Will ethanol E85 catch on in the US? Will we Live Green and Go Yellow?

seniorjose · June 2006

NEVC - Jefferson City, MO  E85 refueling locations have more than doubled in the past year, making more availability for the almost six million compatible vehicles on American roads. Unfortunately, the price at the pump has not been the most attractive in recent months.

When using E85 in a flexible-fuel vehicle, one will receive a 5 to 12 percent mileage reduction than when using unleaded gasoline in the same vehicle. This reason is simple  E85 contains less energy, lower British Thermal Units (BTUs) than regular unleaded gasoline. Thus, to be advantageous for a consumer, the price of E85 must be lower than that of regular unleaded gasoline. Unfortunately, at this time, the price of E85 is sometimes higher than regular unleaded at many refueling locations.

What are the factors that are resulting in these high E85 prices? One of the main reasons is that ethanol demand has recently been at an all-time high. The reasons for this unprecedented demand of ethanol is the phase out of MTBE in parts of the United States and continued reductions in refining capacity. The hurricanes that hit the Gulf Coast in late 2005 created a gasoline shortage throughout the country and in some cases, refinery supplies are still being impacted. Major gasoline retailers needed to extend their fuel supplies, and adding a small percentage of ethanol to their gasoline blend was a short term answer.

Most persons associated with the industry indicate believe that the high cost of E85 is short term. The price [of E85] is higher but it is being driven by market forces due to a short term market shortage.

gagrice · June 2006

What are the factors that are resulting in these high E85 prices?

No sniveling about the high price of corn ethanol. Did I say, I told you so? I hope you continue to support and run E85 in your vehicle when the price continues to rise. If not I would say that borders on hypocrisy.

gridflash · June 2006

Good post.
It's surprising that it's taken this long to get an Industry-Approved E85 fuel dispenser.

It's too bad that they aren't publicly traded. Cause we are going to need a lot of them.

seniorjose · June 2006

Removing the influence of the oil cartel or at least dissipating it is our national goal. South America and now Iran are threatening to cut off the oil spigot...this terrorist blackmail has to stop!

It is hilarious to see even our USA TREE-HUGRs scramble, whine and ineptly try to denigrate renewable resources such as Ethanol and Biodeisal. Of course Hydrogen powered autos are decades away from being practical, just as Electric autos have been phased out as impractical so far.
E95 and Biodeisal will allow us to push diesels technology NOW! Of course E85 continues to impact auto sales NOW.

Ford currently is running a new ad that is advertising their E85 capable F150 as having NO price increase over 100% gasoline models. Good advertising...shows a stalk of green corn slowly turning into an E85 green corn like hose that is fueling a bright red F150...and the beat goes on...NOW! Like Mikey..."Buy it, you'll like it."

gagrice · June 2006

You and I may be closer together than you think. First though I am not worried about oil being shut off from Iran. They have crap oil with real high sulfur that no one wants. That may cause them to use their big guns to take over other Middle East countries. That could be problematic. South American oil is much more stable. They talk a lot but love our money. They have horrible leaders, but not ones that have a religious fervor of hatred toward the USA.

It is good that Ford and GM are offering FFVs for those that have access to E85. Right NOW today we are just about maxed out on what we can produce from corn. Until a process is in place to make ethanol from biomass we have reached our potential for supplying ethanol. We can waste a lot of money building more stills and without the corn to fill them it is a waste of money. You have already seen the price of E85 pass up regular. What does that mean to you. I do think biodiesel will have a more positive impact on our oil usage than ethanol over time.

rorr · June 2006

"Removing the influence of the oil cartel or at least dissipating it is our national goal."

Well that's fine and dandy but raising corn for ethanol won't do it. Have you read the extensive article on ethanol in the latest (July) issue of Car and Driver?

jkinzel · June 2006

The correct spelling is "diesel".

I truly admire the enthusiasm and passion you have for ethanol and E85 as an alternative fuel. You also have a deep desire to rid the US of oil dependence from other countries as Im sure most of us do.
If you really want to eliminate our need for imported oil you would have the same enthusiasm for bio diesel as you do ethanol and I dont see that.
Have you written your Congressman or woman asking why more has not been done to promote diesel and bio diesel passenger cars? I have.
Have you written your Congressman or woman asking why Congress, the President and the US auto makers are pushing ethanol and ignoring bio diesel and in fact legislating some of the most fuel efficient diesels off the market? I have.
I got back a form letter, but at least I did something and its on record.
Forgive me if Im wrong, but with such single, narrow focus on ethanol, I cant help but feel your enthusiasm is self serving.

mlbender · June 2006

I haven't run a full tank of E10 through yet, but if it's anything similar to my 00 Yukon 5.3 on E10, I'm expecting 14city/18hwy. I got very consistantly over 6 years of owning it. According to the fancy computer on my new truck, E10 is showing about 13.5 in mixed driving (mostly city), but that's only over about 100 miles. I'll let everyone know when I get a couple tanks through for comparison.

tpe · June 2006

Of course Hydrogen powered autos are decades away from being practical, just as Electric autos have been phased out as impractical so far

Actually I'm reading that automakers like Honda and BMW are going to be introducing hydrogen vehicles way ahead of schedule. Maybe in 3-4 years.

If ethanol's viability is based on large government subsidies I think the idea of practicality goes out the window. Electric vehicles have already been proven. They may only have a limited range but it is more than adequate for the vast majority of commuters. So the main problem is the expensive battery pack that adds $10k or more to the price of the vehicle. No problem. Let the government subsidize this amount and, voila, its practical.

seniorjose · June 2006

All I am saying is that Ethanol and E85 are available NOW, not like Hydrogen fuels that have No infrastructure and right now are as unsafe as a mixture of fertilizer and diesel oil...explosive resistant tanks have yet to be built.

There is a Biodiesel plant being built about 20-30 miles south of here. The problem with biodiesel is the same as for Ethanol...where do we get enough raw material? States like California will never accept Ethanol or Biodiesel...too bad!

I am not on any Ethanol bandwagon except it is a renewable resource available to us now and can be used in 12 million autos today, not tomorrow. Both Ethanol and Biodiesel are proven to be winners today and do cut down on our imported oil usage.

We will evolve solutions over time, there is an E95 solution to the diesel problem right now, but nobody is building any plants. Diesels will be used in passenger autos more and more. However, Ethanol can be used today in today's gasoline engines where biodiesel can only be used in a major way in our diesel trucks.

South America, Venezuela and Bolivia, have openly espoused their hatred of the USA getting their oil and of course Iran has generated this kind of hatred for many years.

tpe · June 2006

All I am saying is that Ethanol and E85 are available NOW, not like Hydrogen fuels that have No infrastructure and right now are as unsafe as a mixture of fertilizer and diesel oil...explosive resistant tanks have yet to be built.

I've read there are only 500 filling stations that sell E85 and they are primarily located in the midwest. So for most of the country the infrastructure does not exist and will require a large investment. There are more hydrogen fueling stations in Southern California than E85. The idea that a hydrogen fuel tank is as unsafe and explosive as a mixture of diesel and fertilizer is just bizarre. There are test fleets of these vehicles and buses being driven throughout the world and so far none have blown up. BTW, there aren't 12 million FFVs on the road, its 5 million and most of the drivers of them choose to fill up with regular gas.

fireball1 · June 2006

Hey, folks, something has to give here. Corn plantings are down 5 percent because of the skyrocketing cost of natural gas fertilizer. But ethanol's share of corn continues to rise. That leaves less corn for cattlefeeding which, frankly, is not all that bad a thing. But if natural gas prices continue to steadily climb, you can expect nationwide corn plantings to decrease. And you can expect ethanol plants to go with coal instead of natural gas, a real pollution-intensive alternative that the American public won't buy once they catch wind of it. The solution: Get the hell off corn ASAP! Reduce corn subsidies to save our environment. Subsidize the growth of other ethanol fuelstuffs instead of throwing millions down the corn drain, thus destroying the environment in which it grows and eliminating the number of farms in our countryside. Ethanol from corn is a part of an unhealthy food system and an ag system that needs to be revamped.

gagrice · June 2006

I've been preaching that since this thread began. Some cannot fathom that growing a crop can cause as much damage as growing corn with current Mega farm methods. It is polluting the streams and rivers to a very high level. So much so that the Mississippi Delta will soon be completely dead. In their greed to get more tax dollars companies like ADM are building more coal fired stills. Coal is about 1/6th the cost of natural gas to use. More pollution there. I wish I could see ethanol through the same rose colored glasses others see it. The only silver lining I can see, is ethanol from biomass as produced by Iogen of Canada. So far that is experimental.

gem069 · June 2006

You and I may be closer together than you think. First though I am not worried about oil being shut off from Iran. They have crap oil with real high sulfur that no one wants. That may cause them to use their big guns to take over other Middle East countries. That could be problematic. South American oil is much more stable. They talk a lot but love our money. They have horrible leaders, but not ones that have a religious fervor of hatred toward the USA.

I saw on TV the other day the commie Pres of Venezuela, Chaevez talking at a OPEC meeting. Even through I really hate them commies, he did have many logical points regarding OPEC and fossil fuels.
And as been his agenda of slamming the "Imperial Empire" (USA) and still trying to find a way to shut off all fossil fuels to the USA and bring the USA to it's knees. (As quoted by him) Luckily the rest of the OPEC is still greedy for the $, or surely the USA would be shut out.

=======================================================
It's only a matter of time till they will!

tpe · June 2006

I don't see how any country can prevent the US from accessing their oil unless they shut down their production completely. All oil makes its way into a global supply. Its like having a swimming pool and saying that you can only take water from the shallow end.

Venezuala's President enjoys playing Robin Hood with a seized oil company's (Citgo) revenue. His leftist practices are a fairly transparent effort to buy influence and support. He wouldn't be able to do this without oil money. If it wasn't for the US's demand for oil the revenue generated would be a fraction of what it currently is. All these anti-American oil producers are like the crack whore who complains about who she has to lie down with. They have no options.

snakeweasel · June 2006

You are right, all these oil producing countries are dependent on money from oil. None of them will turn off the tap decreasing the flow of money inward.

snakeweasel · June 2006

All I am saying is that Ethanol and E85 are available NOW,

While it is available now its not such a great option. Its more expensive to use and extremely land intensive to produce any great quantities of. Not to mention other issues with ethanol. Just don't put all your eggs in the E85 basket, its not as strong as it looks.

South America, Venezuela and Bolivia, have openly espoused their hatred of the USA getting their oil

Yeah but my money is on them loving those Yankee Greenbacks.

seniorjose · June 2006

Shell Oil announced today that they will be producing Ethanol from waste material within two years -- BLOOMBERG TV

seniorjose · June 2006

I was interested to watch on TV the other night the installation of the large hydrogen tanks in autos. These hydrogen tanks took up all of the trunk space. The rear seats had to be temporarily removed and a mechanical arm and winch were used to stuff the trunk with the Hydrogen tank and associated hardware.

All Hydrogen autos are on a short mileage tether just like the Electric cars. We are a tremendously long way from ever having Hydrogen as a viable fuel source just as Electric cars have been interesting but only in an confined urban setting.

In the 60s we had propane powered taxicabs in San Fransisco -- and we know how far that technology took us.

Hydrogen powered autos may be a technology of the future, but it is a long term solution that will take decades to implement and many billions of dollars for infrastructure even to support going outside of an urban area. Hydrogen researchers are now lookng at creating some sort of jell that would fill a storage tank in an auto to smother the explosive Hydrogen product or render it inert in case of an accident.

Solutions will come. However, the point I am making is that we have viable solutions NOW with Ethanol and Biodiesel running in autos that currently come off the production line.

seniorjose · June 2006

What is the range of a flexible fuel ethanol vehicle?
Ethanol has less energy content than gasoline. However, E85 also has a much higher octane (ranging from 100 to 105) than gasoline. FFVs are not optimized to E85, so they experience a 5% to 15% drop in fuel economy. This will vary based on temperature and driving conditions. For comparison purposes, aggressive driving habits can result in a 20% loss and low tire pressure can reduce mileage by 6%.

Research indicates Ford FFVs experience a 5% horsepower gain on E85.
The range of any particular vehicle is dependent on the size of the fuel tank and driving habits.
Current Ford Taurus FFVs have an 18-gallon fuel tank and will normally travel 350 miles between refuelings.

gagrice · June 2006

If you google shell Iogen you will find that Shell bought an interest in Iogen of Canada. So far they are the only company with a working plant to convert biomass to ethanol.

What happens in two years when oil is back at $30 per barrel? They said it would never go below $40 per barrel in the early 1980s. It was as low as $9 per barrel in 1998. The Gulf of Mexico is virtually untapped. With Cuba wanting to tap that resource off the coast of Florida, how long before we start poking holes in the floor of the gulf?

The only thing that Ethanol has going for it NOW is the mandated additive. That is E10 maximum. Most car manufacturers will void your warranty if you use anything higher than 10% ethanol. The FFVs are a joke as there are so few places in the USA you can buy E85. Less than 1% of FFV owners actually use E85. One station for close to 45 million people on the West coast. Your wait in line may be a long one.

Ethanol is not a realistic alternative to fossil fuel. It is purely a feather to put in the hats of useless politicians.

seniorjose · June 2006

What are the benefits of E85?Government tests have shown that E85 vehicles reduce harmful hydrocarbon and benzene emissions when compared to vehicles running on gasoline. E85 can also reduce carbon dioxide (CO2), a harmful greenhouse gas and a major contributor to global warming. Although CO2 is released during ethanol production and combustion, it is recaptured as a nutrient to the crops that are used in its production. Unlike fossil fuel combustion, which unlocks carbon that has been stored for millions of years, use of ethanol results in low increases to the carbon cycle.

What happens when E85 is not available?The FFV system allows the driver to use any combination of gasoline or ethanol -- from 100% unleaded gasoline to 85% ethanol. A driver can therefore use unleaded gasoline if ethanol is not available.

What are the differences in an FFV compared to a regular gasoline-only model? Are different parts used?
There is only one major additional part that is included on an FFV, the fuel sensor that detects the ethanol/gasoline ratio. A number of other parts on the FFVs fuel delivery system are modified so that they are ethanol compatible. The fuel tank, fuel lines, fuel injectors, computer system, anti-siphon device, and dashboard gauges have been modified slightly. Alcohols are corrosive. Therefore, any part that comes in contact with the fuel has been upgraded to be tolerant to alcohol. Normally, these parts include a stainless steel fuel tank and Teflon lined fuel hoses.

Does an FFV cost more than a gasoline-only model?When manufacturers offer a flexible fuel engine as an option in their vehicles, there is no additional cost. In model year 1998, manufacturers began making flexible fuel engines standard equipment on certain makes and models. Therefore, with a specific model you can only get an E85 flexible fuel engine; no gasoline-only engines are available, therefore no additional cost is incurred. For a list of FFVs, click here.

Are repairs and maintenance costs for FFVs any different than they are for gasoline?No, the costs are roughly the same as regular auto repairs and maintenance. An FFV does run cleaner and, therefore, some maintenance costs may actually be reduced in the long run.

What is the octane rating of E85 compared to gasoline?Regular unleaded gasoline has an octane rating of 87; E85 has an octane rating ranging from 100-105 that provides for superior engine performance. Ford FFVs produce a 5% horsepower gain when using E85.

Is E85 more toxic or dangerous than gasoline?No. 100% ethanol can be and is ingested by human beings. The fuel ethanol must be "denatured" with gasoline or a bitter agent to prevent ingestion. Also, ethanol does not contain the harmful carcinogens and toxins found in gasoline.

If E85 is spilled on the ground, can it contaminate ground water?Ethanol is water soluble, non-toxic and biodegradable. E85 contains roughly 80% less of the potential contaminates found in gasoline.

Will I hurt a gasoline-only vehicle if I use E85?Yes. Longer-term use of E85 in gasoline-only vehicles may cause damage because of the incompatibility of the alcohol fuel with the parts in gasoline-only engines. Performance and emissions will also be compromised.

What is the price of E85?As is the case with all forms of fuel, the larger the number of outlets, typically, the more competitively priced is the fuel. E85 is priced to be competitive with 87-octane gasoline.

gagrice · June 2006

FFVs are not optimized to E85, so they experience a 5% to 15% drop in fuel economy.

If they were optimized as you suggest. Would they even run on regular unleaded? You would probably have to use Av gas to get 100-105 octane at 6 bucks a gallon. No one has shown that you can get equal mileage with E85, that you can get with regular unleaded. It defies the laws of science. You can wish all you want that a gas car of equal size and displacement will compete mileage wise with a diesel engine. It ain't gonna happen in our lifetime. Nothing from nothing leaves nothing.

bhw77 · June 2006

I think this is more realistic, but will never happen anyway - too much economic and political implications...
http://www.americanenergyindependence.com/biodiesel.html

gagrice · June 2006

Good article. Take a look at these companies in Oregon that are using biodiesel NOW. There are more stations selling biodiesel in Oregon than stations in 10 western states selling E85. I wonder why? Simple, biodiesel works in a bigger variety of existing vehicles, with little or NO degradation of efficiency.

Companies I will support when possible:

Earth Friendly Biodiesel

seniorjose · June 2006

I realize that E85 issues are dependent upon where you live and if you will ever get E85 Ethanol in your state. many state governments are set against any relief from "big oil" and could care less about solving energy problems. However, many states are problem solvers and are working together to try to implement a national policy. I ran across these comparative tax charts that may be interesting to those who care. Nothing in here about E85 issues, but creating more jobs generally lowers taxes.

State-Local Tax Burdens, Calendar Year 2005. Rank State State/Local taxes as % of per capita income
U.S. average is 10.10%

1 Maine 13.00%
2 New York 12.00%
3 Hawaii 11.50%
4 Rhode Island 11.40%
5 Wisconsin 11.40%
6 Vermont 11.10%
7 Ohio 11.00%
8 Nebraska 10.90%
9 Utah 10.90%
10 Minnesota 10.70%
11 Arkansas 10.50%
12 Connecticut 10.50%
13 West Virginia 10.50%
14 New Jersey 10.40%
15 Kansas 10.40%
16 Louisiana 10.40%
17 Maryland 10.30%
18 Indiana 10.30%
19 Kentucky 10.30%
20 California 10.30%
21 Arizona 10.20%
22 Michigan 10.10%
23 Wyoming 10.10%
24 Washington 10.00%
25 Iowa 10.00%
26 Mississippi 10.00%
27 Idaho 10.00%
28 North Carolina 10.00%
29 New Mexico 9.90%
30 Illinois 9.80%
31 Georgia 9.80%
32 Massachusetts 9.80%
33 South Carolina 9.70%
34 Virginia 9.70%
35 Pennsylvania 9.70%
36 Oregon 9.60%
37 Colorado 9.50%
38 Nevada 9.50%
39 Montana 9.50%
40 Oklahoma 9.40%
41 Missouri 9.40%
42 North Dakota 9.40%
43 Texas 9.30%
44 Florida 9.20%
45 South Dakota 8.80%
46 Alabama 8.70%
47 Tennessee 8.30%
48 Delaware 8.00%
49 New Hampshire 7.40%
50 Alaska 6.40

seniorjose · June 2006

We did not realize this before and yet the spigots can be turned off. Gas stations out of fuel, odd and even buying days for gas...it has happened before and our politicians watered down the CAFE standards, the elimination of V8s that was to take place in the 1980s, etc, etc, etc. That is what the oil cartels love to do to us, probably so that we will spend $100-$150 a barrel for oil. These are very violent dictators that run the oil cartel and use everything at their disposal including the terrorists from Canada, the Middle East and even our homegrown ones as instruments of disaster.

seniorjose · June 2006

Interest in E85 increases as prices dropby Mark Steil, Minnesota Public Radio
April 28, 2005
E85 is selling for 55 cents less than gasoline at the Pump 'N Pak in Luverne. (MPR Photo/Mark Steil)

Ethanol producers see opportunity in the current siege of high gas prices. They're selling 85 percent ethanol far below the price of gasoline, as much as 80 cents a gallon cheaper. The move has increased sales, though the fuel known as E85 is still a small part of the overall market.

Luverne, Minn.  The price sign at the Pump 'N Pak convenience store in Luverne in southwest Minnesota grabs the eye. Regular gasoline sells for $2.09 a gallon. In fact all the fuels listed are over $2 a gallon except one. Manager Lila Sudenga says E85 is $1.54 a gallon.

"Soon as that gas price hit over $2 a gallon people were looking for a more affordable way to get back and forth to work," says Sudenga. "We had it priced at anywhere from 50 to 60 cents lower than super unleaded. And our sales really increased."

E85 sales have tripled since the station lowered its price last month. E85 has always been priced below gasoline, partly because it delivers fewer miles per gallon. Studies show as much as 10-15 percent less. Sudenga says the price gap has widened as gasoline prices have increased.

"When people pull up to that pump, if they don't realize it's E85 and they see that price difference, they definitely come in and ask what's going on," Sudenga says.

That can take some explaining.

snakeweasel · June 2006

FFVs are not optimized to E85, so they experience a 5% to 15% drop in fuel economy.

Per EPA estiments its 20-33% depending on the vehicle.

Current Ford Taurus FFVs have an 18-gallon fuel tank and will normally travel 350 miles between refuelings.

But it will go 125 miles further on a tank of regular gas.

seniorjose · June 2006

Researchers at Iowa State University are developing a mold-based process that breaks down the cellulosic corn fiber that is a by-product of the wet-milling process into sugars that can then be fermented into fuel ethanol.

The initial goal is to create a sequential biorefinery that can tap into what currently are the waste byproducts of corn processing. The process may be suitable for all ligno-cellulosic biomass material however.

The process has a total reducible sugar yield of 12%. The ethanol yield with subsequent Saccharomyces fermentation is 4%. Potentially, we should be able to make 2x more sugar and 3x more ethanol per mass of fiber. We still need to improve on what we got so far. It took two years to get where we are now and the most important part happened suddenly in the last month.

I believe this is a breakthrough. But I also want to caution that we need to do more research.

Prof. van Leeuwen

seniorjose · June 2006

There are NO EPA numbers that say that E85 is 20-33% less efficient - More myths and falsehoods - read carefully the articles I have cited. Ethanol is 100-105 Octane and as such creates a more powerful engine combination. EPA current testing has been totally discredited and are subject to new regs as we speak.

gagrice · June 2006

What a difference a year makes. Now people are bragging when they pay less than $3 per gallon. Notice E85 follows the price of gas right up the scale. I would like to know what studies can show only a 10-15% decrease in mileage with E85. The EPA shows 25-30% lower mileage with E85. Maybe that is what folks in MN would have their customers believe. What is the price comparison TODAY, NOW between E85 and unleaded regular. Would Joe six pack pull up and fill up his FFV Ford F150 with E85 or unleaded regular? A Ford F150 FFV gets 27% less miles with E85 than unleaded regular. If unleaded regular is $3 per gallon to break even in that F150 E85 would have to sell for $2.19 per gallon. You also need to fill more often. It may get there some day. E85 is not for NOW except in two or three states and I don't think it is practical in those states.

See E85 prices TODAY:

Current E85 Prices

Notice outside the corn states E85 is the same as unleaded regular. Only government agencies would pay that price. It is easy when you are spending other people's money.

seniorjose · June 2006

VW is dropping all versions of it's 2007 diesel engines in North America due to their inability to meet US standards.

Daimler/Cgrysler is also dropping their diesel engine version of the Jeep Liberty in 2007.

gagrice · June 2006

There are NO EPA numbers that say that E85 is 20-33% less efficient

Have you checked the EPA website? I have not seen a single site you have posted that can verify your claims for E85. It is on average 25% less mileage...... Who discredited the EPA except for the over rated hybrids?

seniorjose · June 2006

E-85 fuel is available at stations in locations in many states. In Kansas, you can purchase E-85 fuel for your flexible fuel vehicle at several locations.

Kansas State Tax Credit to FFV Owners Who Use E85 Fuel
People who buy new flexible fuel vehicles and use E85 can claim a state tax credit. An individual who purchases a new FFV has from the date of purchase through that calendar year and the next calendar year to purchase 500 gallons of E85. They can then submit those receipts with their taxes and receive a $750 tax credit.

Stay tuned: At least 20 New E85 Locations to Open in Kansas
The Kansas Corn Commission and United Bio Energy have partnered with the
National Ethanol Vehicle Coalition to add 20 more E85 stations in Kansas.

gagrice · June 2006

Ethanol is 100-105 Octane and as such creates a more powerful engine combination.

More power does not equate to better mileage. I would like to see some credible evidence for all these figures you are coming up with. I post links to studies and you quote some ADM official with his hand out to the government. I want to see the facts.

gagrice · June 2006

They can then submit those receipts with their taxes and receive a $750 tax credit.

Is that kind of ignorance on the part of Kansas supposed to make E85 look better? Come on we don't need more hand outs we need solutions to our energy problems. For every $750 they hand back to the people some other service gets cut. I would imagine it will be maintenance of the highways. Oh, sorry we had to sell that snowplow because people are using more E85 and we gave the money to plow the snow away. You better get a Hummer to get to work in.

seniorjose · June 2006

E85 fuel is a blend of 85% ethanol and just 15% petroleum that is designed for use in flexible fuel vehicles (FFVs). Ethanol can be made from virtually any starch feedstock, such as sugar cane, wheat or milo. Today, US ethanol is produced mainly from corn, an abundant and renewable source. A bushel of field corn will yield 1.6 lbs of corn oil, 10.9 lbs of high protein feed (distillers dried grains or DDG), 2.6 lbs of corn meal and 31.5 lbs of starch-which can be converted to beverages, sweeteners or 2.7 gallons of fuel ethanol. Some ethanol producers are running at even higher efficiencies. The US Department of Agriculture reports a net energy balance for ethanol production of 1.67. In other words, for every one unit of energy used to produce ethanol and its accompanying co-products, 1.67 units of energy results. However, the US Department of Energy reports that petroleum refining can actually have a negative energy balance. For example, every unit of energy expended in gasoline production is reported to result in only 0.79 units of energy in the form of gasoline.

E85 has several benefits as a renewable-based fuel. It helps reduce tailpipe and greenhouse gas emissions while supporting the economy and reducing our need for overseas oil imports. Its also very easy to use.

E85 is environment-friendly. It has the highest oxygen content of any fuel available today, allowing it to burn more completely (cleaner) than conventional gasoline. E85 contains 80% less gum-forming compounds, like the olefins found in gasoline. Production and use of E85 results in a nearly 30% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. Many major U.S. cities suffer from unhealthy levels of smog (ground-level ozone). E85 may be able to help. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency reports that high-blend ethanol fuels can significantly reduce harmful exhaust emissions such as carbon monoxide (-40%) and smog-forming pollutants (-15%).

snakeweasel · June 2006

What is the octane rating of E85 compared to gasoline?Regular unleaded gasoline has an octane rating of 87; E85 has an octane rating ranging from 100-105 that provides for superior engine performance.

Any octane greater than the octane needed for your car will provide limited, if any, additional benefit. The octane rating of 100-105 will do nothing for the average driver. and is only beneficial for cars designed for that octane rating.

What is the price of E85?As is the case with all forms of fuel, the larger the number of outlets, typically, the more competitively priced is the fuel. E85 is priced to be competitive with 87-octane gasoline.

What consumers should be aware of is what is the price per mile driven. Since E85 is 15-20% less than regular gas and E85 produces 20-33% less mileage the best one can hope for is break even and the vast majority of people will actually spend more on E85 than on regular gasoline per mile driven.

snakeweasel · June 2006

There are NO EPA numbers that say that E85 is 20-33% less efficient -

EPA figures for 2007 per theirweb site

Chevrolet Tahoe< GMC Yukon, GMC Sierra and Chevy Silverado
Gas 21/16
E85 16/12
25.00% less city
23.81% less highway

Chevy Avalanche, Chevy Suburban and Chevy Tahooe
Gas 21/15
E85 15/12
25.00% less city
23.81% less highway

GMC Savana, Chevy Van
Gas 20/15
E85 16/12
20.00% less city
20.00% less highway

For 2006 cars

Chevy Monte Carlo
Gas 31/21
E85 24/16
23.81% less city
22.58% less highway

Chevy Impala
Gas 31/21
E85 23/16
23.81% less city
25.81% less highway

Chrysler Sebring/Dodge Stratus
Gas 28/21
E85 20/15
28.57% less city
28.57% less highway

Ford Taurus
Gas 27/19
E85 20/15
21.05% less city
25.93% less highway

Dodge Caravan
Gas 26/19
E85 17/13
31.58% less city
34.62% less highway

Shall I go on?

No myths just facts.

gagrice · June 2006

Thank you, I was wearing out my keyboard trying to keep up with the half-truth information being posted. If there is some new credible evidence that E85 is now more efficient than it has been for the last 30 years, I would love to study it.

snakeweasel · June 2006

Many years ago I had a caravan that was flex fuel. I used a few tanks of E85 and when I saw the results I was sworn off of the stuff. I lost about 30% of my MPG.

snakeweasel · June 2006

E-85 fuel is available at stations in locations in many states. In Kansas, you can purchase E-85 fuel for your flexible fuel vehicle at several locations.

The problem is that while it is available at a number of stations it is still an extremely small number. Most people, even in the midwest with the highest concentration of E85 outlets, will have to go many miles out of their way to use it. Add that to the extra cost per mile to use E85 and the more frequent fill ups E85 will require its a losing proposition.

rorr · June 2006

Yep. Definitely need to eliminate some falsehoods around here.

"The US Department of Agriculture reports a net energy balance for ethanol production of 1.67. In other words, for every one unit of energy used to produce ethanol and its accompanying co-products, 1.67 units of energy results."

Actually, according to this publication from the USDA: "Estimating the Net Energy Balance of Corn Ethanol", corn ethanol has a net energy ratio of 1.24. Meaning that "for every BTU dedicated to producing ethanol, there is a 24% energy gain."

http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aer721/AER721.PDF

To be fair, I've seen energy balance numbers for ethanol all over the place (some negative). Obviously, the numbers are highly dependant on the assumptions used in the study. And on who finances the study. Another point, one of the big selling points the study cited above was that ethanol was attactive because the energy USED to produced the ethanol could be domestically sourced rather than imported. In fact, the study concludes with this:

"Ethanol production utilizes abundant domestic energy supplies of coal and natural gas to convert corn into premium liquid fuel....."

Hmmm, so the consumption of coal figures prominently in any kind of debate concerning efficient ethanol production. I wonder what that does to your "reduced CO2 emmissions" argument?

"However, the US Department of Energy reports that petroleum refining can actually have a negative energy balance. For example, every unit of energy expended in gasoline production is reported to result in only 0.79 units of energy in the form of gasoline."

Ah, No. Yes, petroleum products have an energy balance less than 1. But this means that the fuel (be it gasoline or diesel) yields less than 1 unit of energy for every unit consumed. In other words, for your number of 0.79, this means that for every 1 BTU in the oil as it exists underground in an oil field, you net 0.79 BTU of energy in the form of gasoline in your tank.

rorr · June 2006

"Ethanol is 100-105 Octane and as such creates a more powerful engine combination."

Nope.

Octane is NOT a rating dealing with energy content. In fact, higher octane "premium" gasoline typically has LESS energy content than lower octane regular. Octane is a measure of how resistant a fuel is to premature detonation which causes knocking. It is measured relative to a mixture of 2,2,4-trimethylpentane (an isomer of octane) and n-heptane. An 87-octane gasoline has the same knock resistance as a mixture of 87% isooctane and 13% n-heptane.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_rating

You associate high octane numbers with more hp because typically HIGHER COMPRESSION engines yield more hp. However, higher compression increases the propensity for destructive engine knocking, therefore requiring higher octane fuels.

john500 · June 2006

I just finished reading a book by George Olah entitled "Beyond Gas and Oil: The Methanol Economy". I found the alternative energy facts in the book very well done. Unfortunately, it comes with a cost. Apparently, Olah has some patents on CO2 recycling into methanol and a large amount of the book deals with promoting methanol as the fuel of the future. I didn't find the methanol argument well-substantiated, however, the data compilation is well documented (there are plenty of references) and worth reading if you are an alternative energy advocate.

The values for fuel economy quoted by snakeweasel are exactly in line with theoretical expectations. Ethanol has 40 % lower energy content than gasoline, however, it is slightly more dense than gasoline (meaning a larger mass of ethanol is burned per unit volume using the industry practice of defining efficiency volumetrically - equating to an increase in fuel economy of approximately 5-10 %). E85 should have approximately 25-30 % lower fuel economy.

seniorjose · June 2006

Engine knocking went out withy high button shoes. All new auto computers shift their timing so knocking no longer exists. On old cars, prior to sophisticated computer management of timing, etc. Ethanol will allow 87 octane + Ethanol fuel instead of premum fuel asked for by older autos and some new cars.

seniorjose · June 2006

NEVC - National Ethanol Vehicle Coalition release

Does it take more energy to produce a gallon of ethanol than the energy we get out of it?

Response:
No. This has been a common misconception of the ethanol industry, that it takes more energy to make ethanol than is available to the final consumer. Remember, ethanol is produced from plant matter, today dominated by corn, wheat, potatoes, sorgum, etc. Plants grow through the use of energy provided by the sun and are a renewable resources. In the future, ethanol will be produced from waste products or "energy crops." In fact, a partner of the NEVC, BC International (BCI), is currently constructing an ethanol production plant in Louisiana that will use sugar cane waste to produce ethanol. Additionally, BCI is considering the establishment of ethanol production facilities in California that would use the waste hulls from rice growers and wood waste from the forrest industry to produce ethanol. Energy crops such as perennial switch grasses, timothy, and other high-output/low-input crops will be used in the future.

Current research prepared by Argonne National Laboratory (a U.S. Department of Energy Laboratory), indicates a 38% gain in the overall energy input/output equation for the corn-to-ethanol process. That is, if 100 BTUs of energy is used to plant corn, harvest the crop, transport it, etc., 138 BTUs of energy is available in the fuel ethanol. Corn yields and processing technologies have improved significantly over the past 20 years and they continue to do so, making ethanol production less and less energy intensive.

elias · June 2006

one possible thing to consider is that we are not comparing E85 to pure gasoline, but comparing it to "E10" or something close to that. the switch from "E0" to "E10" or "MTBE10" caused an mpg loss of 10% way back when. and now with E85 we are talking about ANOTHER 25% drop?!
if i had an E85-capable vehicle i suppose i would consider using E85 if it cost >35% less than gasoline.

rorr · June 2006

"All new auto computers shift their timing so knocking no longer exists."

I was simply trying to point out that octane is a measurement of a fuel's ability to resist detonation. Yes, ignition timing CAN be adjusted to eliminate knocking. Of course, you lose hp at the same time.

So, it would appear to the CASUAL OBSERVER that lower octane = lower hp and higher octane = higher hp.

However, if an engine isn't designed to take advantage of higher octane fuels (by having a higher compression ratio), then expecting high hp levels JUST BECAUSE you're running a high octane fuel is folly.

What we DO know is that ethanol has a substantially lower energy content than gasoline (84.4k BTU/gallon for ethanol vs. 125k BTU/gallon for gasoline). That's about 1/3 less energy/gallon for ethanol compared to gasoline. If run on straight ethanol, I would expect fuel economy to be reduced by about a third.

Of course with E85, the energy content would be about 90.5k BTU/gallon which is about 27% lower energy content than. And what was the reported decrease on fuel economy running E85? Around 20-25%.

Seems straightforward to me. Of course, I don't have my corn-colored glasses on either.......

Will ethanol E85 catch on in the US? Will we Live Green and Go Yellow?

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles