Warnings Not to Use ‘E15’ Gas in Your Car | Fox Business Video

[KingFish]

Ford flex fuel cars go up to E85 and look more like this http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi..._Ford_&_GM.jpg The E10-15 cars are just the standard fare. Most fuel lines are made of plastic as compared to the organic rubber that gets eat up by the ethanol. Ford loves alt fuels. Just this model years the C-Max, -Max Energi plug in, and the all electric Focus have all been released.

[bhearts]

i like blkfordsedans comment. stating that weve been using the stuff for years and no one has complained. this whole "magical" discovery reminds me of the big fat scare back in the 90s. when everyone wanted lowfat-fatfree foods (which are replaced with high glycemic carbs). look what happened to us... looks like fat wasnt the enemy. same can be said about ethanol. e85 could be one of the best inventions for racers since...well....turbos i guess. if youre afraid of your engine prematurely wearing out, then fill up with e85 and add some upper cylinder lube. did you guys know they make grape smelling ucl. makes it smell like grapes coming out your exhaust pipe.

[bhearts]

http://compare.ebay.com/like/200339158425?var=lv&ltyp=AllFixedPriceItemTypes&var=sbar

[sketchman]

Haha. I read Flex and assumed (given the context of the discussion) that he meant Flex Fuel. I see now. I'm all for alt fuels too, but not turning our food into them. Electric is good, just not good enough yet. I'm sure they're holding back to max profits, though. That's just the way of business.

[DriverOne]

Re: Warnings Not to Use ‘E15’ Gas in Your Car | Fox Business Video

I have heard that you can actually turn trash into fuel.

[lessersivad]

Hmmm..., I found this info;

1 gallon of E85 has 73% to 83% of the energy of one gallon gasoline (variation due to ethanol content inE85). 1 gallon of E10 has 96.7% if the energy of one gallon of

gasoline.[2]

[2]

E85 is a high‐level gasoline‐ethanol blend containing 51% to 83% ethanol, depending on geography and season. Ethanol content is lower in winter months in cold climates to ensure a vehicle starts. Based

on composition, E85's lower heating value varies from 83,950 to 95,450 Btu/gal. This equates to 73% to 83% the heat content of gasoline.



From this site;


http://www.afdc.energy.gov/pdfs/afv_info.pdf

There are also other fuels listed such as gasoline, diesel, biodiesel, propane, etc.

[skimsucka]

so wish this was in the arena

[KingFish]

The real money is in the Eco-Boost. Turbo charged, direct injected, variable cam timing. Instant torque excellent fuel mileage and low emissions. This is the tech that is going to dominate the market for the next few years. And with the turbo and cam controls, adjusting for E-85 should present little problem.

Not to mention that we now have a 250+ hp Focus RT thanks to this tech.

[Bert]

Hmmm..., I found this info;

[/SIZE][/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT]From this site;


http://www.afdc.energy.gov/pdfs/afv_info.pdf

There are also other fuels listed such as gasoline, diesel, biodiesel, propane, etc.

Excellent reference, and from US Dept of Energy, no less. BTUs (British thermal units) per gallon: Diesel; 128.5, gasoline; 117, propane; 85, ethanol; 76, natural gas; 75. What this tells me is that gasoline has 91% of the available energy, per unit volume, of diesel fuel whereas pure ethanol is only 59% as 'energetic' as diesel. And pure ethanol only produces 65% of the energy, per unit volume, of gasoline.
To put this in some perspective; liquid Propane is 73% as 'energetic' as gasoline. Western countries (for sure Ottawa, Ontario, Canada and many European Countries) were all abuzz about Propane as a 'wonder fuel' back in the early 1970s and there were numerous gov't incentives to convert taxi and commercial fleet vehicles over at the time. Huge numbers of municipal and federal vehicles were also adapted. There were minor carb modifications involved (and most vehicles were rigged to be dual fuel capable via a manual changeover switch) but installing numerous pressure cylinders (think BBq tanks) over and above the standard gas tank was quite a bit of work. But that whole 'futuristic energy' movement died out very quickly (within 3 years) when drivers and owners discovered that they were driving underpowered (ie 27% more so!) vehicles and/or had to upgrade to bigger engines just to keep up.
If E85 does in fact constitute 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline (Dept of Energy suggests that lower proportions of E are used in the winter months) then my math suggests that loss of available energy per unit volume over pure gasoline is for all intents and purposes 30%. This nearly duplicates the previous dismal 'experiments' with propane. Today's computer-controlled fuel injection technology may well be able to effectively counter power loss, via increase in fuel consumption (30%?), but your average Joe isn't going to buy into this scheme until E85 becomes at least 30% cheaper at the pumps.

[lessersivad]

Bert said;

" but your average Joe isn't going to buy into this scheme until E85 becomes at least 30% cheaper at the pumps."

I think I may disagree with the "average Joe" not buying into the scheme. I fear we have a LOT of "sheeple" that can't do the research or math.

They concern themselves with the perceived cheaper price on the pump or what the "gang greenies" tell them are the wonderful aspects of the fuel.

Nevermind that there is fossil fueled equipment planting and harvesting the "wonder fuel" or the petroleum it takes to haul it to and from the ethanol plant.

No, we cannot concern ourselves with the whole process, that's too much bother and information. "It's green, it's renewable, it's grown HERE", is all you are going to hear from most of the media and "gang greenies".

Now granted the whole scheme is great for the farmers, who I respect. When they are able to get great prices per bushel compaired to 5-10 years ago. Unfortunately fuel, fertilizer, and seed corn have also gone up during this period.

I was talking to one farmer and he told me he was actually making more money when corn was going for $2.00- $2.50 a bushel than at $6.00-$6.75. Reason being, higher "input costs".


But hey, the "gang greenies" are the same type of people who believe you can use an electric motor to power a generator and get more out than you put in. Let's not concern ourselves with the losses involved in converting power used to get the power. "IT WORKS". " I can power a light bulb from this electric motor powered genrator and it lights the bulb. Now I'm going to power the whole house and get rid of the electric company".

Does anyone see the flaw in this plan?

Just my 2¢.

[KingFish]

OK. This conversation is not about tech anymore, it has gone to the same name calling place everything here goes.

[DriverOne]

Re: Warnings Not to Use ‘E15’ Gas in Your Car | Fox Business Video

So the other day I filled up with non-ethanol fuel, 87 octane. Since then the car has driven better than on 10E, just overall. Watch my MPG average on these next two tanks. If I get 37 or better (I have the '88 carby model with the magnetic gas pedal), the fuel has paid for itself at roughly $0.19/gal increase. Keeping the broad spectrum of the world out of things, I'll just keep buying non-ethanol gas, and enjoy the fuel mileage.

[Bert]

OK. This conversation is not about tech anymore, it has gone to the same name calling place everything here goes.

Maybe I should have said 'the average Bert is not going to buy into that scheme'

[bhearts]

yeah, theres a couple plants in the world that can take household waste and turn it. like wasted house wood, and grass clipping and leaves and such.

[DriverOne]

Re: Warnings Not to Use ‘E15’ Gas in Your Car | Fox Business Video

Then I have a solution: All the trimmings that the DOT would normally leave on the side of the road could be taken up and processed as fuel, the cleanup from forest fires as well, the electric companies' tree waste, Christmas tree waste, yard waste, all that stuff could be taken to a fuel plant instead of the dump.