Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Your E85 Flex Fuel Experience
Post your observations about your realworld E85 flex fuel use here.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
From what I can tell it will work, but would be very expensive. Since there is little direct discussion of this on the Internet (and bio fuels are a hot topic), I suspect that it is not a viable fuel.
Isoprophyl is used as a fuel antifreeze, and can be used to get small amounts of water out of the fuel tank.
Ethanol is much cheaper...
I bought a new car last month. One of my 3 choices for engines was a 2.7L V6 that was E85 compatible. I didn't know very much about it but I did some online research.
I found out that if I used E85 instead of regular 87 octane gas the mpg rating dropped by nearly 30%. Since I average around 14,000 miles per year I calculated that it would cost me approximately $300/yr more for E85 fuel, even at the lower cost per gallon.
I know some people say we have to look beyond that and E85 reduces our dependence on foreign oil, even if it costs us a little more to use. However, at what price point does this extra cost become more of a factor than whatever foreign oil we're not using?
http://www.aaafuelgaugereport.com/
according to the above site, the E85 (gallon of gas equivalent) is 2.98 while gas is 2.83
but when the prod volume goes up and its transported by trains, its cost will go down.
Dont forget that gas prices are further set to rise with $90 oil. It makes sense to buy Flex Fuel vehicle and when gas prices are higher, we can buy E85 and help the country.
Well, that brings us back to my original question. At what point does the higher cost to drive an E85 vehicle become more of a factor than whatever foreign oil we're not using?
Right now, in my area, E85 is only 12 cents per gallon cheaper, yet I get 4MPG less. It would have to be at least 54 cents per gallon cheaper, just to break even.
That puts me at paying 3.386 equivalent per gallon compared to 2.899 87 octane.
It's harder on the system and the cars and no real benefit to the consumers.
This in a '08 Impala 3.5L, winter in SC.
If they can come up with an alternative fuel that's $1 or more less, then people will buy it and use it.
For me, I'm sticking with regular fuel. They can have their E85 junk.
to make matters worse;
The cars have yet to see a drop of ethanol since there are no stations in place to provide the fuel. :surprise:
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/07/11/ahem-california-bought-over-1-000-flex-f- uel-vehicles-two-years/
I have ran a few tanks of E85 and 87 octane and I have consistently gotten 5MPG less on E85. That means it would have to be 60 cents less per gallon to break even.
Around here, there is only a 12 cetns difference in price. That puts me paying $57 to get the same mileage as 87 octane at $45.
Plus, the price of E85 varies by state. The national average is 18% cheaper E85 Prices. Some states DO sell it for $1 gal cheaper. Unfortunately, in MI where I live, it's only about 10-15% cheaper, but I still use it in my 2008 FFV F150 and my FFV converted 1998 Taurus.
There are a lot of myths about ethanol. Bottom line, who you gonna trust, OPEC or fuel that is Made in USA.
Flex Fuel My Ride
It's definitely not better for your engine. Do you actually really know what ethanol does to engines? Why do you think they have to have special built systems to handle ethanol?
Average loss is 23% and that is what I am getting. It's not worth the scam, especially when you add in all the other factors in producing it, refining it, transporting it and using it.
No, there are people out there claiming there are myths about ethanol and there are a LOT of facts about ethanol and how bad it is for the environment and other things, like taking away from our food supply.
You know we could do more to cut our dependency on foreign oil if we kept the oil gotten out of U.S. soil, here in the U.S. right? Most of our oil is sold to the highest bidder overseas which makes us have to get it from the middle east.
Corn based ethanol.....
-Fossil fuels used to plant the corn
-more fertilizer being used to produce more corn which leads to more contamination of water supply and oceans
-more fossil fuel used to harvest the corn
-more fossil fuel used to transport the corn to the refineries
-more fossil fuel used to transport to further refining (to be mixed with the gasoline)
-more fossil fuel used to transport to the stations
-no pipelines can be used in any of the transportation, like they can with regular gasoline, because it's too corrosive
-It takes AWAY FROM THE FOOD SUPPLY, which is raising the prices of corn based food to extreme levels.
-very harsh on fuel systems and engines, thus the needed changes to be able to use it without destroying every thing.
-Subsidized by ALL taxpayers so the price can remain competitive and incentive to produce it.
-Gets MUCH less MPG so you end up spending even more money for your fuel which is already a burden on a lot of families.
It's more susceptible to attracting moisture and it's more damaging.
Corn based ethanol and the current E85 is just a scam that's costing taxpayers and drivers more money and hurting our environment and food supply even more.
When you look at the whole picture, it's not pretty at all.
I converted a 2006 Hummer H2 and with a 50/50 blend, he gained 1.5 mpg. At least that is what his on demand, instrument cluster told him, during a 3 hour drive back to IN.
Plus, conversion kits run better than OEM, in my opinion. The 5+% increase is OEM spec, not aftermarket.
And MUCH less MPG is an overstament. It varies 5-20% with the larger SUVs and trucks on the high end. For a small car, it's closer to the lower end. If the national average for ethanol price is 15% cheaper, it's a wash and possible GAIN for small vehicles. The price is just going to go down in the long run. Some states, consumers buy it for $1/cheaper!
Also, that is untrue about not being able to use pipelines. Studies are being done right now. http://calibre.mworld.com/m/m.w?lp=GetStory&id=294181411
And check your owner guide. Most auto manufactures correctly point out that Methanol corrodes metal and damages plastic and metal, not Ethanol. All fuel, whether it's convention, reformulated, oxygenated should meet the same standards for volitility, octane, stability, corrosivity, etc, set by the ASTM.
...and lastly, you think big oil doesn't get subsidized? hello! that was a huge sticking point in the 2007 energy bill.
You been scammed by too much BS from GM and the ethanol people. Do your research before you believe everything you hear and read from people tied in with making money from it. You need to do a LOT of research.
10 cents cheaper is is a FAR cry from 15% cheaper. 4%^ cheaper in my area with a 23% reduction in fuel economy = CRAP that will not go in my tank.
Don't be brainwashed into believing it's all that. It's a scam and people that do their research can see it. Look at EVERYTHING involved, not just your situation. All the other environmental damage, etc. has to be figured in along with all the fossil fuel required to make it and transport it.
Studies don't mean jack bud. Studies are not real world actuality in what is happening.
Magellan Midstream Partners and Buckeye Partners Assessing $3B Dedicated Ethanol Pipeline System
20 February 2008
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/02/magellan-midstr.html#more
As far as OEM modifications, the 2008 OEM FFV F150 I drive, has only one component different in the fuel system - the fuel pump brushes. Everything else is the same.
Sorry your fuel is only 10 cents cheaper. Mine is 30-40 cents cheaper. The national avergae is 15% cheaper, which of course means some States are higher and some are lower. That's just a fact of supply and demand. More pumps will mean lower prices.
And as far as fuel mileage degredation, that varies too, based on size of vehicle and everything else that varies fuel mileage - vehicle technology, state of tune, ambient temperatures, head winds, road grade, tire pressure, use of air conditioners, and numerous other factors have an impact on fuel economy. How do you know you are comparing apples to apples? That's why the average degradation is such a huge spread -- 5% to 20%. Not every vehicle loses a huge amount of gas mileage when converted either. Most small vehicles with high compression engines show little to no difference in MPG. Certainly not enough for people to NOT use E85, because of the trade off they get in increased power. Otherwise, people wouldn't covert. Hunderd's of thousands of people have converted thier vehicles to burn E85 with no problems.
And as far as pollution, the gasoline industry makes the most cancer causing chemicals of any industry in the world. Technology for ethanol production is cleaner than in the past and those issues will be worked out. How much land & water pollution has Exxon Mobil created? Let's talk about that!
And the subsidies! Holy crap. $130 billion in the past 30 years for oil as compared to $11 billion for renewable fuels. PULEEZE!
Big business (Big 3) would rather you buy a new vehicle than convert your old one. And the government doesn't have a clue about the technology of today. Much of the crap they rely on was created back in the 70's when this technology didn't exist and gasohol was [non-permissible content removed] (and most likely included methanol - a HIGHLY corrosive alcohol).
BTUs contained in one US gallon of the following liquid fuel:
Gasoline 115,000
Ethanol 76,000
Propane 91,600
Petro Diesel 130,500
Fuel Oil #2 139,000
Fuel Oil #6 150,000
Obviously there are a lot of variables involved: state of tune of your engine, driving style etc., but all else being equal the laws of physics cannot be ignored.
Incidentally, the differences in the above liquids have a lot to do with the density of the substance..
Now if Ethanol could compete on price with gasoline without government subsidies that would be great. All we'd have to do is put a 30 gallone tank in our cars to get the 300-450 mile range we get now with gasoline. The fact is that economics and politics conspire to make ethanol a poor choice for auto fuel, and "putting perfume on a pig" won't change that..
Also, I carefully ran the numbers as I always do when I fill up...put in into my Excel spreadsheet. In my area, E85 was being sold for 40 cents less than 87 octane regular. With the reduced mileage from 16 mpg to 13 mpg, it works out thatn the E85 fuel costs right at 1 cent more per mile than gasoline.
I'll never use the stuff again. Besides, it's ridiculous for us to be consuming our foodstocks for fuel. It hurts everybody in the world.
'er y' go.
...from http://e85prices.com/e10-ethanol.htm
"The Reality of Ethanol Production
Contrary to the Oil Companies propaganda E85 isn't responsible for the rising costs of food or any other real or imagined issues. E85 is only 1% of total ethanol production and clearly isn't responsible for anything other than being a real alternative fuel for any American that chooses to fuel up with E85. There are around 1,400 Stations in the United States selling E85 using 80 million gallons of ethanol . That's an average of 4,700 gallons per Station per month. The United States would need 140,350 Stations (1 pump) in the United States selling E85 to use the current ethanol production of 8 Billion Gallons!
E85 Represents just 1% of all Ethanol For Vehicle Production
So where is all that Ethanol Production going then?.
As an Additive for Gasoline. We pay the Petroleum Companies (sometimes the ethanol companies get the subsidy..but generally the petro companies do the blending and gets the blending credit of 51 cents per gallon)
That's right, there is a blending credit of 51 cents for every gallon of ethanol blended with Gasoline.. which works very well when used as designed to build out the real alternative fuel.. E85.
When we end up paying the Oil Companies nearly 4 Billion a year (at current production levels) to blend just 10% ethanol to their gasoline product then it's time we re-evaluate the subsidies for ethanol blending, what levels of ethanol and who should get the credits.
E10 (90% Gasoline /10% ethanol = additive ..not an alternative fuel)
8 Billion Gallons Represents 99% of All Ethanol for Vehicles production.
Solutions to Increase E85 Production
If we are serious about getting E85 on the Market then clearly we need to :
1.Phase out ethanol subsidies for E10 unless that ethanol is produced from cellulosic material
2. Maintain ethanol subsidies for E85
3. Move the billions in credits we pay the oil companies to blend E10 to the installation of E85 pumps/tanks as well as installing blender pumps
4. Blender Pumps- are ideal in that it allows the retailer to offer blends from E10, E20, E30, E60, E85 as well as a unleaded product. It gives the consumer Choice and creating competition for each fuel..thus lowering the costs of all fuels.
It shifts the blenders credit closer to the retailer..which could then be ethanol company or an oil company.. moving the current blender credits away from oil and to the retail location would be the incentive.. ethanol and oil companies to install the blender pumps .
To get the credit they have to blend with blender pumps AT the retail level."
2. Maintain ethanol subsidies for E85
3. Move the billions in credits we pay the oil companies to blend E10 to the installation of E85 pumps/tanks as well as installing blender pumps
We do have some points of agreement. I think first the E10 mandate needs to be done away with. It costs the refiners more to make E10 even with the subsidy. It has to be hauled all over the country by truck or rail. Using E85 as an alternative for those that feel it is worthwhile is fine. I could even go along with the subsidy. If Congress is truly interested in alternative fuels they need to drop the 54 cent tariff on Brazilian Ethanol. That will allow the market determine if ethanol is worthwhile.
The way the current US ethanol business is run we are just robbing Peter to pay Paul and the Saudis are laughing all the way to the bank. Ethanol has not reduced our foreign oil consumption by ONE gallon.
Convert a what, Taurus? POS, toss it out. Seals are probably beat to hell and back. I wouldn't have even wasted my time or money with the conversion.
Anyone knows proper care and monitoring will be a good deterant for the wear and tear.
Your plan to make this work is a good example of why governments can never out plan the free market, and why they shouldn't try. You are just digging a deeper hole. Here is a clue. If you EVER have to use a "subsidy" you have already lost the battle for your government plan to be competitive with the free market.
For national security reasons only, we should be drilling, using our own oil, while we work hard to develop better transportation energy solutions. Nuclear power and hydrogen would be one approach but the progressives are afraid of nuclear power plants. While we haven't built a new nuclear power plant in almost 40 years, we still have 102 successfully operating plants, while China has scheduled the building of 300 nuclear power plants.
Nuclear plants could also address our water shortage in California, by conducting massive, energy intensive desalination operations all along the coast. But the greens are in control now, so ironically the "progressives" have pretty much curtailed any real technology progress.
Currently nationwide E85 is 16.9% less than RUG. The mileage difference is 28-30% less MPG with E85. You do the math on each 100 miles driven.
They need to keep ALL US oil in the US and reduce foreign dependency that way. Then work on REAL solutions for alternative energy.