Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    7:26 AM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: All Things Ethanol > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: Ethanol Horror Stories anyone? Back to Topics
smelser1123

Champion Author
Nevada

Posts:3,696
Points:852,175
Joined:Jun 2012
Message Posted: Jul 27, 2012 1:25:40 PM

Has anyone had a bad experience converting over to the ethanol way of life? Is it worth it (besides the huge yes in regards to environmental issues)?
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
WE0H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:1,662
Points:566,450
Joined:Feb 2011
Message Posted: Sep 27, 2012 2:33:14 AM

I see the Ethanol Haters are still on this blog :) I will continue to run E85 no matter what some idiot says :)
Profile Pic
Daurel
Veteran Author Indiana

Posts:341
Points:37,310
Joined:Jul 2011
Message Posted: Sep 26, 2012 9:28:37 AM

First I do not put my bike in the "shed" with any kind of fuel in it ever hear of condensation?!?!
This was eating the bottom out of many of tanks when Ethanol was just a dream for fuel.

Some of you ought to get some more "Facts" that are a little more in line with the real world.
also I have 5 gallon of gas that has ethanol that set in a tank for a year it does not look bad but would not burn on a bet, tank looks fine the gas looks fine just will not burn.
Profile Pic
SilverStreaker
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:14,109
Points:2,789,285
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Sep 25, 2012 11:06:25 AM

DucatiRider asks "What about all the energy and fertilizer that goes into making ethanol?"

Not much fertilizer and according to the US Dept of Energy's Ethanol Myths and Facts, it takes 0.74 BTU of fossil energy to create 1 BTU of ethanol. Gasoline, on the other hand, has a negative energy balance, taking 1.23 BTU of fossil energy to create 1 BTU of gasoline.
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,258
Points:1,325,155
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Sep 25, 2012 11:01:59 AM

dshipp28760 wrote: "Your tax dollars are subsidizing the production of YOU food into fuel."

What federal subsidies are you talking about? Can you list them?

dshipp28760 wrote: "If it was not subsidized it would not be cheaper. I try to buy only Gasoline! NOT ethanol."

Gasoline is also subsidized. Does this mean you not going to use gasoline from now on?

dshipp28760 wrote: "My 1989 motorcycle (and I have spoken to others) had the liner eaten out and dissolved by the Alcohol in Ethanol. Then when the bike sat, the alcohol evaporated and left the tank liner in the bowl."

Nice conspiracy theory. By the way, Ethanol is Alcohol.

dshipp28760 wrote: "You will get any where from 10 to twenty percent higher gas mileage if you use Gasoline in stead of Ethanol."

Strangely enough I don't. So much for your promise.
Profile Pic
DucatiRider
Rookie Author Maryland

Posts:70
Points:1,200
Joined:Sep 2012
Message Posted: Sep 25, 2012 10:48:06 AM

Why do you say a huge yes for environmental reasons? What about all the energy and fertilizer that goes into making ethanol?

As for horror stories, the worst ones I have are about people who put their bikes in a shed for the winter and came out with a tank full of gasohol that had soaked up a bunch of water. The bottom of the tank looked like it was filled with clearish milk.
Profile Pic
dshipp28760
Rookie Author Asheville

Posts:1
Points:1,320
Joined:Sep 2012
Message Posted: Sep 25, 2012 10:35:32 AM

Ethanol is being forced on Us by our government. You pay for it twice. Your tax dollars are subsidizing the production of YOU food into fuel. If it was not subsidized it would not be cheaper. I try to buy only Gasoline! NOT ethanol. My 1989 motorcycle (and I have spoken to others) had the liner eaten out and dissolved by the Alcohol in Ethanol. Then when the bike sat, the alcohol evaporated and left the tank liner in the bowl. Also all the gasket material and acceleration pump were compromised. What a mess. You will get any where from 10 to twenty percent higher gas mileage if you use Gasoline in stead of Ethanol. I have been told that higher compression engines run better on (the same octane) Gasoline then Ethanol.
Profile Pic
Daurel
Veteran Author Indiana

Posts:341
Points:37,310
Joined:Jul 2011
Message Posted: Sep 25, 2012 10:18:42 AM

Interesting as my experience most do until the Acetone starts swelling the Made in China plastic jets.
Profile Pic
Sneakers55
Champion Author Houston

Posts:61,873
Points:2,659,170
Joined:Nov 2005
Message Posted: Sep 23, 2012 7:24:26 PM

On Sep 19, 2012 8:52:43 AM, MertieMan wrote:

>Ethanol definitely takes a toll on smaller engines, i.e. lawnmowers,
>weedeaters, blowers, edgers.

It is interesting that the small-engine manufacturers make a product that won't run well on the predominant fuel sold in the USA.
Profile Pic
rumbleseat
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:25,279
Points:3,829,920
Joined:Oct 2002
Message Posted: Sep 22, 2012 5:30:53 PM

"He says that ethanol does not burn properly in it. The car sputters and jerks."
Any bets he put E-85 in it? There is no way E10 would cause the car to run that badly.
Profile Pic
jakerson
All-Star Author Fresno

Posts:556
Points:127,225
Joined:Jun 2009
Message Posted: Sep 22, 2012 9:23:51 AM

no problems
Profile Pic
barber7796
Veteran Author Oklahoma

Posts:426
Points:432,610
Joined:May 2012
Message Posted: Sep 22, 2012 2:20:13 AM

I have a mercury sable.wagon with 297,000+ miles and I fill up with whatever is priced lowest (except E15).

Runs fine. I think oil change 3000 miles makes it run smooth and lasts longer.
Profile Pic
belovedsparrow
Rookie Author North Carolina

Posts:1
Points:300
Joined:Sep 2012
Message Posted: Sep 21, 2012 10:34:01 AM

My husband has a classic mustang. He says that ethanol does not burn properly in it. The car sputters and jerks. He tried it once to see how it would do and had to put in "seafoam" (engine stabilizer I think) to clear it out. Then it calmed down. It's cheaper for him to go to one of the nearby gas stations that provide non-ethanol gas for the boats (we live around the lake). If he had to buy "seafoam" everytime he filled up then it would cost an arm and a leg.
He refuses to put ethanol into any of our lawn mowers or weed eaters.
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:24,255
Points:2,421,575
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Sep 19, 2012 2:15:04 PM

goldseeker, no, i think the sad testament to that video is the misconception that burning ethanol would negate the poor vehicle choice made by many of them that purchasing a flex fuel vehicle and then not using flex fuel...

Profile Pic
jacksfan
Champion Author Lincoln

Posts:2,572
Points:1,272,615
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Sep 19, 2012 10:36:22 AM

"Ethanol definitely takes a toll on smaller engines,"

When exactly should I expect this to be happening, MertieMan? I've been running ethanol in all of my small engines for years -- 10+ years in my Lawnboy -- without issue. How will I know it's ethanol that's the problem and not general wear and tear or just flat out old age?

Definitely is an awfully strong term, MertieMan.
Profile Pic
MertieMan
Champion Author Lexington

Posts:17,374
Points:3,495,335
Joined:May 2005
Message Posted: Sep 19, 2012 9:52:43 AM

Ethanol definitely takes a toll on smaller engines, i.e. lawnmowers, weedeaters, blowers, edgers. Most new push mowers say not to burn gas with over 10 percent ethanol in it.
Profile Pic
goldseeker
Champion Author West Virginia

Posts:22,976
Points:3,317,110
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Sep 19, 2012 2:58:44 AM

No ethanol problems, but the real horror story is..............................
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,258
Points:1,325,155
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Sep 18, 2012 5:08:18 PM

GrumpyCat wrote: "Tolerance for benzene is no indicator of tolerance for ethanol."

It is the indicator of tolerance to gasoline, which is my point. Plastics have better, much better, tolerance to ethanol than gasoline. What is your point?
Profile Pic
GrumpyCat
Champion Author Alabama

Posts:5,363
Points:1,263,800
Joined:Jun 2009
Message Posted: Sep 18, 2012 4:37:45 PM

"Alcohols fear much, much better than benzene, toluene, and xylene; all used as common chemicals in gasoline. It is plain scary what gasoline can do to the common plastics."

Tolerance for benzene is no indicator of tolerance for ethanol.
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,258
Points:1,325,155
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Sep 18, 2012 12:41:17 PM

The Chemical Resistance Chart for plastics

Alcohols fear much, much better than benzene, toluene, and xylene; all used as common chemicals in gasoline. It is plain scary what gasoline can do to the common plastics.

[Edited by: krzysiek_ck at 9/18/2012 12:41:47 PM EST]
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,258
Points:1,325,155
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Sep 18, 2012 12:28:57 PM

tdioiler wrote: "If your car is not equiped for it, don't use it. In higher concentrations it will destroy your engine components that cannot handle it. It is more caustic to parts (mainly plastic and coatings) that gasoline."

I have zero problems running mixtures higher than E10. What is your personal experience with Ethanol mixtures higher than E10? What problems have you encounter?

Also, here is the Chemical Resistance Chart for rubber. Sample here only lists few common chemicals found in gasoline.

Chemical - EPDM, NATURAL, NEOPRENE, NITRILE, SBR, UHMW, XPLE
ETHANOL - A, A, A, C, A, A, A
BENZENE - X, X, X, X, X, A, A
TOLUENE - X, X, X, I, X, A, A
XYLENE - X, X, X, X, X, A, A

A - Acceptable Performance
C - Conditional Performance
F - Fair Performance
X - Not Recommended
I - Insufficient Data

The Chemical Resistance Chart



[Edited by: krzysiek_ck at 9/18/2012 12:29:58 PM EST]
Profile Pic
tdioiler
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:1,009
Points:720,175
Joined:Jul 2011
Message Posted: Sep 18, 2012 11:47:03 AM

If your car is not equiped for it, don't use it. In higher concentrations it will destroy your engine components that cannot handle it. It is more caustic to parts (mainly plastic and coatings) that gasoline.

Only if your car is spec'd, and you match that spec with the right fuel mixture will be you safe to use it.

Then there is the cost... you need to decide based on your local conditions.
Profile Pic
Coya843
Rookie Author South Carolina

Posts:5
Points:200
Joined:Aug 2011
Message Posted: Sep 18, 2012 11:36:52 AM

I haven't experience using Ethanol, but i just might try it.
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:24,255
Points:2,421,575
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Sep 18, 2012 10:05:53 AM

Ethanol tankers have dangerous flaw

"The flaws were noted as far back as a 1991 safety study."

Hopefully these issues can be resolved and made safer for the communities where ethanol is shipped through...
Profile Pic
ProfDude
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:4,766
Points:1,045,490
Joined:Jan 2012
Message Posted: Aug 16, 2012 5:57:53 AM

In the late 1970s when ethanol was first added to gasoline to help replace the lead that was no longer permitted to be used, ethanol's inclusion in the fuel brought water up from the bottom of some of the underground tanks and into the vehicles being refueled. Alcohol has that kind of effect and those tanks with water on the bottom were susceptible. At least this is how I recall having experienced it.

There were numerous "bad gas" claims made by drivers against what had previously been their favorite gas stations.

That only happened in places where ethanol was the selected replacement, not where MTBE or other possible carcinogens were used instead.

Thankfully, that was a brief blip on the radar screen as there are often challenges to adopting new technologies.

Other than that, no ethanol horror stories after millions of miles and dozens of vehicles, including several hundred thousand miles in FFVs running any combination of ethanol-gasoline fuel mixes.

Oh, I did learn that Ford sold me a poorly engineered 2003 FFV in terms of fuel efficiency, but I also know first hand that my 2002 GM FFV was more efficient by far on E85 than either the Mercury I owned or the EPA's untested mileage estimates.

[Edited by: ProfDude at 8/16/2012 6:01:58 AM EST]
Profile Pic
tattoo666TX
Champion Author Texas

Posts:2,567
Points:344,480
Joined:May 2011
Message Posted: Aug 14, 2012 12:00:39 PM

My truck has a 32 gallon tank. I know when I say this people always try to point out what size tanks everyone has, that they may be bigger or smaller. So we are starting out with a 32 gallon tank.
If I want to drive way out of my way to get E-85 I can. And yes, it may cost me a few dollars less to fill up. But when I say the fuel mileage with it sucks, I mean it really sucks!
Cost per mile (figured over a minimum of 5 tanks of each gas)
E-85 cost per mile 21 cent.
E-10 (mid-grade, it gets the best mileage of the 3 choices)cost per mile 16 cent.
93 octane non-ethanol cost per mile 15 cent.
So now the cost per mile varies no more the 6 cent per mile.
But on a 32 gallon tank, that is a difference of 150-200 miles per tank, minimum.
On a full tank (32 gallons) of E-85 I can go 300-350 miles.
On a full tank of the E-10 it gets closer to 450-500 miles.
On the non-ethanol I get between 580-630 miles.
yes, there is some variation, but think about weather, traffic and anything else that can cause a change in your driving habits and mileage.
Not really a horror story, unless you take a close look at what it would have cost me to drive 30,000 miles using the E-85.
Profile Pic
tropicalmn
Veteran Author Minnesota

Posts:276
Points:254,120
Joined:Mar 2011
Message Posted: Aug 11, 2012 11:42:24 PM

"A 2011 study commissioned by the state Department of Environmental Protection found ethanol is now the most hazardous substance being transported by rail in the United States."
Not surprising a newspaper hack didn’t understand and correctly quote what was actual written.

The statement the BOSTON HERALD butchered was in reference to a
quote originally made by Erich Rudolph, DOT Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Railroad Safety Specialist who actual said the following-

"Ethanol is the #1 transported haz mat by rail (overtook propane)"

I'm not sure what the MOST hazardous product rail transported but i think most would agree Ammonia & Chlorine rank high on the list.

[Edited by: tropicalmn at 8/11/2012 11:48:55 PM EST]
Profile Pic
SilverStreaker
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:14,109
Points:2,789,285
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Aug 11, 2012 11:03:42 PM

reb4, again with the reading comprehension? Let's see if you can produce this "study" that you consider "fact".
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:24,255
Points:2,421,575
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Aug 11, 2012 9:34:24 PM

silverstreaker, that is a ethanol horror story in what way???

you are the confused one.

I found it odd that ethanol was determined to be so hazardous, in fact:
"A 2011 study commissioned by the state Department of Environmental Protection found ethanol is now the most hazardous substance being transported by rail in the United States."
Profile Pic
SilverStreaker
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:14,109
Points:2,789,285
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Aug 11, 2012 6:42:48 PM

reb4, which state, the state of confusion? Let's see if you can produce this "study". It's certainly not toxic, like the recent event when

Residents flood San Francisco Bay area hospitals after refinery fire spews thick black smoke

[Edited by: SilverStreaker at 8/11/2012 6:45:21 PM EST]
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:24,255
Points:2,421,575
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Aug 11, 2012 9:55:38 AM

Guess transportation through train communites have felt the heat...

Etanol explosion from Ohio last month...

Photos of the fire ( i like the credits of the photographers)

Inferon fears - governor puts temporary halt on ethanol transportation through populated neighborhoods

concerns are valid...

"Ethanol trains have been classified by the Department of Homeland Security as a potential terrorist target, especially at train intersections and during unloading."

"A 2011 study commissioned by the state Department of Environmental Protection found ethanol is now the most hazardous substance being transported by rail in the United States."

[Edited by: reb4 at 8/11/2012 9:56:43 AM EST]
Profile Pic
sluggopyle
Champion Author North Carolina

Posts:23,609
Points:1,076,110
Joined:Dec 2005
Message Posted: Jul 30, 2012 7:16:30 PM


Sure have. They call it the optic nerve. Amazing stuff.

But "precision" is exactly what wasn't needed; that was the whole point.
Profile Pic
SilverStreaker
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:14,109
Points:2,789,285
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Jul 30, 2012 6:39:59 PM

sluggopyle, thanks for the reply. Have you received special training to allow you to drive and at the same time be able to quantify the gas gauge with such high precision?
Profile Pic
sluggopyle
Champion Author North Carolina

Posts:23,609
Points:1,076,110
Joined:Dec 2005
Message Posted: Jul 30, 2012 5:42:46 PM


Well, you did say "please" so I guess I have to...

I was the driver (I'm ALWAYS the driver) in a car I know intimately on a route I know intimately, watching a fuel gauge I also know, all together now, intimately. It isn't the final measure of mileage, that time or any other; it's an anecdotal illustration, which the actual reading later on confirmed. For the slow reader, the illustration simply means, "that's how dramatic it was".

Oh before I forget -- you're welcome. Let me know if you need any other posts explained. I get paid by the word.
Profile Pic
SilverStreaker
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:14,109
Points:2,789,285
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Jul 30, 2012 5:29:46 PM

sluggopyle, please tell us how and where your eyeball has been calibrated to the level of precision you claim. Also, were you driving at the time or were you a passenger? What kind of test track were you on?
Profile Pic
sluggopyle
Champion Author North Carolina

Posts:23,609
Points:1,076,110
Joined:Dec 2005
Message Posted: Jul 30, 2012 5:17:45 PM


SilverStreaker- do you really expect gainsaying to be taken seriously?

The topic asked for stories, and I gave one. Actually two. Like it or lump it.
Profile Pic
jacksfan
Champion Author Lincoln

Posts:2,572
Points:1,272,615
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Jul 30, 2012 2:49:50 PM

"(besides the huge yes in regards to environmental issues)"

Please, do tell!
Profile Pic
goldseeker
Champion Author West Virginia

Posts:22,976
Points:3,317,110
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jul 30, 2012 7:52:55 AM

SilverStreaker. You certainly hit the nail on the head.
Profile Pic
WE0H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:1,662
Points:566,450
Joined:Feb 2011
Message Posted: Jul 30, 2012 4:39:36 AM

No problems with my SUV running blends and straight E85. I also use one of those Change2E85 converters on another vehicle and it runs flawless on straight E85. It costs less and gives from better than regular gas mpg to down a couple mpg's from regular gas. It all depends on the vehicle and the compression ratio of the motor. Higher compression motors love E85 and low compression motors loose mpg's on E85 or blends. Overall it saves me money at every fill up in my vehicles.
Profile Pic
WEPSMAN
Champion Author South Dakota

Posts:11,306
Points:2,550,400
Joined:Mar 2005
Message Posted: Jul 29, 2012 8:38:36 AM

None here
Profile Pic
SilverStreaker
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:14,109
Points:2,789,285
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Jul 29, 2012 2:04:11 AM

sluggopyle claims "It burned so fast I could watch the difference on the gas gauge."

Do you really expect to be taken seriously?
Profile Pic
sluggopyle
Champion Author North Carolina

Posts:23,609
Points:1,076,110
Joined:Dec 2005
Message Posted: Jul 29, 2012 1:19:37 AM


I filled up at a station in Mississippi a few years back that had no ethanol label but was really E10. It burned so fast I could watch the difference on the gas gauge. Ironically it was a "Pure" brand station. Seriously.

Another favorite E-free station converted quietly to E10 ... so quietly that I only noticed the label after the tank was full; it was down about four inches off the ground where nobody would see it. I went in to complain, and they had a stack of forms already from other customers.
Profile Pic
willp09
Champion Author Houston

Posts:3,874
Points:751,855
Joined:Jul 2009
Message Posted: Jul 28, 2012 11:49:39 AM

Actually, ethanol doesn't taste bad at all! :)
Profile Pic
SilverStreaker
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:14,109
Points:2,789,285
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Jul 27, 2012 1:43:22 PM

I haven't had any bad experiences using ethanol blends in my non-FFVs. I've used over 70% ethanol in a 2000 Ford Windstar and over 40% ethanol in a 2003 Honda CRV. Ethanol has been saving me money, as I haven't seen any significant change in mileage at any blend.

I also used E10 in a 40 year old lawnmower for over 10 years. No ethanol related problems there either.
Post a reply Back to Topics