E20 or E30 (20 or 30% ethanol) -- at which cars will provide better mileage than the fuel's per-gallon btu content would predict.
The new study, cosponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy and the American Coalition for Ethanol (ACE), shows mid-range ethanol blends -- fuel mixtures with more ethanol than E10 (10% ethanol) but less than E85 (85% ethanol) -- can in some cases provide better fuel economy than regular unleaded gasoline, even in standard, non-flex-fuel vehicles. The new study also found that mid-range ethanol blends reduce harmful tailpipe emissions and that vehicles without any adjustments can operate well on higher ethanol blends than previously thought.
Previous assumptions held that ethanol's lower energy content should always directly correlate with lower fuel economy for drivers. Those assumptions were found to be wrong
"Initial findings indicate that we as a nation haven't begun to recognize the value of ethanol," says Brian Jennings, ACE executive vice president. "This is a compelling argument for more research on the promise of higher ethanol blends in gasoline. There is strong evidence that the optimal ethanol-gasoline blend for standard, non-flex-fuel vehicles is greater than E10 and instead may be E20 or E30. We encourage the federal government to move swiftly to research the use of higher ethanol blends and make necessary approvals so that American motorists can have the cost-effective ethanol choices they deserve at the pump."
The University of North Dakota Energy & Environmental Research Center (EERC) and the Minnesota Center for Automotive Research (MnCAR) conducted the research using four 2007 model vehicles: a Toyota Camry, a Ford Fusion and two Chevrolet Impalas, one flex-fuel and one non-flex-fuel. Researchers used the EPA Highway Fuel Economy Test (HWFET) to examine a range of ethanol-gasoline blends from straight Tier 2 gasoline up to 85% ethanol. All of the vehicles got better mileage with ethanol blends than the ethanol's energy content would predict, and three out of four actually traveled farther on a mid-level ethanol blend than on unleaded gasoline.
The research provides strong evidence that standard, non-flex-fuel vehicles can operate on ethanol blends beyond 10%. The three non-flex- fuel vehicles tested operated on levels as high as E65 before any engine fault codes were displayed. Emissions results for the ethanol blends were also favorable for nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide and non-methane organic gases, showing an especially significant reduction in CO2 emissions for each vehicle's "optimal" ethanol blend (E20 for the flex- fuel Chevy, E30 for the Toyota and Ford, E40 for the non-flex Chevy).
"These studies show that moderate 20-30% ethanol blends can reduce air pollution, improve gas mileage and save drivers money in the most popular cars on the road today," says Brett Hulsey, president of Better Environmental Solutions, an environmental health consulting firm. "Moderate ethanol blends are homegrown in America, can be delivered with existing pumps to current vehicles and cost less than gasoline. Ethanol lowers CO2 emissions 20% from gasoline, making it one of our most effective greenhouse-gas-reduction programs currently in place."
For more information on the key findings of the study or to download the full report, click here: www.ethanol.org/news.
KB
--
Thunder Snake #9
"Protect" your rights or "lose" them.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The fallacy in this study is that it ignores the energy cost of ethanol production and the economic cost increase on food production. Of course our legislators are too stupid to recognize this and will crucify us on the ethanol cross.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No problem, it's easy and cheap to make ethanol from petroleum now... --scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Scott Dorsey wrote:

But farmers don't get petroleum subsidies.
--
Dec. 6 (Bloomberg) -- Government officials and activists flying to Bali,
Indonesia, for the United Nations meeting on climate change will cause
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That's the problem I see now with the incentives to boost ethanol. I don't think they require documentation on how it is produced, and I believe most makers now use a lot of fossil fuels, natural gas if not petroleum. It takes a lot of heat to make ethanol.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
news:c53fce6f-

Corn is not the way to go.. Ethanol is a good enough fuel, but you cant justify using a bunch of petroleum to make a little alcohol. The Brazilians do it by fermenting sugar cane juice (starch laden tubers like mandioca, potatoes, etc can also be used). These produce more fermentable starch than corn, and do not require the levels of petroleum based nitrogen fertilizers that corn does.
They fire their distillation facilities, partly or wholly, with bagasse. They are now pretty much fuel independent and alcohol is one of the prime ways they got to that stage.
Alcohol is a good plan, but not with this porkbarrel approach.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The problem is that once you get the government subsidizing anything, that is the approach you eventually wind up with.
The notion of producing ethanol from cellulose waste is a very intriguing one. I have not seen the actual power budget for the proposed process, but there are a couple full scale plants that should be coming on line in the next two years which will be using it. If anything, this would seem the real way to accomplish it; no cane or corn required and no petroleum either. --scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Don Stauffer in Minnesota wrote:

Hydration of ethylene to ethanol probably takes no heat but there will not be a government subsidy. I don't know the economics today but many years ago the cheapest source of industrial ethanol was from petroleum.
Same goes for hydrogen.
Politicians are not scientists and the environmentalists driving the politicians to their idiocy are also not scientists. Big industry, whether petroleum or agribusiness will take advantage of the situation created and we'll all pay for it with higher prices and taxes.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You got that right!
The issue is not to produce ethanol based on petroleum consumption. It should be to find effective ways to use nonpetroleum alcohols to extend or replace petroleum fuels.
We are a society that has been spoiled with the availability of cheap and plentiful hydrocarbon fuels. The future might not allow us that continued luxury.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Were it not for corn farm subsidies, it would still be the cheapest source. It is, in fact, currently used in Russia to make cheap drinking alchol, although it is illegal to sell drinking alcohol made in that process in the US.

It would be nice if we actually had some folks in office who understood basic scientific concepts as well as basic economic theory. I blame the country's education system on this. --scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No problem, we just elect a farmer to the White House and he'll do for agriculture what Bush did for the petroleum industry.
No wait, we tried that with Carter.... --scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Scott: What does "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." mean?
wrote:

course
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Scott Buchanan wrote:

It's French..."It's a Nagra. It's Swiss and very, very accurate". I believe that Nagra refers to a Swiss made tape recorder.
Having lived in Switzerland (Geneva) for a while, I'd say that almost anything Swiss made is "very, very accurate"...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

"It's a Nagra. It's Swiss, and very very precise." The Nagra is a small portable audio recorder much beloved in the film industry. The signature is actually a misquote from the film _Diva_ in which a Nagra III recorder figures prominently. By the time I figured out it was a slight misquote, I'd been using it for more than 16 years and it was too late to change... --scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.