NotAPreppie

I don't think it is in most areas of the US. It's been banned in 25 states since 2005 (probably more by now).

There was a 2005 act that was supposed to give the petrochemical industry $2b to transition from MTBE to EtOH over the following 9 years.

alnielsen

iTrader: (4)

The local refinery that I work at, the rail cars come directly to the facility and a short pipeline delivers the alcohol to the blending area. The reason it comes on in tank cars is ethanol is corrosive and it would damage the pipeline with continued use.
Diesel doesn't pollute as much as gasoline and cause ozone. It does, however, put soot into the air.

BigCajun

iTrader: (1)

Never let facts sway opinion.

Like in "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance",
"When the Legend becomes fact, print the Legend"

bse50

One of the byproducts of ethanol combustion with gasoline is formaldehyde.

FazdaRX_8

iTrader: (1)

get a market boycott?

NotAPreppie

Yeah, I'm not yet convinced that the quantity and health risks of H2C=O are as great as some reports would have you believe. Most health data on formaldehyde comes from animal studies and have 3-4 orders of magnitude of extrapolation involved. Despite that, formaldehyde is shown to be almost 10 times less toxic that MTBE.

So, still happy to burn EtOH over MTBE any day of the week.

The body produces formaldehyde during various metabolic processes so it's not THAT toxic. Granted, you still don't want to hang around the stuff but it's better than MTBE (and benzene, butadiene, etc) which is completely foreign to the body.

Allch Chcar

They are not requiring E15 or going to eliminate E10. The only thing that changed is now it is legal to pump E15 into non-flexfuel cars MY2001+. Stations can now setup certain pumps for E15 to sell to non-ffv customers. The pumps must be clearly marked and they must continue to offer something with less than 10% Ethanol. It'll be like E85 where everything has a warning on it and pumps will be rare but they still sell Regular Gasoline. They are legally required to have pumps dispensing Gasoline with less than 10% Ethanol if they sell E15.

Ethanol is scientifically prove to be cleaner, cheaper, and more efficient than Gasoline. It does not take away from our food supply. In fact, high corn prices have actually led to more corn being grown. The law of Supply is that producers will sell more when prices are higher. Studies have shown that raw corn prices have had a negligible effects on our food(including meat) prices. Meanwhile, studies have also shown that competition from Ethanol has reduced Gasoline prices by 20-30 cents per gallon.

TANKERG

I guess the question will be, how many stations will be able to afford to put one more tank in the ground. This is getting crazy.

Allch Chcar

There are programs through Federal, State, and private organizations for funds to help pay for extra costs to install E85 pumps. I expect ones will be made available for E15 too. I have heard of stations changing over existing tanks and pumps but it's becoming another heavily regulated ordeal.

J8S2

Finding stations that don't have any ethanol content is getting hard these days. Also, it isn't a natural demand and supply curve since the government heavily subsidizes corn farmers. It's gotten to a point where they've lobbied so much that corn is in everything! High fructose corn syrup is the main sweetener in lots of foods these days and is one of the main contributor's to the country's high obesity rates. Corn is fed to cows and chickens (not their natural diet at all), injected with hormones, then slaughtered for the masses to eat. When was the last time you actually bought fresh duck, lamb, etc. from your local supermarket?

Subsidies need to end and let market forces determine prices. By subsidizing one area you increase costs and reduce efficiency of many others, ultimately falling on the consumer. Why they feel the need to prop up one aspect of the economy at the expense of everyone else is beyond me... I'd rather keep my non-ethanol gas and get better fuel economy and not have to worry about water contamination in my fuel.

bse50

1) Completely false. Ethanol pollutes just as much as gasoline and also produces formaldehyde... something you have to handle with a hazmat vest when doing experiments. Ethanol is also less efficient, so you actually use more fuel.. polluting more. It's cheaper... not really. You still use more gallons per mile of it and it damages engine and fuel system components that have a price.

2) Fuel-grade corn doesn't take away from food supplies but the high subsidizing makes producers increase their low-level\non edible corn output while reducing food quality corn.
You have only got half of what the law of supply really states. Add demand to the equation and see what happens when food quality corn gets scarce. Prices increase.

3)Corn prices had tangible effects on both food and fuel prices in the U.S.

You're right. Food wise i'm glad I don't live in the Abominable States of 'Murica. We have around 300 times more rules and quality controls on foods. Hormones are banned everywhere. The police also inspects random packages to check for frauds.
Subsidies suck but you can't do much to abolish them when your presidential system is so far away from a true democratic system. The US is closer to corporatism than it is to a democracy, especially legislation wise.

nycgps

iTrader: (1)

They dont force e15 bullshit down everyone in the us YET , because corn lobbyist needs time to brainwash the public and make them think that, ethanol is cleaner, better, and cheaper! ROFL

Just the way they did years ago about how wonderful corn ethanol is and we dont need no stinky fossil bs in 10 yrs! Horrraaay!

bse50

They're doing a pretty good job given some of the previous replies!

Allch Chcar

Gasoline w/o Ethanol is a niche fuel these days. Stations offer it at a premium. I watch and see if it is ever becomes economical compared to Gasohol.

So long as somebody doesn't claim 10% better MPG with Gasoline, I'm fine. I talked to a guy last week that made that claim. I was trying to avoid discussing chem trails at a birthday party and he dropped that gem.

HFCS is just as bad for you as any other processed sweetener. Natural sweeteners are better, obviously, but unregulated over-consumption is still bad. I admit that I've been spoiled by farm fresh meat and vegetables more than a few times. Supermarkets charge premiums for those kinds of luxuries. Living in an apartment hasn't been the best. But I'm just thankful that I can still catch, CLEAN, fresh fish cheaper than I can buy imported fish. A lot of fish here have high mercury levels. As much as I love China, fresh fish is best fish. Farm fresh eggs was probably the worst because of how much it spoiled me. I can't eat the $1 a dozen white eggs anymore.

Natural demand and supply curve. That's an ironic term if I ever heard one. Where did you get that? I would gladly take the regulated market over unregulated. More individuals over a few key decision makers. It's better in the end.

Why are you worried about water contamination? Ethanol is transported by truck to avoid this. You're more likely to have water contamination in your Gasoline. Which worse case will bond with Ethanol. Too much can cause phase separation but new fuel systems are sealed so that's largely a non-issue.

As for paying more for Gasoline, I can understand that. I pay a little bit extra for E85 instead of running Gasohol like everyone else. Sure I get about the same MPG on E10-E30. But I paid $2.99 or the GGE of $3.98 today. So I completely understand why someone would place a premium on what they want versus what would be more convenient.

Nonsense, it's still an accepted fact accepted by the majority of scientific bodies and well respected researchers in that particular field. It'll take more than a few radical studies to change my mind. I didn't ignore the controversial studies like the CRC one on E85 use in Los Angelos, the CARB funded one on carbon release from deforestation, or Pimental's work on Ethanol energy balance. I still read them. In fact I found them more interesting than reading the 3-4 other studies that came up with similar results. I'm always looking for that difference in opinion, but the facts haven't changed, much.

The damage from Ethanol thing is really getting old. I really wish people would stop saying that. Here, see one of my favorite links. DuPont Chemical Resistance Guide
Look at Ethyl Alcohol and Gasoline.

[fake accent]Ack, he knows. Quick, marginalize his opinion before it spreads![/fake accent]

Hey I can play a villain if need be. So long as I get to be the magnificent bastard.

But yes they would like to increase the base Ethanol percentage, similar to Brazil. Minnesota has already done some durability testing on E20 in non-FFVs years ago. The EPA wants to start testing new cars with E15, you know because that's the new E10. The Tier 3 emissions proposal outlining a way to encourage more engines be built for premium fuels with a new certification for a premium blend of E30. That was the most interesting. That was the one where they wanted to decrease sulfur content in Gasoline. I think it got buried under something more important but I forget what it was.

BigCajun

iTrader: (1)

Interesting. You know a lot about the issue, I have a question.
I believe Brazil's system is based on sugar cane. Do you know of that is because it's better than corn (yield per acre maybe?) as a bio-fuel, or is it because it's possibly easier to grow there than corn?
Thanks.

Bladecutter

Hey Corn Lobby schill, here's one of my favorite links about the "damage from ethanol":

http://www.ducatimonsterforum.org/in...?topic=25074.0

You're right that the damage caused by ethanol laced fuel has gotten old.
It sucks having to replace a several thousand dollar motorcycle tank because it expands from ethanol reacting and being absorbed by the material the tank is made of.

Automotive fuel tanks have been made of similar materials as the motorcycle gas tanks, but since no one can see the tanks, they don't know if they are expanding or not, just as long as they hold fuel.

I would much rather go back to not having oxygenated fuels, as the reasons why fuels were originally oxygenated have changed. All new cars sold today are fuel injected, and reduce pollution into the air, unlike back when the ethanol was originally added to fuel in the major metropolitan cities to reduce smog and pollution during winter weather.

BC.

Allch Chcar

They use it because they already grew a lot of it when they were looking into alternatives. Sugar cane has been a profitable cash crop there for years. Their Ethanol supply also competes between international Sugar prices and Gasoline prices. So they reduce the base % in Gasoline from time to time.

It is different how they harvest it by hand and use the stalks as fuel in distilling it. They also don't distill all the water out of it. Which saves a lot of energy. Ethanol in the US must be "dry" which is over 99% Ethanol. Brazil sells 95% "wet" Alcohol. That might seem crazy but Ethanol will still bond with Gasoline if it has little water in it. But it takes more than 30% of the Ethanol content to be water to cause phase separation. Anything over 70% Ethanol can be any combination of water or Gasoline and it will still bond.

It clearly says in the link the issue is with uncoated Nylon absorbing water. Nylon is fine with Ethanol and Gasoline. For phase separation to occur there would have to be significant water contamination which would impact the bike's operation. And would also be an issue in itself. The tanks were sealed with a vent and were damaged by repeated expanding and contracting. The manufacturer mucked up and didn't coat both sides of the fuel tank.

You can tell if there is pressure buildup in a car's fuel tank from change in volume when you loosen the gas cap. A little bit is normal as fuel vapors change with ambient temperature. As do various materials but it's included in design specifications. New cars use sealed fuel systems that can detect a leak. Even car manufacturers have been known to recall a faulty fuel tank for being out of spec.

It was a bigger issue 30 years ago for cars and then 10 years ago with small engines. Some of the older small engines weren't designed before Gasohol and it wasn't really a big issue until Gasohol became more common. It was legally required for cars in the 80's! Check some owner manuals from cars from that era. The issue isn't with Ethanol in the fuel, it's a case of non-compatible fuel used in the wrong engines. The new stuff is usually designed for Gasohol but occasionally companies sell a small engine that requires non-alcohol fuel and then denotes it in the owner's manual. In places where RF Gasoline is required, like the 13 states that follow CARB emissions, they heavily regulate the small engines sold there.

This is more of an acute problem with boats since many people don't know the difference between automotive and boat fuel. Most boat engines need to use boat fuel because they use open air vents. Some manufacturers have started designing boats to use cheaper and more plentiful automotive fuels. They still use leaded Gasoline in Airplanes BTW. There are difference between Gasoline w/o Ethanol and Gasohol that require special design consideration.

I had a really old boat motor gum up when I used automotive fuel by mistake, didn't come with a manual. When a friend bought an old '90 jetski for cheap, I told him about the difference. Small engine manufacturers have gotten better about making new stuff compatible but now and then something falls through the gaps. It's usually listed in that old decrepit thing called an instruction manual. Or available online somewhere. I've been guilty of ignoring it to my own loss before so I tend to read mine.

TANKERG

Water contamination is a very big concern. The water gets into the gas/ethanol in the underground tank at the station. The water enters the system through the tank's fill pots by three different ways. The first will be a broken drain allowing any liquid in the fill pot into the tank. The second will be the driver pulling the drain and allowing the water into the tank, or if the water is over the fill cap and the driver takes off the cap and allows the water into the tank. The last way would be the station personnel using the fill pot drain to empty the fill pot instead of doing what they are supposed to do and suck out any liquid and dispose of it properly.

Oh and if there are any tank integrity problems where ground water could get into the tank.

I have delivered a station that had over 3" of water, which meant it was way past the phase seperation stage.

StealthTL

iTrader: (1)

Ethanol ALMOST makes sense, until you read that the waste is fed to a bio-mass furnace at an electricity generating facility, but it would be overall more efficient if the corn was not fermented, but burned right as it came from the farm.

So burning the whole crop in the power station furnace would produce more energy, more efficiently, than all this fermentation/distillation and bio-fuel sillyness......

It's no secret that I work for an oil company, but "stupid is as stupid does" still applies.

nycgps

iTrader: (1)

Forget ur other bs for now, do u know how often ppl in brasil gotta replace their cars cuz their engine just crap out? Sureee ethanol is great! T

J8S2

I'm not sure what you're referring to. Is there a problem with the terminology I used in regards to supply and demand or are you saying that since there's only a few "big" oil companies that the price of fuel would be the result of an oligopoly?

What I'm saying is if ethanol (corn-based) was so great, why should the government need to subsidize it? Why not let consumers realize it's advantages and demand the fuel be introduced to their local gas station? In the end, what happens when you subsidize a substandard source of ethanol is you prop up areas of the economy which shouldn't be and it prevents further innovation in the same field. From an energy balance point of view, corn-based ethanol is terrible. There's many more efficient ethanol sources which have a net energy balance of 5 or more compared to corn which is barely over 1 (sugarcane comes to mind). I'm not fighting for oil - they have their own posse of lobbyists, but I'm sure as hell not going to happily settle for government subsidies which are wasteful. For full disclosure, I'm a tax paying US citizen, are you? (You don't have to disclose this if you don't want to, just wondering if you actually have any skin in the game if you know what I mean).

From a water contamination point of view, yes there is the possibility. You can't just say "oh modern fuel systems are perfectly sealed up and ethanol is transported by a sealed tank on a truck" and think that it's okay. The hygroscopic property of ethanol (and all alcohols) means it'll absorb water from the humidity in the air at an extremely fast rate. If the fuel is exposed to the air for even a minute it can be contaminated. The truck mixing the ethanol at the station or just your average joe filling up while the tank is open all means water gets absorbed. Now of course the water/ethanol solution can still be mixed but you've forgotten to mention the temperature at which phase separation occurs. Most people fill up during the day when it's warmer, and at night when it gets cooler phase separation can occur. You say that ethanol can support up to 30% water by weight and still be soluble but once the temperature drops, it WILL phase separate and having a quart of water sitting at the bottom of your tank is not something you want.

Allch Chcar

I've only heard that from Americans using hyperbole.

That's fascinating. How do you tell how much water is in the tank once it sinks to the bottom?

They don't do it for efficiency, they do it for money. Most Oil is sold as Gasoline/Diesel instead of Electricity Generation for exactly that reason. If they wanted efficiency they could use the land for solar panels and run electric cars more "efficiently." Or some other "hair brained" scheme. Which wouldn't payoff in a timely period.

Electricity Generation has to compete with numerous different fuels from Coal, Natural Gas, Hydroelectric, Nuclear, etc. It's not as if Power plants are unregulated, they're heavily regulated. It's actually the inverse situation from Oil/Gasoline with local suppliers having little or limited competition.

It's natural that if you work for someone you'll at least try to defend them. The issue is that your bias can taint your opinion. Which makes it very difficult to be impartial when you directly benefit.

People have been asking for alternatives for decades. Oil refineries have tight reins on the Gasoline supply. Ever heard about how a station tried to add another fuel like E85 or Biodiesel and receive threats from their supplier? Oil companies sign contracts to keep stations from using competing fuels they don't offer. Or if they do offer E85 they offer it above the market price when it would be cheaper to cut out the middle man and get Ethanol straight from the Distilling plant. Competition between Gasoline stations is stiff, profit on Gasoline is so tiny most stations make most of their money from convenience stores. If they don't sell Gasoline at competitive prices they lose out on convenience store customers.

The reason it receives subsidies is to include other benefits not include in the economic price. Both Gasoline and Ethanol at the distribution level are taxed without subsidies while being subsidized some point on the supply side. There is a benefit to producing it while there is a cost to using it. It might seem like market foul play to most, and there is room for corruption, but it's called regulation and is an important part of Capitalism. Just as there is government corruption there is certain market activity that costs consumers more than it benefits. We shouldn't accept market corruption simply because we think our government is too corrupt to bother. It's trading a few hand selected Executives for the many democratically elected government officials. A balance is difficult but it's the best in the long run.

There are some key disadvantages to relying on one source for such a large share of the market. And barring an advantages of an alternative there is the simple fact that more competitive markets are better for consumers. At some point it's worse for companies, which is why there should be limit

Bladecutter

In the link I provided, we are talking about Ducati motorcycles produced between 2004 and 2014. These tanks are still being used today. With non-ethanol fuel used, the gas tanks do not deform, period.

The water contamination comes from the humidity in the air, 90% of the time.
Various Ducati owners keep their bikes in garages, and never ride in the rain, nor do the bikes sit outside in rain or snow storms, so that means that the water contamination is getting access to the fuel in the tank, either at the filling station, the gas station, or in the owners garage, while the bike just sits there.

The tanks expand, deform, and look horrible, and on some of these bikes, the tank to fuel pump seal is compromised, and now the owner has a potential fire under their crotch. That's not a good situation to be in, honestly.

Without the ethanol absorbing the moisture in the air, the tanks simply don't deform. Or, the owner can move to Death Valley, where the isn't any moisture in the air. Not many people want to ride motorcycles in Death Valley, however, so that's pretty much unrealistic.

Ethanol laced fuel has been proven to be damaging to vehicles.
Enough damage over time, and you have a fuel leak.
A fuel leak in the wrong location (a motorcycle's gas tank is directly above a very hot engine and exhaust system, don't forget), and you have a fire.
A fire then leads to a damaged vehicle, and possibly even personal injuries.

Eliminate the ethanol fuel, and you eliminate these issues completely in the motorcycling community.

BC.

nycgps

iTrader: (1)

u mean u can't prove me wrong.

TANKERG

Before making a delivery, the driver will take out their measuring stick and measure the level of the gas to find out how much gas is in a tank. There are conversion charts that will tell the driver at a certain height how many gallons are in that tank. Well at the bottom of the stick, the driver is supposed to put some water paste to see if there is any water present. Currently my company is using Gasoila (their sight is down right now) here is a link to the stuff I use. I have also used a paste from a company called Kolor Kut

Gasoila Water Finding Paste AP02 ---BUY ON-LINE NOW!!!

Here is a site with a picture of a stick with kolor kut on the end.

http://www.oilybits.com/kolor-kut-pa.../prod_836.html