Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    3:09 PM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: All Things Ethanol > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: What E85 good for? Back to Topics
Bonito
Champion Author
Dayton

Posts:19,271
Points:3,723,135
Joined:Jun 2004
Message Posted: Mar 24, 2007 8:17:31 PM

The stations I see are charging the same or more for E85, SO WHO WANTS IT? So we are using less oil -- big deal! E85 will not fly in the US unless we ARE REQUIRED to use it or IT'S CHEAPER!
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Sneakers
Veteran Author Georgia

Posts:409
Points:63,530
Joined:Feb 2003
Message Posted: Mar 9, 2015 1:03:35 AM

To answer the question without the inevitable transportation/efficiency/food conflict debate: E85 is good for diversifying our fuel options, utilizing excess sugar beats/cane/corn and ... perhaps drinking(?) if you get the chemical separation process & associated costs down. I bet some Russian guy is dropping his antifreeze bottle and looking for an E85 pump right now.
Mininana
Champion Author New York

Posts:1,081
Points:110,765
Joined:Dec 2014
Message Posted: Feb 28, 2015 11:20:27 AM

to answer the question, it's good for mechanics...
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:9,004
Points:1,500,510
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2015 11:41:19 AM

wrote: "Mixed with octane 114 ethanol, & 84 octane base gasoline, to make octane 87 ethanol blends, toluene & xylene most certainly aren't in double digit percentages.....not even near. Even in 87 octane E0, toluene & xylene are still below double digits."

I provided information straight from Marathon 91 Recreational Gasoline Material Safety Data Sheet. Let's see the source of your wild claim.

By the way, Marathon completely disagrees with you. What a surprise. Marathon Regular Unleaded Gasoline MSDS

[Edited by: krzysiek_ck at 2/26/2015 11:45:07 AM EST]
litesong
Sophomore Author Gary

Posts:163
Points:2,880
Joined:Mar 2012
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2015 9:34:30 PM

krzysiek koughed:
Toluene can be as high as 15% and Xylene as high as 10%.
///////
litesong wrote:
Mixed with octane 114 ethanol, & 84 octane base gasoline, to make octane 87 ethanol blends, toluene & xylene most certainly aren't in double digit percentages.....not even near. Even in 87 octane E0, toluene & xylene are still below double digits. Burned in gasoline engines designed to burn octane 87 E0, t & x produce minimal power output......kinda like.....ethanol.
Since krzysiek loves E10, E15 & probably E20, krzysiek has to be happy with even less toluene & xylene.

[Edited by: litesong at 2/25/2015 9:42:23 PM EST]
nru
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:7,094
Points:1,809,925
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2015 7:25:47 PM

Yes, combustion increases the temperature of the gases (energy input from the fuel - btu is a good measure) and results in a pressure increase - direct result of available energy from the fuel. You've argued yourself into a corner - if there is nothing about BTU's there in no available energy to increase the temperature and provide work.

If it had nothing to do with energy density of the fuel, there could be no work done with the motor - it's sciency stuff that you should darn well be aware of, tell me what supplies the energy if not the fuel (and the amount is energy density of the fuel related - you need more of a less energy dense fuel to get the same work out of a motor.

Simple application of the ideal gas law (no deriviitive ) results in zero work - or are you now going to tell us how to get work from a motor without putting in energy - you brought up that there is nothing about BTU's in the ideal gas law. If no fuel is available with enough BTU's, there can be no work Work is directly proportional to input energy - sorry just how a motor works
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,631
Points:29,120
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2015 5:30:52 PM

"No, and there is little relation to ideal gas law and a piston engine."

Tell that to the guys at NASA. I'm sure they would like to hear how to correct their website.
nru
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:7,094
Points:1,809,925
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2015 5:25:09 PM

No, and there is little relation to ideal gas law and a piston engine. I guess you are still better informed than all the engine guys in the world as to how they work though - and why all those people say the opposite of you
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,631
Points:29,120
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2015 4:51:54 PM

"you need the rise in something to give rise to pressure, and since the chamber is "sealed" n and R are fixed. So there is an inherent part of how an engine works that you are leaving out - back to why a motor will get more MPG from a high BTU fuel than a low BTU one."

Wrong. Pressure strives to be constant as volume of the cylinder varies. n is a variable based on pounds of fuel aspirated with variable airflow. Temperature is variable based on a combination of fuel mixture, timing, relative compression, and manifold pressure.

What you influence as you drive is n, the pounds of fuel injected into the engine by moving your foot on or off the accelerator determines the moles of combustion product within the cylinder at any given cycle of the piston.

What goes on behind the scenes is timing advance constantly moves varying degrees before top dead center. igniting the fuel sooner creates more pressure on the upstroke, increasing burn rate and temperature.

O2 and knock sensors regulate fuel mixture to provide as much air possible to increase temperature at tdc.

Higher relative compression and manifold pressure (turbocharging) also increase temperature by increasing pressure at tdc. But, of course, timing and fuel mixture would automatically dial back if these two are more aggressive.

Like I said, there aint no btus per gallon in the ideal gas law formulas.

The engine of almost every car on the road is programmed to prevent engine knock and maintain an exhaust gas temperature below a level that will burn valves. both ethanol and gasoline have far more energy than can be used by the volume of combustion gasses in the cylinder. regardless of how much energy is in a gallon of either substance, it gets wasted out the radiator and tailpipe.
Baron62nd
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:10,458
Points:2,454,705
Joined:Sep 2007
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2015 4:45:56 PM

It's real good for cleaning parts.
nru
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:7,094
Points:1,809,925
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2015 4:10:59 PM

yep - I am. What in my argument would bely that? Your link to NASA shows a basic 4 stroke engine - the reason they work is that the fuel burns (turning from a liquid to a bunch of other gases and and raising of temperature).
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,631
Points:29,120
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2015 3:34:56 PM

Einstein, thought you said you were a physicist.
nru
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:7,094
Points:1,809,925
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2015 1:55:45 PM

"PV=nRT. Again, there ain't no btus per gallon in that equation. "

hmmmm.. this would not cause any motion without heat or other energy from the system (burning gasoline or other fuel) - maybe a better statement for this would be delta(PV) = nRdelta(T) (sorry there is no delta symbol available in this editor that I can find) - you need the rise in something to give rise to pressure, and since the chamber is "sealed" n and R are fixed. So there is an inherent part of how an engine works that you are leaving out - back to why a motor will get more MPG from a high BTU fuel than a low BTU one.

your logic would allow us to run an engine on straight nitrogen.

[Edited by: nru at 2/25/2015 1:57:08 PM EST]
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:9,004
Points:1,500,510
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2015 10:29:42 AM

litesong wrote: "krzysiek mentions chemicals he calls common, but they are of little percentage or importance in 87 octane E0 gasoline."

Wrong. Nice spin though. As listed below, Toluene can be as high as 15% and Xylene as high as 10%. Both chemicals have octane rating higher then Ethanol.

litesong wrote: "What is important: adding only 10% ethanol to 87 octane E0(becoming E10), reduces mpg by 8%, 7%, & 5% in low compression ratio (9:1 to 11:1) gasoline engines designed to burn 87 octane E0."

Wrong again. My stock NA vehicles do not see the drop you claim I should see.

litesong wrote: "What krzysiek tries to say, is 87 octane 100% gasoline (E0) is foreign in gasoline engines engineered & designed to burn 87 octane E0 & truly foreign ethanol improves engine performance(mpg). Yes, not only is krzysiek silly, it is a propagandist, too."

Wrong again. You made a garbage claim and I'm asking you to explain it in more details. Why is it so difficult for you to do?

Once again.

How exactly is "low compression ratio gasoline engine" designed to efficiently burn Toluene or Xylene, common chemicals used in E0 gasoline? Both chemicals have octane rating higher then Ethanol.

[Edited by: krzysiek_ck at 2/25/2015 10:32:09 AM EST]
litesong
Sophomore Author Gary

Posts:163
Points:2,880
Joined:Mar 2012
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2015 10:17:27 AM

krzysiek koughed:
How exactly is "low compression ratio gasoline engine" designed to efficiently burn Toluene or Xylene, common chemicals used in E0 gasoline?
///////
litesong wrote:
krzysiek is a propagandist for ethanol, & here to confuse. krzysiek mentions chemicals he calls common, but they are of little percentage or importance in 87 octane E0 gasoline. What is important: adding only 10% ethanol to 87 octane E0(becoming E10), reduces mpg by 8%, 7%, & 5% in low compression ratio (9:1 to 11:1) gasoline engines designed to burn 87 octane E0. The percentage drop in mpg in E10 is easily understood. E10 is a combination of 114 octane(& higher) ethanol AND octane 84 (& lower) base gasoline molecules, being forced through engines, designed to burn 87 octane E0.

What krzysiek tries to say, is 87 octane 100% gasoline (E0) is foreign in gasoline engines engineered & designed to burn 87 octane E0 & truly foreign ethanol improves engine performance(mpg). Yes, not only is krzysiek silly, it is a propagandist, too.
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:9,004
Points:1,500,510
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2015 9:23:58 PM

litesong wrote: "It matters that 114 octane ethanol, as used (not burned efficiently) in low compression ratio gasoline engines, designed to burn 87 octane, does NOT deliver near E0 97% mpg output, but loses 8%, 7% & 5% mpg."

Please provide the breakdown of all chemicals used in E0 gasoline. After all gasoline is nothing more than mixture of about 150 different chemicals. Let me start the list for you:

Benzene - 0.5-3.5% - 98 RON and 91 MON octane rating
Ethyl Benzene - 0.5-2.0% - 107 RON and 98 MON octane rating
Toluene - 1-15% - 124 RON and 107 MON octane rating
Xylene - 2-10% - 145 RON and 124 MON octane rating

Marathon 91 Recreational Gasoline

How exactly is "low compression ratio gasoline engine" designed to efficiently burn Toluene or Xylene, common chemicals used in E0 gasoline? Both chemicals have octane rating higher then Ethanol.

[Edited by: krzysiek_ck at 2/24/2015 9:27:46 PM EST]
litesong
Sophomore Author Gary

Posts:163
Points:2,880
Joined:Mar 2012
Message Posted: Feb 22, 2015 10:40:34 PM

soiled soylentgrain guffed:
....REAL science that ethanol has 92-96% of gas's energy output, but you still argue that "it doesn't matter"
///////
litesong wrote:
It matters that 114 octane ethanol, as used (not burned efficiently) in low compression ratio gasoline engines, designed to burn 87 octane, does NOT deliver near E0 97% mpg output, but loses 8%, 7% & 5% mpg.

[Edited by: litesong at 2/22/2015 10:47:08 PM EST]
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,631
Points:29,120
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Feb 22, 2015 4:23:28 PM

"You profit off ethanol..that immediately takes you out of the conversation of it."

Yes, in an indirect way. I own land. However, I stand to profit more from high oil prices than ethanol.

I'm pro US energy production; oil, natural gas, ethanol, methanol, nuclear, solar, whatever we can produce. You can believe what you want to believe. But to close your eyes to anything different than what you know about gasoline is unfortunate."None of your bs, none of your deflection will change REAL science that ethanol has 92-96% of gas's energy output, people have put in link after link that has shown you that, but you still argue that "it doesn't matter""

Tell that to the guys at NASA who wrote the article I linked to.

Jayburt
Champion Author Toledo

Posts:4,275
Points:691,055
Joined:Jun 2009
Message Posted: Feb 22, 2015 3:48:28 PM

None of your bs, none of your deflection will change REAL science that ethanol has 92-96% of gas's energy output, people have put in link after link that has shown you that, but you still argue that "it doesn't matter"

You profit off ethanol..that immediately takes you out of the conversation of it.

Now post a link to IL Corn video of an alcohol lamp that doesn't burn gas well..or some other nonsense, but no one should take a word of what you say as anything but a profiteer.
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,631
Points:29,120
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Feb 22, 2015 12:26:05 PM

Jaybert, let me help you out. This is not rocket science. That said, please look at the link I am posting to the NASA website.

4-Stroke Internal Combustion Engine

To save you some time reading, please see the combustion phase of the cycles. Ideal gas law; that's the principle that turns heat energy into kinetic energy. PV=nRT. Again, there ain't no btus per gallon in that equation.

The reason ethanol is a good if not superior fuel to gasoline is it produces the same amount of expandable gas and can create compustion temperatures exceeding that of gasoline. Since the internal combustion engine wastes so much heat, btu content per gallon is irrelevant. Anything above what is needed to push the piston down is wasted energy.

[Edited by: SoylentGrain at 2/22/2015 12:27:16 PM EST]
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,631
Points:29,120
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Feb 22, 2015 7:31:36 AM

"completely ignoring REAL science, and the only part that has relevance to this conversation."

If an engine operates by something other than expanding gasses, influenced by volume of gas and temperature, please enlighten us.
Jayburt
Champion Author Toledo

Posts:4,275
Points:691,055
Joined:Jun 2009
Message Posted: Feb 22, 2015 1:24:53 AM

'science' from a person that said quote "True, but an irrelevant factoid. While gasoline has more energy per gallon of fuel, that alone has minimal relationship..."
completely ignoring REAL science, and the only part that has relevance to this conversation. You try and use a formula that has absolutely NO bearing on any of the topic...and the best part is..you wrote it wrong,LOL

We get it, you profit off the very bad idea of ethanol..still no reason to distort, try and distract and lie about it. You think these people are not smart enough to see the difference and that says a lot about you and your brethren that profit off of it.

SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,631
Points:29,120
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2015 7:46:17 AM

"So you spout pure nonsense in response to a very real post...typical."

It's called science.

"You guys are a joke..and thats not just my opinion, have gotten quite a few msg.s about you guys, and rest assured, we're laughing AT you, not with you."

Rest assured, I take that as an indirect compliment.
Jayburt
Champion Author Toledo

Posts:4,275
Points:691,055
Joined:Jun 2009
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2015 12:32:13 AM

So you spout pure nonsense in response to a very real post...typical. And isn't it funny one Shrill had to get another to come in when someone started putting in proof that ethanol stinks (in more ways than one)

You guys are a joke..and thats not just my opinion, have gotten quite a few msg.s about you guys, and rest assured, we're laughing AT you, not with you.

and make sure you see this link people. Its important

[Edited by: Jayburt at 2/20/2015 12:34:19 AM EST]
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,631
Points:29,120
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2015 11:44:16 PM

"He even wrote 'Ethanol contamination and damage' as the cause of problem because they are tired of calling it anything but its true source. "

Did re recommend replacing the framis and flux-bridge relay as well?

" a direct quote from the post below that is as crazy as your arguments."

The basic gas law that governs how much energy is created in your engine by burning fuel is PV=nRT. Sorry, there ain't no btu's per gallon in that equation.

Jayburt
Champion Author Toledo

Posts:4,275
Points:691,055
Joined:Jun 2009
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2015 8:56:26 PM

It is quite ironic to have this conversation today of all days..
Just got off the phone with a friend of mine who I went through late grade school-high school with, except he took 'automotive' and after working for a repair shop in the area now works at a top dealer. The guy has many ACE certifications and our topic naturally drifted to his work, where he told me about a repair yesterday on a ladies car,a 2014 that she takes very good care of,using all premium products.
A 'Check Engine Light' and poor performance, that needed its fuel system and sensors cleaned..turns out she was using mid-grade gas, which because it doesn't sell fast has more time for the ethanol to deteriorate and gunk up systems. He even wrote 'Ethanol contamination and damage' as the cause of problem because they are tired of calling it anything but its true source. He educated her on the use of a product which they do not sell, but will hopefully help to stop the problems in the future.

I specifically asked him if there was anything he would like to say to you shrills, and he did have many things which cannot be put in a post here,and he normally doesn't talk like that at all. He he also 1 of the biggest ethanol opponents you could ever meet,having seen daily the effects of using it.

So the people who read this can believe a multiple ACE Certified technician with over 25 yrs. of experience, who has his arms in automotive engines 6 days a week, or they can believe you and your brethren.

Now hurry and post a bunch of times so hopefully people won't see those real credible links, and so you can post things like "True, but an irrelevant factoid. While gasoline has more energy per gallon of fuel, that alone has minimal relationship to the temperature a given quantity of either fuel burns." a direct quote from the post below that is as crazy as your arguments.
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,631
Points:29,120
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2015 8:00:49 PM

"No matter what lies you put in Nothing will change basic facts like gasoline has 111-114K BTU per gallon, and Ethanol has 76K - that's energy density."

True, but an irrelevant factoid. While gasoline has more energy per gallon of fuel, that alone has minimal relationship to the temperature a given quantity of either fuel burns. As it turns out, a pound of ethanol and pound of gasoline produce a similar amount of horsepower.

"yet another link that shows I'm telling the truth, and you..not so much"

Again, the Volumetric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit you claim as a "subsidy' is long gone and actually not a subsidy. It's was a tax decrease that found its way to you, the consumer, in the form of lower fuel prices.

But, getting to the meat of your article: "All told, more than $3.3 million has been spent on corn ethanol blender pumps, in addition to numerous other federal subsidies. Instead of using the budget to reinforce one of the very few good policies in the farm bill, the administration is proposing to undo it and increase this amount by up to 66 times."

$3.3 million!!!!!!???? That's peanuts in terms of government spending. You are talking about a fuel market that is measured in hundreds of billions of dollars.

As far as other ag subsidies, I own farmland and participate in those programs. The USDA pays me NOT TO GROW crops. With the increased market demand for grain I can now exit those programs and place most of my land back into production.

More US made fuel (that means ethanol), fewer subsidies paid to me, more US jobs, less imported oil. That's a positive for everyone in this country.
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:9,004
Points:1,500,510
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2015 5:57:19 PM

Jayburt wrote: "you mean except for all the links to real credible sites?"

You mean all the links that do not list a single ethanol related failure.

Jayburt wrote: "No matter what lies you put in Nothing will change basic facts like gasoline has 111-114K BTU per gallon, and Ethanol has 76K - that's energy density."

Except we are not heating water here.

Jayburt wrote: "yet another link that shows I'm telling the truth, and you..not so much"

I'm still waiting for you to list Ethanol subsidies. Why is it so difficult for you to do so? So far you mentioned one, VEETC, that expired in 2011. Even the last link you provided mentions it. What else you got? Except of course pathetic comments.

[Edited by: krzysiek_ck at 2/19/2015 6:01:54 PM EST]
Jayburt
Champion Author Toledo

Posts:4,275
Points:691,055
Joined:Jun 2009
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2015 4:55:45 PM

"all you got"- you mean except for all the links to real credible sites? And I'm a "big oil shrill"?, lol
Pathetic is the bs your trying to sell, painted gold, buts its still a steaming pile of bs. No matter what lies you put in Nothing will change basic facts like gasoline has 111-114K BTU per gallon, and Ethanol has 76K - that's energy density. Can't get the same mileage from ethanol.nothing

Seen other threads where people have consistently put in facts and links to those facts..and you've told us all about your 'special ECU'
Ethanol is bad for vehicles, bad for taxpayers and bad for for America. Case closed
Now rant on, and try and hope some people will believe you...oh

yet another link that shows I'm telling the truth, and you..not so much



[Edited by: Jayburt at 2/19/2015 4:57:11 PM EST]
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:9,004
Points:1,500,510
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2015 4:04:59 PM

Jayburt wrote: "It has become increasingly apparent you are a industry shrill. We are looking at a black box and you are trying to convince us it is white, or gray,..or any other color than what it is.
Since you've lost all credibility I hope your integrity was worth whatever they've paid you."

That is all you got. Pathetic. Than again I would not expect anything more from Big Oil Shill.
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,631
Points:29,120
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2015 3:40:06 PM

Jayburt, do some homework. The Volumetric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit expired four years ago. In addition, aside from the evil sounding name, VEETC was a reduction in the amount of tax fuel retailers paid on ALL FUEL, not just ethanol. Which means you paid less for any type of fuel you used in your car. That's gone so, you pay more for gasoline and diesel.

As far as your mandate link, the EPA mandates every drop of fuel used in the US. It can be mandated with ethanol or mandated with crude oil products, like MTBE. You pick which one is better.
Jayburt
Champion Author Toledo

Posts:4,275
Points:691,055
Joined:Jun 2009
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2015 3:22:46 PM

Deny, deflect, and then add a big pile of bs..
but direct from the Gov itself
we see your still embarrassing yourself
and still more proof,along with the subsidies that WE pay for!

It has become increasingly apparent you are a industry shrill. We are looking at a black box and you are trying to convince us it is white, or gray,..or any other color than what it is.
Since you've lost all credibility I hope your integrity was worth whatever they've paid you.
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:9,004
Points:1,500,510
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2015 12:06:39 PM

More on CRC "studies".

"Perhaps most surprisingly, the CRC decided to select several engines already known to have durability issues, including one that was subject to a recall involving valve problems when running on E0 gasoline and E10. It is no surprise that an engine having problems with traditional fuels might also "fail" with E15 or E20 ethanol-blended fuels -- especially using a failure criterion chosen to demonstrate sensitivity to ethanol and operated on a cycle designed to stress the valves."

Myths And Facts About The Renewable Fuel Standard
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:9,004
Points:1,500,510
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2015 11:24:50 AM

The Coordinating Research Council study mentioned in the link you provided was discussed here already. Actually there are multiple "studies" done by CRC. All of them were discussed here. I will mention one of the issues here, you are welcomed to search for others on this forum.

"The Coordinating Research Council, Inc. (CRC) is a non-profit corporation supported by the petroleum and automotive equipment industries."

INTERMEDIATE-LEVEL ETHANOL BLENDS ENGINE DURABILITY STUDY

You can clearly see who paid for this report. There are other issues with validity of CRC reports.
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:9,004
Points:1,500,510
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2015 10:53:49 AM

wrote: "You mean the subsidies clearly listed in the links just a few posts below your last one? Are you really going to try that? Or do you really think you can fool these good people? Your just embarrassing yourself now..smh"

Your first link discusses Volumetric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit (or VEETC) that does not exists anymore. Your second link does not list any current Ethanol subsidies. Why is that? My question to you still stands.

What subsidies? Please list them.
Jayburt
Champion Author Toledo

Posts:4,275
Points:691,055
Joined:Jun 2009
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2015 12:31:26 AM

But again channeling the late Billy Mays...wait there more
like this,that clearly SHOWS engine damage from ethanol
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2013/01/29/ethanol-fuel-car-engines/1873733/
and here
Jayburt
Champion Author Toledo

Posts:4,275
Points:691,055
Joined:Jun 2009
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2015 12:28:08 AM

You mean the subsidies clearly listed in the links just a few posts below your last one? Are you really going to try that? Or do you really think you can fool these good people? Your just embarrassing yourself now..smh

but since you seem to be a bit slow, I'll put them in again
Like here

and here
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:9,004
Points:1,500,510
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Feb 18, 2015 2:13:25 PM

litesong wrote: "Not "maybe". I've told you often my 3 car data are accurate. You intimate that I lie with your "maybe"."

So far you produced a lot of garbage claims. Why would this one be any different?
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:9,004
Points:1,500,510
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Feb 18, 2015 2:11:00 PM

Jayburt wrote: "The subsidies for it which I and every other taxpayer pay for it."

What subsidies? Please list them.

Jayburt wrote: "Lets see, we have engine mechanics, both automotive and small engine who say ethanol is crap, we have automakers say its crap, we have engineers and scientists who say its crap, and we have real world people like I and the thousands of others who has spoken in these threads."

And none of them provide any evidence of actual failures they claim "may" or "can" happen. Why is that?
Jayburt
Champion Author Toledo

Posts:4,275
Points:691,055
Joined:Jun 2009
Message Posted: Feb 17, 2015 10:01:19 PM

"mentioned failures" like the one I put in from small engine experts reporting how like new small equipment "with engines that are shot" to directly quote them, don't say it clear enough? lol, now your just sounding silly.
Lets see, we have engine mechanics, both automotive and small engine who say ethanol is crap, we have automakers say its crap, we have engineers and scientists who say its crap, and we have real world people like I and the thousands of others who has spoken in these threads.
But as Billy Mays used to say..'Wait, Theres more..'
Lets talk about the costs of ethanol..One the extra charge at the pump for blending in a product which even refineries don't want..
2) The subsidies for it which I and every other taxpayer pay for it..
3) The costs of motor and component breakdowns and wear, all while getting less energy for an equal volume of mass.
You'll notice how nice I was NOT to list the costs associated with extra downtime because of using this inferior fuel source, or the extra costs of sensors etc.. not working as well as they could because of being contaminated and affected by it.
I restore certain old equipment and its stuff I actually use, it has been greatly affected by the forced use of this stuff, I also have two old vehicles I've rebuilt and restored myself, one from late '60's and one from the early '70's, all including my much newer vehicles greatly affected by e-crap.
I sincerely hope you do leave your tanks 'half filled with it' like you proponents of it say, when your stuff goes down I hope making money off of a very bad idea is worth the cost of your integrity..
litesong
Sophomore Author Gary

Posts:163
Points:2,880
Joined:Mar 2012
Message Posted: Feb 17, 2015 8:14:02 PM

krzysiek koughed:


[Edited by: litesong at 2/17/2015 8:15:43 PM EST]
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:9,004
Points:1,500,510
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Feb 17, 2015 6:32:34 PM

Another news story mentioned by Jayburt that lists zero ethanol failures and words such as "could".
Tucsonhomes
Champion Author Tucson

Posts:10,051
Points:1,004,840
Joined:Jan 2011
Message Posted: Feb 17, 2015 3:46:31 PM

I'm for nitrogen
Jayburt
Champion Author Toledo

Posts:4,275
Points:691,055
Joined:Jun 2009
Message Posted: Feb 17, 2015 3:31:01 PM

ah, more of the gang who profits off a bad idea come out. Maybe people won't notice I put in proof with links to reliable sources..and you put in "Obviously my NA vehicles enjoy better stock ECU programming than yours. " (actually a ECM) and I'm sure yours is just special,little shortbus special that is(no offense to those that did ride it)
But there is this;
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/05/07/auto-makers-warn-new-ethanol-mandate-could-damage-cars/ available here as well
that even Fox shows automakers warning against e-crap. And the fact that every marina gas station worth its salt sells e-crap free products because they know how bad they are. And the fact that every small engined machine I've bought in the last 3 years clearly states "gas with ethanol is NOT recommended in this engine", including a new snowblower bought in 2015, but I'm sure they put that in there just for laughs right? litesong reports exactly what I and friends and family have seen so we know which one to believe.
There is also the fact that we taxpayers help pay for all that damage done to our stuff,
http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2010/07/ethanol-subsidies-bad-gulf-good-bpas shown here
and here.
litesong
Sophomore Author Gary

Posts:163
Points:2,880
Joined:Mar 2012
Message Posted: Feb 17, 2015 12:22:56 PM

litesong wrote:
".... & 10% ethanol blends drops mpg by 7%....& 8%....& 5%."
//////
krzysiek koughed:
For you maybe. I do not get the same results as you. Obviously my NA vehicles enjoy better stock ECU programming than yours.
////////
litesong wrote:
Not "maybe". I've told you often my 3 car data are accurate. You intimate that I lie with your "maybe". Using E0, one car averages 46mpg overall, with an EPA highway rating of 42mpg, second car averaged 31mpg overall, with an EPA highway rating of 27mpg, & third car, averaged 34+mpg with an EPA highway rating of 32mpg. Finally, a fourth car averages 39+mpg overall, while many(most?) other posters with the car, register only 30mpg overall. All vehicles lose many mpg when using (not burning effectively) E10, as I have accurately posted.
All vehicles are stock, with no efforts to boost ethanol or 100% gasoline performance, as your jerry-rigged phony facts are wrenched.


[Edited by: litesong at 2/17/2015 12:28:29 PM EST]
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,631
Points:29,120
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Feb 17, 2015 10:33:28 AM

"which clearly shows that they do, and it does. Its senseless to try and debate with someone who won't allow themselves to see the truth."

The truth is a small engine fixed fuel mixture carburetor and a computer controlled fuel injection system in your car are two different things. Yes, IF you run E85 in a small engine and IF the fuel mixture is lean, engine damage can occur. That's simply no the case with cars made in the past 35 years.
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:9,004
Points:1,500,510
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Feb 17, 2015 10:14:14 AM

Jayburt wrote: "which clearly shows that they do, and it does. Its senseless to try and debate with someone who won't allow themselves to see the truth."

The truth is that I used Ethanol fuels for last 20+ years and can report zero ethanol related failures in my vehicles, lawn mowers, or snow blowers. So you are wrong, not everyone has the same results as you.
Jayburt
Champion Author Toledo

Posts:4,275
Points:691,055
Joined:Jun 2009
Message Posted: Feb 17, 2015 12:31:37 AM

and there goes the disinformation and the attempts to cloud the subject...but there is this;
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/25936782/ns/business-consumer_news/t/mechanics-see-ethanol-damaging-small-engines/

also available right here in clickable form,same link
which clearly shows that they do, and it does. Its senseless to try and debate with someone who won't allow themselves to see the truth.
Personal experience? I just had to rip apart a intake from using the crap,and replace seals,o-rings and other parts I wouldn't have if it wasn't present. And we have a flex-fuel vehicle we've tried over 10% e-crap gas in, with the same real world results everyone else has had.
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:9,004
Points:1,500,510
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Feb 16, 2015 7:49:16 PM

Jayburt wrote: "Many people can, and several real stories have been done about it."

Popular mechanics and Consumer Reports do not report any destroyed engines. There is a reason why they used words like "can" or "may". Bell Performance link is pure advertising for their products.

Jayburt wrote: "so act like its a rumor if you choose too,the rest of us know the truth. Its funny to watch people all over these forums who profit from ethanol try and convince everyone else that the truth isn't the truth,and that it is a good thing."

I used up to E35 in my 1994 turbo car and up to E30 in my 2000 NA car for years. I can report zero ethanol related problems. At the same time, there are few folks on this forum that are nothing more than Big Oil Shills trying to tell me otherwise. What is your personal experience with anything above E10?
Jayburt
Champion Author Toledo

Posts:4,275
Points:691,055
Joined:Jun 2009
Message Posted: Feb 16, 2015 5:18:41 PM

mtnrambo wrote: "E85 destroys engines..."

krzysiek_ck wrote;"How many destroyed engines can you personally report? Is it possible you are just making this up?"

Many people can, and several real stories have been done about it.
http://www.rense.com/general85/eth.htm
http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/hybrid-electric/a6244/e15-gasoline-damage-engine/
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2013/03/gas-with-ethanol-can-make-small-engines-fail/index.htm
http://www.bellperformance.com/blog/how-to-tell-if-ethanol-is-destroying-my-vehicle

so act like its a rumor if you choose too,the rest of us know the truth. Its funny to watch people all over these forums who profit from ethanol try and convince everyone else that the truth isn't the truth,and that it is a good thing.
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:9,004
Points:1,500,510
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Feb 16, 2015 2:00:01 PM

litesong wrote: ".... & 10% ethanol blends drops mpg by 7%....& 8%....& 5%."

For you maybe. I do not get the same results as you. Obviously my NA vehicles enjoy better stock ECU programming than yours.
ray44512
Veteran Author Ohio

Posts:420
Points:212,580
Joined:May 2007
Message Posted: Feb 15, 2015 5:11:52 PM

Turbo motors!
Post a reply Back to Topics