Home » Public Forums » GMCnet » Ethanol article
| Ethanol article [message #97540] |
Fri, 27 August 2010 17:56  |
Bob de Kruyff
Messages: 4260
Registered: January 2004
Location: Chandler, AZ
Karma: 1
|
Senior Member |
|
|
This is still hovering around--we think we have problems now!
By David Shepardson
Aug. 26, 2010
Weeks before the Obama administration is set to decide whether to allow higher blends of ethanol, automakers and a broad range of other groups are asking Congress to intervene.
The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers -- a trade group representing Detroit's Big Three automakers, Toyota Motor Corp. and seven others -- and the Association of International Automobile Manufacturers joined 36 other groups in asking Congress to hold hearings before the Environmental Protection Agency decides whether to approve ethanol blends of up to 15 percent for vehicle use. A decision by the EPA is expected by the end of September.
"We believe that many important questions remain before EPA can make this decision," the consortium of groups wrote.
"EPA has not released information about the mid-level blend's impact on different types of road and non-road engines, nor has it released information about how it will prevent harm to consumers from 'misfueling' their engines with the incorrect blend."
Other signers have a variety of worries: Environmental groups fret about the impact of boosting ethanol use; the National Turkey Federation and American Meat Institute are concerned that diverting more corn to ethanol will boost feed prices.
And engine producers -- including snowmobile, lawn care equipment and boating manufacturers -- worry that the higher ethanol blends will damage engines.
Late last month, three farm groups called on EPA to approve E12 -- or 12 percent ethanol -- as an interim step.
The American Coalition for Ethanol, National Corn Growers Association and the Renewable Fuels Association "encourage the EPA to formally approve the use of E12 for all motor vehicles as an immediate interim step pending any ongoing additional testing on E15."
Congress has directed the use of nearly 12 billion gallons of ethanol this year, and 36 billion gallons by 2022.
Most pumps already sell E10, which is 10 percent ethanol.
But automakers warn that a higher ethanol blend could boost greenhouse gas emissions, damage engines or disable vehicles.
In addition, increased ethanol blends could corrode engines that aren't specifically built for E15.
Charles Territor, a spokesman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, said EPA should base its decision on "sound science not on political expediency."
He warned the decision could impact all 245 million vehicles on the roads.
"We need to make sure that Congress is fully aware and the EPA gets it right," he said.
Bob de Kruyff
78 Eleganza
Chandler, AZ
|
|
|
|
| Re: Ethanol article [message #97555 is a reply to message #97540] |
Fri, 27 August 2010 19:27  |
|
|
You know I converted an 88 mustang to run E-85 and drove it for 5k miles before I chipped the ecm to allow me to run both gasoline and E-85. Unfortunately this lead to a blown head gaskit, when I forgot to turn down the boost when I dropped in a tank of 91 piss gas. See E-85 has a minimum octane of 105 so running 20# of boost on 91 isn't a good idea.... Anyhow the car loved e-85 and it wasn't designed for it either. When I replaced the HG the cylinder head was nice and clean and no carbon deposits. The stuff runs clean and its way cheaper then C16....
73 Canyon Lands, (a.k.a. The Yellow Submarine) West Los Angeles CA
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Ethanol article [message #97579 is a reply to message #97571] |
Fri, 27 August 2010 22:57 |
|
|
I don't really know, I did it when 91 was about 4.89 a gallon. E85 was only at 1 station near my job and was 3.49 so it was way cheaper even with the 20% hit in mileage. But the real reason I did it was I could only run 13# of boost on 91 and I still got some detonation, but I could run 20# on E85. That was the limit I could run on 46 pph injectors, for more boost I would have needed larger squirters.
The cost of the conversion was not much, 120 dollars for converted CFI injectors. With the hardware swap you didn't need to chip it since the injectors were exactly right size. But to run gasoline again I needed a chip and a programmer that set me back another 150 but gave me the ability to change timing to an RS450 timing curve to take advantage of E85, and change the injector slope for gas if ethanol was not available.
My savings over premium was probably a wash because of the milage drop. But to get race fuel that is 105 octane would cost 9 ars a gallon so when compared to that E85 is dirt cheap!
| Charles wrote on Fri, 27 August 2010 21:20 |
Shan,
How long will it take to recoupe the cost of conversion.
Charles
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
73 Canyon Lands, (a.k.a. The Yellow Submarine) West Los Angeles CA
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Ethanol article [message #97608 is a reply to message #97579] |
Sat, 28 August 2010 07:01 |
Charles
Messages: 455
Registered: January 2004
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Shan,
Since we're already having trouble with the 10% junk,
I was more concerned about the cost of change on a GMC
motorhome. As our illustrious government increases
the ethanol it's going to kill our GMC's. Looks like the only
way to keep them on the road will be to upgrade to fuel
injection and replace all rubber with ethanol compatible
material. Looks like maybe $3000.00 + to do the job,
right ???????
Charles
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Charles Wersal
Duncanville, Texas
26 foot 1975 Glenbrook
Pandora's Box
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Ethanol article [message #97621 is a reply to message #97540] |
Sat, 28 August 2010 09:24 |
Steven Ferguson
Messages: 3447
Registered: May 2006
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
It will take me days to defrost after reading this.
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 3:56 PM, Bob de Kruyff <NEXT2POOL@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
> This is still hovering around--we think we have problems now!
>
> By David Shepardson
> Aug. 26, 2010
>
> Weeks before the Obama administration is set to decide whether to allow higher blends of ethanol, automakers and a broad range of other groups are asking Congress to intervene.
>
> The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers -- a trade group representing Detroit's Big Three automakers, Toyota Motor Corp. and seven others -- and the Association of International Automobile Manufacturers joined 36 other groups in asking Congress to hold hearings before the Environmental Protection Agency decides whether to approve ethanol blends of up to 15 percent for vehicle use. A decision by the EPA is expected by the end of September.
> "We believe that many important questions remain before EPA can make this decision," the consortium of groups wrote.
>
> "EPA has not released information about the mid-level blend's impact on different types of road and non-road engines, nor has it released information about how it will prevent harm to consumers from 'misfueling' their engines with the incorrect blend."
>
> Other signers have a variety of worries: Environmental groups fret about the impact of boosting ethanol use; the National Turkey Federation and American Meat Institute are concerned that diverting more corn to ethanol will boost feed prices.
>
> And engine producers -- including snowmobile, lawn care equipment and boating manufacturers -- worry that the higher ethanol blends will damage engines.
>
> Late last month, three farm groups called on EPA to approve E12 -- or 12 percent ethanol -- as an interim step.
>
> The American Coalition for Ethanol, National Corn Growers Association and the Renewable Fuels Association "encourage the EPA to formally approve the use of E12 for all motor vehicles as an immediate interim step pending any ongoing additional testing on E15."
>
> Congress has directed the use of nearly 12 billion gallons of ethanol this year, and 36 billion gallons by 2022.
>
> Most pumps already sell E10, which is 10 percent ethanol.
>
> But automakers warn that a higher ethanol blend could boost greenhouse gas emissions, damage engines or disable vehicles.
>
> In addition, increased ethanol blends could corrode engines that aren't specifically built for E15.
>
> Charles Territor, a spokesman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, said EPA should base its decision on "sound science not on political expediency."
>
> He warned the decision could impact all 245 million vehicles on the roads.
>
> "We need to make sure that Congress is fully aware and the EPA gets it right," he said.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Bob de Kruyff
> 78 Eleganza
> Chandler, AZ
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> List Information and Subscription Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
--
Steve Ferguson
'76 EII
Sierra Vista, AZ
Urethane bushing source
www.bdub.net/ferguson/
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Ethanol article [message #97638 is a reply to message #97608] |
Sat, 28 August 2010 12:09 |
|
|
Have you ever wondered why most fuel companies put 10% ethanol in their gas even if its not required in that area? its because they get a $.50 a gallon tax credit to do so. Personally I think E-10 is a waste of time, since the hit in mileage to go to full E-85 is only a little more, and if you build an engine with E-85 in mind you can make the most out of the fuels lighter BTU content, since it has stupid high octane! an engine optimized for E-85 should be running about 12:1 compression. Current flex fuel engines and gasoline motors converted to run waste a lot of potential efficientcy with an alcohol based fuel because of the low compression needed to run standard pumpcrap gas.
As for converting a GMC to be flexfuel, it wouldnt be too bad, you would need one of the MS2 or later based EFI controllers, these are relatively inexpensive, but you have to build it yourself. MS2 has provisions for using a GM flexfuel sensor. You would need 2 in the tank fuel pumps and wiring, im sure some kind of solution can be made using mens mall parts. using stainless steel fuel line which can be had from summit for about $55 for 20 feet, and you will need a second fuel selector valve to route the return line back to the selected tank. and you would need to eliminate any rubber soft connections.
If you do the work yourself and all the leg work you should be able to go to EFI for much less then $3k, now if you buy a ready built system that is another story 3-4k is to be expected there...
I have given this some thought, but right now the only practical use I see for E-85 is in highboost applications that would call for expensive leaded racing gas. Our main problem in this country is we have assclown politicians making decisions based on what feels good, and paying back who paid for their election. If we were really serious about ethanol as a suitible replacement for gasoline we would do what is done in Brazil and mak it from sugarcaine and other fast growing products. biomass ethanol could also be made on a large scale. but the corn lobby is very powrful in this country and corn is not the most economical way to produce ethanol, and is a main source of food products. Using the proper source like in brazil, ethanol should be less then a dollar a gallon to produce. You could eliminate the expensive subsidies for both corn and ethanol, and let the market decide! the cheapness of sugar based ethanol over petroleum fuel would drive more people to use that, the result would also be a lower cost for gasoline since demand would be less, basically it would lower the cost of energy across the board.
But I think the last people who understand the basic concept of supply and demand, as well as competition, somehow always wind up working for the government in policy making positions...
| Charles wrote on Sat, 28 August 2010 07:01 |
Shan,
Since we're already having trouble with the 10% junk,
I was more concerned about the cost of change on a GMC
motorhome. As our illustrious government increases
the ethanol it's going to kill our GMC's. Looks like the only
way to keep them on the road will be to upgrade to fuel
injection and replace all rubber with ethanol compatible
material. Looks like maybe $3000.00 + to do the job,
right ???????
Charles
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
73 Canyon Lands, (a.k.a. The Yellow Submarine) West Los Angeles CA
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Tue Sep 24 03:34:02 CDT 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01143 seconds
|
GMCforum
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
