Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    4:40 PM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: All Things Ethanol > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: "E15 Causes Serious Damage to Automobiles" Back to Topics
antiguzzle

Sophomore Author
Wichita

Posts:237
Points:20,545
Joined:Mar 2012
Message Posted: May 16, 2012 4:16:34 PM

Study Documenting Engine Failures Requires EPA to Reconsider Increasing Ethanol in Gasoline

"The Coordinating Research Council's objective scientific tests have found disturbing evidence that increasing the amount of ethanol in gasoline above the current 10 percent causes serious damage to car engines. The study shows that a significant percentage of cars tested suffered engine damage when refueled with 15 percent ethanol. These are cars EPA has approved to run on E15 and are representative of approximately 5 million vehicles in the nation's existing fleet."

---It's over folks. There is no way that E15 is coming to market now. With the mandate repealed, more ethanol refineries will close down and the whole stack of cards will eventually fall. Ethanol was a bad idea supported by good intentions. Unfortunately, good intentions won't put food on the table.

Ethanol (as a major fuel replacement) is done in America. Good riddance.

[Edited by: antiguzzle at 5/16/2012 4:18:17 PM EST]
REPLIES (newest first) Topic is locked
Profile Pic
vulcan96
Champion Author Ohio

Posts:27,181
Points:3,133,135
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Feb 27, 2013 1:03:56 PM

plus, it would void your warranty
Profile Pic
driver61OR
Rookie Author Oregon

Posts:90
Points:4,530
Joined:May 2011
Message Posted: Jun 29, 2012 6:41:26 PM

But you do agree, "Daruel", that you get less miles per gallon on gas than before ethanol was added year round. Oh, by the way, you can still get racing gasoline, by the drum, with TEL in it or did you know that. Also, they're still using TEL in 100 octane aviation gasoline up until 2018. The FAA has started to phase out the use of TEL in aviation gasoline this year. The funny thing is....there isn't any unleaded replacement on the market yet or being developed either!
Profile Pic
Daurel
Veteran Author Indiana

Posts:341
Points:37,310
Joined:Jul 2011
Message Posted: Jun 28, 2012 12:00:56 PM

driver610r
That was at least 14 going on 15 years ago cars today will run on 15% just is that the "map" will not adjust for the added air which in some not all cases throws a "fault code"
piston airplanes have not had lead in the fuel for over 12years No they do not use ethanol in all but the leaded fuel is not even blended!

a little late on the tax break also it was repealed a while back.
Why don't you get in the same year as the rest of us?
Profile Pic
driver61OR
Rookie Author Oregon

Posts:90
Points:4,530
Joined:May 2011
Message Posted: Jun 21, 2012 12:35:02 PM

What the confusion is about all of that "E15 causes damage to cars", is this...most of the vehicles being manufactured and that are being driven on the road today are designed to use E0 and up to E5 gasoline. As soon as you increase the concentration of ethanol in gasoline, the car starts to lose gas mileage. The only ones that aren't affected by that are the ones that have a sensor in the fuel system that monitors the ethanol concentration, so the electronics can be adjusted to compensate for that.

The other thing that people don't understand is now that TEL (Tetraethyl Lead) isn't being used to boost the octane rating of gasoline anymore, except in airplanes that use piston engines, something had to be used to increase the octane rating without making the fuel super expensive. Add to that the lobby in Congress who wants to give those producers of corn who turn their crop into ethanol for use in extending gasoline a MASSIVE tax break for doing that and you get the result of what we have now.....a motor fuel that gives you less miles per gallon, because it's now made to burn less efficiently and you must buy more of it to get around.
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:24,344
Points:2,427,800
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Jun 15, 2012 7:35:59 AM

thanks for your posts silverstreaker..

Oh i'm not confused. the facts are clear that the blend wall is there, and national fuel czars want people to use more ethanol by blending it in e15...
Profile Pic
SilverStreaker
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:14,131
Points:2,795,350
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Jun 15, 2012 12:45:37 AM

reb4 says "i don't know that there were significant tests" and "the people making quotes indicating that legitimates tests have been performed and using the miles of millions of miles at e15 is ... exagerating"

Obviously still confused.
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:24,344
Points:2,427,800
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Jun 14, 2012 11:33:56 PM

Hanie59, no i don't know that there were significant tests. and the people making quotes indicating that legitimates tests have been performed and using the miles of millions of miles at e15 is ... exagerating...
Profile Pic
Hannie59
All-Star Author Appleton

Posts:964
Points:24,300
Joined:Apr 2010
Message Posted: Jun 14, 2012 9:45:15 AM

reb4,

Test methods should always evolve for the sake of practicality. To say a single method of testing anything is the only way to make proper determinations is..well quite limiting actually.

The tests were done more than thouroughly enough, and conclusive.

You know it and so does everyone else. No legitimate claim has been made that 15% ethanol is harmful in any automobile after model year 2000 model year.

As for small engines, E-15 is not yet been approved for that. So, any arguments about E-15 and small engines are people anticipating what is not even reality at this point.


[Edited by: Hannie59 at 6/14/2012 9:50:53 AM EST]
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:24,344
Points:2,427,800
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Jun 14, 2012 9:04:13 AM

gamechanger2011 you posted the Message : Jun 11, 2012 11:42:46 AM

said....“The Department of Energy conducted 6 million miles of testing on E15 — the equivalent of 12 round trips to the moon — and found no issues,” Hartwig said.DEO (she meant doe... I think) conducted 6,000,000,000 miles of testing on E15

Where is the tests that pertain the miles quoted in this?you also posted the message: Jun 11, 2012 11:51:42 AM

gamechanger2011 posted and article and quoted excerpts from it:
Green Car Congress articleSpecifically...

"In contrast, Davis noted, the DOE’s own study on E15 use found:

An inspection of critical engine components, such as valves, and did not uncover unusual wear that would be expected to impact performance.

Rather than using an aggressive test cycle intended to severely-stress valves, the Energy Department program was run using a cycle more closely resembling normal driving.

The Energy Department testing program was run on standard gasoline, E10, E15, and E20.

The Energy Department test program comprised 86 vehicles operated up to 120,000 miles each using an industry-standard EPA-defined test cycle (called the Standard Road Cycle).

The resulting data showed no statistically significant loss of vehicle performance (emissions, fuel economy, and maintenance issues) attributable to the use of E15 fuel compared to straight gasoline."

Now, where is the detail report where...

"The Energy Department test program comprised 86 vehicles operated up to 120,000 miles each using an industry-standard EPA-defined test cycle (called the Standard Road Cycle)."

i'm not asking you to find the report, because the testing was not done...
no test was done on e15 for this amount of time...

Which is why the crc did the tests...

Profile Pic
gamechanger2011
Champion Author Wichita

Posts:1,894
Points:72,615
Joined:Jun 2011
Message Posted: Jun 12, 2012 10:45:36 AM

Spin all you want. You just keep losing credibility!
Profile Pic
gamechanger2011
Champion Author Wichita

Posts:1,894
Points:72,615
Joined:Jun 2011
Message Posted: Jun 12, 2012 10:38:59 AM

Reb4....why don't you read the study by the DOE, approved by the EPA I think that you don't even know what you are asking for anymore. You are terribly confused!

[Edited by: gamechanger2011 at 6/12/2012 10:39:29 AM EST]
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,749
Points:2,786,215
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Jun 12, 2012 9:45:43 AM

"petroleum wants their stranglehold on you and me protected by the government"

Who's stopping you from selling all the E85 you want (other then the consumer that is)?
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,749
Points:2,786,215
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Jun 12, 2012 9:44:54 AM

"All this even though extensive testing has been done"

What testing? you keep talking about testing, but you don't provide the actual tests...

"Auto industry wants no accountability"

What should they be accountable for? Not making cars more expensive by making them capable of running on a fuel few want to buy?
Profile Pic
Hannie59
All-Star Author Appleton

Posts:964
Points:24,300
Joined:Apr 2010
Message Posted: Jun 12, 2012 8:54:15 AM

Shock, the petroleum and automotive lobby has guaranteed that ethanol be a scapegoat, and facts be ignored. All this even though extensive testing has been done. Auto industry wants no accountability and petroleum wants their stranglehold on you and me protected by the government.



[Edited by: Hannie59 at 6/12/2012 8:59:04 AM EST]
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:24,344
Points:2,427,800
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Jun 12, 2012 8:45:37 AM

gc2011, "
Message Posted: Jun 11, 2012 10:42:46 AM

Ignore gamechanger2011 Report Abuse“The Department of Energy conducted 6 million miles of testing on E15 — the equivalent of 12 round trips to the moon — and found no issues,” Hartwig said."

Really, let's see the tests they did on e15 where they racked up those miles, got any links to back up the claim?

Look at the last link you provided.. the tests documented might get once around the moons surfice...

And nice reposting of the link I've been posting all along. I guess it's "different" since it came from "growth energy link".

Do a search and see who aided in the test... "CRC" ...

Odd huh!

and oh yea... ""The E15 testing done by the DOE is the most extensive fuel testing done to date on ethanol blends. It consisted of 86 vehicles driven more than six million miles total. Torn down and inspected, they showed no discernible difference in engine wear between test fuels according to DOE. Several other tests, not funded by oil companies, have shown similar positive results with respect to drivability, emissions, and engine durability" 86 vehicles tested... where is the details??

Go search the ethanol links for that...


[Edited by: reb4 at 6/12/2012 8:51:08 AM EST]
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,749
Points:2,786,215
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Jun 12, 2012 8:24:53 AM

"Oh, and Hanie59, is someone going to guarantee it ?"

Of course not! In fact the ethanol and corn lobby have guaranteed that the people who sell this crap can not be sued for damaging your vehicle...
Profile Pic
gamechanger2011
Champion Author Wichita

Posts:1,894
Points:72,615
Joined:Jun 2011
Message Posted: Jun 12, 2012 1:52:04 AM


"In view of the ongoing DOE Catalyst Study, the Agency delayed
making a decision on the waiver request for MY2001-2006 light-duty
motor vehicles until the test program was completed and the results
made available to the public. DOE testing was largely completed in
November, and retesting of several models that experienced mechanical
problems unrelated to fuel use was completed in December. The test
results were made available to the public on a rolling basis, with EPA
submitting data to the docket as soon as the data were received and
checked for accuracy and completeness with DOE."Waiver decision for 2001 and newer vehicles
Profile Pic
gamechanger2011
Champion Author Wichita

Posts:1,894
Points:72,615
Joined:Jun 2011
Message Posted: Jun 12, 2012 12:51:14 AM

"again,

Where are the detailed reports similar to this report?"

You do realize that your link is the DOE test and not the CRC?

The test was completed and given to the EPA in 2010. What are you asking for if you already had it?


[Edited by: gamechanger2011 at 6/12/2012 12:53:55 AM EST]
Profile Pic
gamechanger2011
Champion Author Wichita

Posts:1,894
Points:72,615
Joined:Jun 2011
Message Posted: Jun 12, 2012 12:39:49 AM

And just to make sure that you noticed...and don't try to spin things...

"Date Published: February 2009 Prepared by the
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 1617 Cole Boulevard, Golden, Colorado 80401-3393 303-275-3000 • www.nrel.gov
NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC
Contract No. DE-AC36-08-GO28308"

The test was conducted by the DOE and their laboratory!
Profile Pic
gamechanger2011
Champion Author Wichita

Posts:1,894
Points:72,615
Joined:Jun 2011
Message Posted: Jun 12, 2012 12:23:50 AM

Re4...I found it...now what are you going to whine about.
Department of Energy Test on E15
And FYI...it's much more detailed then the test that you posted.

You should have been able to google search and found this yourself!



[Edited by: gamechanger2011 at 6/12/2012 12:28:47 AM EST]
Profile Pic
gamechanger2011
Champion Author Wichita

Posts:1,894
Points:72,615
Joined:Jun 2011
Message Posted: Jun 12, 2012 12:10:16 AM

There are detailed reports obviously...and you know it. The links that I posted have detailed information from the tests. Why don't you look for it. I'm NOT you secretary...comprende?And oh by the way...you said

"Your test is very small, and paid exclusivel by the ethanlol industry... And they were the ones that petitioned for the increase"

Who paid for the test that you posted...Big Oil...duhhhhh


[Edited by: gamechanger2011 at 6/12/2012 12:15:20 AM EST]
Profile Pic
gamechanger2011
Champion Author Wichita

Posts:1,894
Points:72,615
Joined:Jun 2011
Message Posted: Jun 12, 2012 12:05:42 AM

And WHO did the tests on the MPG that you posted? The same government agency...the DOE!

Thanks for the chuckle! Another example of YOUR hypocrisy!

[Edited by: gamechanger2011 at 6/12/2012 12:07:29 AM EST]
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:24,344
Points:2,427,800
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Jun 11, 2012 11:39:44 PM

again,

Where are the detailed reports similar to this report?

One must presume there have been none which raises the question of why the inflated numbers have been published....

Gamechanger2011, at least the crc is Petroleum and auto industry...
Your test is very small, and paid exclusivel by the ethanlol industry... And they were the ones that petitioned for the increase..

thanks for the chuckle...

Oh, and Hanie59, is someone going to guarantee it ?



[Edited by: reb4 at 6/11/2012 11:41:08 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Hannie59
All-Star Author Appleton

Posts:964
Points:24,300
Joined:Apr 2010
Message Posted: Jun 11, 2012 2:53:57 PM

reb4 will try anything to hide the truth that higher percentages of ethanol are IN NO WAY HARMFUL TO VEHICLES.
Profile Pic
gamechanger2011
Champion Author Wichita

Posts:1,894
Points:72,615
Joined:Jun 2011
Message Posted: Jun 11, 2012 2:51:35 PM

The Department of Energy and the EPA would have copies of the study. From January 5, 2011
"The U.S. DOE has delivered the final results of its tests using E15 in vehicle models 2001-2006 to the U.S. EPA, but interested parties will have to wait a bit longer before they can access the data. According to the U.S. EPA, the agency received the DOE’s final test results in the final hours of 2010. The EPA said it expects to release the additional data “within the next couple of days” but declined to comment further on the test results, adding that it remains on track to issue a decision on expanding the use of E15 soon."

DOE delivers final E15 test results to EPA

[Edited by: gamechanger2011 at 6/11/2012 2:52:07 PM EST]
Profile Pic
gamechanger2011
Champion Author Wichita

Posts:1,894
Points:72,615
Joined:Jun 2011
Message Posted: Jun 11, 2012 2:34:52 PM

Effects of E15 Ethanol Blends on HC, CO, and NOx Regulated Emissions from On-Road 2001 and Later Model Year Motor Vehicles
This is from the RFA. So the study has been released because these links have information from the DOE study.

[Edited by: gamechanger2011 at 6/11/2012 2:35:24 PM EST]
Profile Pic
gamechanger2011
Champion Author Wichita

Posts:1,894
Points:72,615
Joined:Jun 2011
Message Posted: Jun 11, 2012 2:14:32 PM

EPA's response to the waiver
Profile Pic
gamechanger2011
Champion Author Wichita

Posts:1,894
Points:72,615
Joined:Jun 2011
Message Posted: Jun 11, 2012 2:07:03 PM

E15 waiverSeems as though test results are in this document. Why do you act like it's our job to come up with this? I think that you would be perfectly capable of doing this yourself.

[Edited by: gamechanger2011 at 6/11/2012 2:08:37 PM EST]
Profile Pic
jodybull
All-Star Author El Paso

Posts:767
Points:140,880
Joined:May 2012
Message Posted: Jun 11, 2012 1:51:00 PM

I agree, good riddance! I've never liked ethanol itself nor the various governments forcing us to use it whether we want to or not. Feed the corn to our livestock instead of making ethanol, or sell the corn to other countries instead of giving it away. Stop making us pay for "welfare grains" given to other countries by charging us so much for meats and veggies at the grocers.
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:24,344
Points:2,427,800
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Jun 11, 2012 1:45:34 PM

"“The Department of Energy conducted 6 million miles of testing on E15 — the equivalent of 12 round trips to the moon — and found no issues,” Hartwig said."

again, gc2011, where is the actual detailed documented paper similar to the crc test which they "bashed" ...

Tests similar to what the CRC provided. I am not disputing the objections raised by DOE of the CRC tests, I am asking for the detailed Something like this report they do know how to create a report see... Give the details... for the additional testing they claimed were being done!

Profile Pic
gamechanger2011
Champion Author Wichita

Posts:1,894
Points:72,615
Joined:Jun 2011
Message Posted: Jun 11, 2012 11:51:42 AM


DOE's response to CRC study...

DOE response. In his response on the DOE website, Davis charged that the choice of test engines, test cycle, limited fuel selection, and failure criteria of the CRC program resulted in unreliable and incomplete data, which severely limits the utility of the study. More specifically:

The CRC failed to establish a proper control group. Only three out of the eight engines were tested with straight gasoline containing no ethanol (E0), and one of those three failed the CRC’s test.

No engines were tested with E10 fuel, the de facto standard gasoline for all grades, which represents more than 90% of gasoline available in the US market. Even though E10 fuel has been in the market for over 30 years and is used in all current conventional gasoline vehicles and small non-road engines, it was not part of the CRC test program.

The CRC employed a test cycle designed specifically to stress the engine valve train. This test cycle was developed specifically for this study and thus there is no experience base for how to interpret results from the testing.

The CRC used the arbitrary criterion of 10 percent engine leakdown (a diagnostic test in which an engine cylinder is pressurized with compressed air, and the rate at which the cylinder loses pressure is measured) to determine if an engine “failed.” This is not a standard previously employed by either industry or federal agencies during testing, nor as a criterion for any warranty claims. DOE testing has shown that it is not reliable indicator of durability issues.

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.

—Pat Davis

In contrast, Davis noted, the DOE’s own study on E15 use found:

An inspection of critical engine components, such as valves, and did not uncover unusual wear that would be expected to impact performance.

Rather than using an aggressive test cycle intended to severely-stress valves, the Energy Department program was run using a cycle more closely resembling normal driving.

The Energy Department testing program was run on standard gasoline, E10, E15, and E20.

The Energy Department test program comprised 86 vehicles operated up to 120,000 miles each using an industry-standard EPA-defined test cycle (called the Standard Road Cycle).

The resulting data showed no statistically significant loss of vehicle performance (emissions, fuel economy, and maintenance issues) attributable to the use of E15 fuel compared to straight gasoline.

The Energy Department test program also showed that 10% engine leakdown is not a reliable indicator of vehicle performance. In the Energy Department program, there were vehicles found to exceed 10% leakdown for all fuels, including vehicles running on E0 and E10. There was no correlation between fuel type and leakdown, and high leakdown measurements did not correlate to degradation in engine or emissions performance."

Green Car Congress article
Profile Pic
gamechanger2011
Champion Author Wichita

Posts:1,894
Points:72,615
Joined:Jun 2011
Message Posted: Jun 11, 2012 11:42:46 AM


“The Department of Energy conducted 6 million miles of testing on E15 — the equivalent of 12 round trips to the moon — and found no issues,” Hartwig said.

DEO conducted 6,000,000,000 miles of testing on E15
Profile Pic
gamechanger2011
Champion Author Wichita

Posts:1,894
Points:72,615
Joined:Jun 2011
Message Posted: Jun 11, 2012 11:39:28 AM

"The E15 testing done by the DOE is the most extensive fuel testing done to date on ethanol blends. It consisted of 86 vehicles driven more than six million miles total. Torn down and inspected, they showed no discernible difference in engine wear between test fuels according to DOE. Several other tests, not funded by oil companies, have shown similar positive results with respect to drivability, emissions, and engine durability."Evidence of E15 safety
Profile Pic
gamechanger2011
Champion Author Wichita

Posts:1,894
Points:72,615
Joined:Jun 2011
Message Posted: Jun 11, 2012 11:33:40 AM

Reb4. You could contact the Dept. of Energy and ask them.
Profile Pic
Gas_Eyes
Champion Author Dallas

Posts:2,857
Points:681,310
Joined:Mar 2011
Message Posted: Jun 11, 2012 9:35:12 AM

Canada only requires 5% ethanol. The US needs to follow Canada on this.
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:24,344
Points:2,427,800
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Jun 11, 2012 9:13:49 AM

krzysiek_ck, my statements are accurate. And I have searched for the information that doe stated. It's odd that the department would make a statement specifically stating x number of cars and x number of miles and not back the claim up.
Profile Pic
jay93LA
Champion Author New Orleans

Posts:5,074
Points:1,197,345
Joined:Aug 2011
Message Posted: Jun 10, 2012 2:44:52 PM

just say no to E15
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,289
Points:1,331,505
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Jun 10, 2012 2:20:30 PM

reb4 wrote: "krzysiek_ck, yea, that's right."

It is nice to see you are admitting to your own spin.

reb4 wrote: "WHERE ARE THE TESTS THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY INDICATED THEY WERE GOING TO DO,

huh ace!"

There is not a need for shouting and name calling. If you are so interested in DoE study then look for it.
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,749
Points:2,786,215
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Jun 10, 2012 11:41:52 AM

"The same parts are in a brazillian Camry and an USA Camry guys"

Of course, you have something from a reliable source (such as Toyota itself) which states this...

Or are you simply assuming this to be true?
Profile Pic
V8GasKing
Rookie Author Alberta

Posts:4
Points:83,555
Joined:Nov 2008
Message Posted: Jun 10, 2012 11:10:41 AM

I just bought a new 2012 KIA Sportage, which has a completely redesigned engine.

"Do not use gasohol containing more than 10% Ethanol, and do not use gasoline or gasohol containing any mEthanol. Either of these fuels may cause driveability problems and damage to the fuel system. Discontinue using gasohol of any kind if drivability problems occur.
Vehicle damage or driveability problems may not be covered by the manufacture's warranty if they result from the use of:
1. Gasohol containing more than 10% Ethanol.
2. Gasoline or gasohol containing mEthanol.
3. Leaded fuel or leaded gasohol.
"E85" fuel is an alternative fuel comprised of 85% Ethanol and 15% gasoline, and is manufactured exclusively for use in Flexible fuel vehicles, "E85" is not compatible with your vehicle. Use of "E85" may result in poor engine performance and damage to your vehicles engine and fuel system. KIA recommends that customers do not use fuel with an Ethanol content exceeding 10%...."

The manual also states not to use gas containing MTBE over 15% and to never use gas which contains methanol. It also recommends to use 'Top tier gasoline' or to add this detergent once every 12,000 kilometres or 12 months.

KIA and Hyundai combined are the 5th largest automobile manufacture in the world. I could care less what some 'Hillbilly American' has to say about fuel, as they are generally wrong on most things regarding a thought process.
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:24,344
Points:2,427,800
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Jun 9, 2012 5:31:51 PM

krzysiek_ck, yea, that's right. But what about the rest of it.

THE ONE complete test that was performed was in conjunction with the crc.
and then no subsequent "published reports".SPIN THE REST OF IT ACE..

WHERE ARE THE TESTS THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY INDICATED THEY WERE GOING TO DO,

huh ace!



[Edited by: reb4 at 6/9/2012 5:38:52 PM EST]
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,289
Points:1,331,505
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Jun 9, 2012 5:14:31 PM

reb4 wrote: "fact sheet of effects on intermediate ethanol blends...

No details in the tests performed... and some troubling statements that increased ethanol RAISED temperature of engine and exhaust...."

reb4's spin vs. actual information from the link:

"Vehicle results include the following when E15 and E20 were compared with traditional gasoline:

Tailpipe emissions were similar;
Under normal operations, catalyst temperatures in the 13 cars were largely unchanged;
When tested under full-throttle conditions, about half of the cars exhibited slightly increased catalyst temperatures with E15 and E20, compared to traditional gasoline; and,
Based on informal observations during testing, drivability was unchanged."

[Edited by: krzysiek_ck at 6/9/2012 5:19:56 PM EST]
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:24,344
Points:2,427,800
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Jun 9, 2012 4:45:46 PM

Search for e15 testing

Hannie59, the above link is a search from the department of energy's site.

fact sheet of effects on intermediate ethanol blends...

No details in the tests performed... and some troubling statements that increased ethanol RAISED temperature of engine and exhaust....

DOE article critizing the report on testing for engine durability

They spent much time bashing the report, and gave sound bite statements about being safe for cars .

In fact, they stated that:

"The Energy Department test program was comprised of 86 vehicles operated up to 120,000 miles each using an industry-standard EPA-defined test cycle (called the Standard Road Cycle)."

WHERE IS THIS REPORT!

Where are the tests?

DOE Announces Additional Steps in Developing Sustainable Biofuels Industry

The purpose:

"Increasing the Use of Biofuels
U.S. consumers already use E10, gasoline blended with 10 percent ethanol, in conventional vehicles and other engines. In order to meet the goals set forth in the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007, however, the U.S. will likely need to use higher blends of ethanol in conventional vehicles. To assess the potential impacts of higher blends of ethanol such as E15 and E20, gasoline blended with 15 and 20 percent ethanol, on conventional vehicles and other gasoline engines, DOE initiated a testing program in August 2007."

Effects on Intermediate Ethanol Blends on Legacy Vehicles.... (february 2009)

This is a report on 16 vehicles (where's the other 70)? .

Also they tested for 100 miles on the e10, e15, and e20 and 200 mile on the e0... And on some cars the tested a total of up to 500 to 1,200 miles.

This test was also done with the CRC...
4.7 indicates additional reports will be conducted... but if they were they are no where to be found...
.Oh, by the way Hanie59, the TRUTH is not to many Camry's or toyotas are sold in Brazil... In fact my source shows less than 90 (if any)...



[Edited by: reb4 at 6/9/2012 4:48:38 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Hannie59
All-Star Author Appleton

Posts:964
Points:24,300
Joined:Apr 2010
Message Posted: Jun 2, 2012 9:54:08 AM

Sensitive because of our current "one fuel reliance system". The EPA caters to the oil lobby, because they know the entire economy is hostage to oil. So they try to strike a balance between what the know, and what they say as to not upset the wrong people.

The truth is far higher concentrations of ethanol than 10% do not present any materials compatibility issues. But, the auto companies don't want any additional liability so they are always looking for scapegoat. The same parts are in a brazillian Camry and an USA Camry guys, only difference is Toyota doesn't have to warranty that USA Camry if they find ethanol. So why would they make it flex fuel when it gives them a scapegoat not to? The fuel industry has no reason to oppose things such as E-15, because E-15 will not be mandated anywhere. So why does the petroleum industry oppose E-15 if it isn't mandated? Because they lose a little more of their stranglehold on you and me reb.


[Edited by: Hannie59 at 6/2/2012 9:59:12 AM EST]
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:24,344
Points:2,427,800
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Jun 1, 2012 11:34:01 PM

obviously you haven't had any difficulties with it in your hyundai's

But still haven't seen the reports. Sensitive in what way...
Profile Pic
Hannie59
All-Star Author Appleton

Posts:964
Points:24,300
Joined:Apr 2010
Message Posted: Jun 1, 2012 10:34:00 PM

Actually, reb4, e-30 has no effect on non flex fuel vehicles. The EPA knew it three years ago. It is true, but as to why they don't say it, well... they have their reasons. It's a sensitive subject...


[Edited by: Hannie59 at 6/1/2012 10:35:55 PM EST]
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:24,344
Points:2,427,800
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Jun 1, 2012 8:13:47 PM

still waiting for the governement to release their detailed report. They actually released statements prior to the report coming out from CRC... WOW...
Profile Pic
antiguzzle
Sophomore Author Wichita

Posts:237
Points:20,545
Joined:Mar 2012
Message Posted: Jun 1, 2012 4:59:16 PM

Why are manufacturers making Flex Fuel vehicles because ethanol is perfectly safe in all cars.

*crickets chirping*
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,289
Points:1,331,505
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: May 31, 2012 9:30:08 AM

This study, sponsored by petroleum and automotive industries, has an interesting challenge. How do you provide evidence against Ethanol while ensuring the automotive manufacturers are not blamed for producing junk?

CRC's approch is this statement

"The detailed results are masked in order to ensure OEM confidentiality, including their technical data. The provided vehicle list is not in order within the table below to maintain this confidentiality."

Out of 8 tested vehicles 3 failed the test, one unrelated to fuel used. Personally, I would like to know what specific vehicles failed as it should help me with a better purchasing decision.
Profile Pic
Hannie59
All-Star Author Appleton

Posts:964
Points:24,300
Joined:Apr 2010
Message Posted: May 31, 2012 8:34:50 AM

You are still referring to that petroleum funded thing? Good Golly Wolly! I am surprised they aren't sued. The fact is that they can say anything regardless of truth. Truth doesn't matter unless they are slandering a PERSON. if it is a thing anyone can say whatever they want.And they spend alot of dollars in the media so of course they are gonna publish this "study". That test had been discredited long before they ever ran it!

And to be fair, the study that claimed ethanol saves $1 a gallon funded by the corn group was equally crap. Also the study funded by Kimberly Clark (Kleenex) that claimed zillions of germs were everywhere and could be eliminated by kleenex brand antiseptic wipes and you'd never get sick again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Let's not ever quote a "study" funded by a company to promote or discredit a THING as anything close to reality. Stick to facts.

[Edited by: Hannie59 at 5/31/2012 8:37:44 AM EST]
Topic is locked Back to Topics