More ethanol !

[micel]

Read article on gasBuddy.com, 02/11/09 posting. I wish I could use computer better so I could paste article.This is so important to us boaters b/c our engines are having issues running the allowed 10% ethanol now.

 

[Silvertip]

Re: More ethanol !

Come on folks -- stop with the panic already. We've been using ethanol blended fuel in Minnesota since 1997 and other than some issues with older engines this is simply not a problem. If you kept your fuel system clean over the years and switch to E10 you will notice no difference in running. Yes -- you might need to replace some rubber components that weren't ethanol tolerant in older engines. Rebuild the carbs and fuel pump and go boating. Serious engine problems are more than likely the result of crud that was loosened by the ethanol as it cleaned up a mucked up fuel system, plugged the carb and created a lean condition so you popped a piston. There is a very strong possibility that was about to happen anyway due to the gradual degradation of the fuel system. If you switch to E10, immediately change the fuel filter(s) and carry a couple of spares. After three or four tanks of fuel and frequent filter changes, if you've not noticed any issues, you are home free. If at any time you do have a running issue, for heaven's sake, fix the issue. Don't continue to run thinking it will get better as it likely will not. Many times inexperienced or money grubbing service agencies blame ethanol for engine damage that was really due to some other issue. Coastal areas seem to have more issues but they tend to have larger boats with larger fuel tanks hence moisture can be a problem. E10 will attack the adhesives used in the manufacture of fiberglass (not plastic) fuel tanks so that is a real issue.

 

[KurtG]

Re: More ethanol !

The switch contemplated I believe is allowing E15 or E20 where the max is currently E10 everywhere except in flex fuel vehicles (where E85 is allowed) and saying it is about the same as gasoline so there should not be any technology issues.

I had heard that there may be heat related issues for small engines (lawn mowers, etc)???

 

[micel]

Re: More ethanol !

Kurt,your exactly right.Tom Vilsack thinks that 10% ethanol is not enough,he is saying he wants a considerably higher % of ethanol in all gasoline.I know the impact that 10% has had here in S.Florida on boaters and what it has cost us.Now the feds just decide to raise it without any litigation. We boaters need to unite and get some lobbyists up there representing us. I do not remember being ask if I wanted 10% , the same will be true for 15 & 20% unless we speak up.

 

[Chris1956]

Re: More ethanol !

The owners manual for my '98 Johnny says that the motor is designed for up to 10% ethanol. I will guess that that means the rubber parts and gaskets can take it, without shortening their life. I wonder what a 20% mix would do to them?

Is the current gas oil fuel (aprox 60::1 using the OMS system)mix sufficient for 20% Ethanol, or is that not a concern?

 

[rolmops]

Re: More ethanol !

I am not so much worried about the mechanical aspects of using ethanol,but there is another problem that worries me.
It is a well known fact that ethanol,although it is a higher octane fuel than gasoline,only has about 66% of the effectiveness of gasoline.This means that ,with the same amount of gallons pumped,your action radius is less than with gasoline.With only 10% ethanol per tank this is not critical,but with 20 % it becomes an issue every time I go offshore.
On another note.I do not all feel that using ethanol which roughly costs 1.25 gallons of gasoline to produce one gallon of ethanol,is in any way environmentally responsible.
If America wants to subsidize our farmers,there are cheaper ways to do that.

 

[micel]

Re: More ethanol !

May I ask what action radius means ? You are correct that ethanol is helping the farmers out, corn and tillable acreage has gone almost doubled in the past three years in the mid-west,where it had stayed the same for 20 years.Do not get me wrong, I think the farmers deserve an profitable business,but just not at the cost of our boating.

 

[KurtG]

Re: More ethanol !

ethanol has a lower heat content, btu's, than gasoline, so it takes more ethanol to create the same amount of energy.

More simply, you need a larger gas tank to go the same distance.

The pentalty is pretty large for those burning E85 in flex fuel vehicles- never understood why one would do so voluntarily based on the price of E85 and gas. The math doesn't work.

oh, and in regard to octane, the refiners aren't giving it away, they can blend lower octane base gas to put the etahnol on top of. The octane at the pump will remain the same. Problem is, if there is an ethanol shortage (rail accident, flood, etc), you won't be able to burn the non-blended gas as the octane will be in the sub 85 range. Don't know how that helps energy security.

 

[pvanv]

Re: More ethanol !

Most vehicles in Brazil run on 100% ethanol. Of course, they have a surplus of sugar cane (not corn), and it does work, once the fuel systems are setup correctly (rubber that's tolerant to alcohol, etc.)

But, as was noted, there are a lot fewer BTU's per gallon in alcohol than gasoline. So you need to run a lot more alcohol than gas for the same performance. Alcohol-fueled race cars, for instance, have HUGE jets in the carburetors. Computerized motors (EFI machines) may be able to compensate, but for those of us with carbs, we will need to re-jet, or risk burning pistons.

 

[dingbat]

Re: More ethanol !

When all is said and done it's who get the money you pay at the pump.

We can continue to use alcohol as a supplemental form of energy and send 10% of our fuel cost to the American farmer of the Midwest. Or we can whine and complain about it and send 100% of the money outside our borders to people like our buddy Joes Chavez in Venezuela and our good buddies the Arabs in the Middle East.

I think I'll give up what little E-10 cost me to keep the money in AMERICA.

 

[KurtG]

Re: More ethanol !

The only difference I think I'd like to see is a that the base gas must be able to be used on it's own without ethanol. I don't like the thought of the midwest floods or a rail issue interrupting 10% of the supply and preventing 100% of it from being utilized.

The refiners save probably 1 cent per gallon making the suboctane blend stock. I think that shouldn't be allowed.

If worse comes to worse in a shortage or emergency, we should be able to burn the gas. We won't be able to if it is all suboctane as the market is moving now.

My understanding the reason being so refienrs can control the ethanol blending in their gas and the taxes and credits. It can't be an after the fact operation.

 

[Shizzy]

Re: More ethanol !

Come on folks -- stop with the panic already. We've been using ethanol blended fuel in Minnesota since 1997 and other than some issues with older engines this is simply not a problem. If you kept your fuel system clean over the years and switch to E10 you will notice no difference in running. Yes -- you might need to replace some rubber components that weren't ethanol tolerant in older engines. Rebuild the carbs and fuel pump and go boating. Serious engine problems are more than likely the result of crud that was loosened by the ethanol as it cleaned up a mucked up fuel system, plugged the carb and created a lean condition so you popped a piston. There is a very strong possibility that was about to happen anyway due to the gradual degradation of the fuel system. If you switch to E10, immediately change the fuel filter(s) and carry a couple of spares. After three or four tanks of fuel and frequent filter changes, if you've not noticed any issues, you are home free. If at any time you do have a running issue, for heaven's sake, fix the issue. Don't continue to run thinking it will get better as it likely will not. Many times inexperienced or money grubbing service agencies blame ethanol for engine damage that was really due to some other issue. Coastal areas seem to have more issues but they tend to have larger boats with larger fuel tanks hence moisture can be a problem. E10 will attack the adhesives used in the manufacture of fiberglass (not plastic) fuel tanks so that is a real issue.

I agree. I have run whatever gas came out of the pump in ALL types of vehicles and I have never had one issue. I have run it in cars as old as 1972, my outboard is a 1965 Johhny (new tank, hose and carb kit) both old and new motorcycles and all types of lawnmowers and snowblowers. as long as it says 87 Octane, ill run it.

 

[Silvertip]

Re: More ethanol !

Let's set the record straight here. None of the marine engine manufacturers recommend running anything more than 10% ethanol blended fuel. If you do use 20% (don't know where that is even sold) since none of the car manufactures recommend that either unless you happen to drive a Flex Fuel vehicle (as I do). Unless you actually run a flex fuel vehicle let's not be throwing numbers around that are unsubstantiated. Here is the economic issue with E10. It is being mandated, not because it is cheaper to produce and not because it is more economical to use. It is mandated by the government (federal and state). If you don't like it, don't keep electing those that spend your money in a way you don't like. Then blame yourself as well. Ethanol plants are closing at a remarkable rate here in Minnesota. Why? Because the American car buying public is fickle. When gas is high we dump our big vehicles, take a beating on it, and go in hock to buy a small car. Then when fuel comes down, we take a beating dumping our small car to take another beating buying a big one again. I see it over and over. Why not just buy what you actually need for 75% of your use and be happy. I love these cycles because it allows me to take advantage of them. I just bought a GMC Yukon dirt cheap and got top buck for my S-10 crew cab. My use for this vehicle is towing a walleye boat and a pontoon so fuel economy is not an issue for me. Because gas is cheap and E-85 is now just 10 - 20 cents a gallon cheaper than E-10 so because of the small difference in fuel cost, those of us with flex fuel vehicles don't use it because of the difference in fuel economy. When E-10 was $4.00+/gallon last summer E-85 was 70 - nearly 80 cents a gallon cheaper than E-10. At that difference, it pays to use it provided you actually do the math and drive like you have an egg under your foot. Flex Fuel vehicles know when they are running on E-85 so the engine management system can advance the ignition timing to take advantage of the increased octane. The net result is better performance (as in acceleratioin) but at the cost of fuel economy. As for the difference between E-10 and regular (unblended) fuel, the difference in fuel economy is very small. Unless you have a huge boat, with huge engine(s), the difference to most recreational boaters is negligable. When Minnesota switched to E-10 eleven going on 12 years ago I had a 1995 Evinrude on my walleye boat. Some ten years later that engine was still running like new but I thought it was time to rebuild the carbs. I was amazed how clean they were. So much for E-10 causing problems. As for fuel economy, I've driven GM vehicles since 1955 and since MPG ratings have been applied I have not had one that I couldn't reach that number. In fact, my 06 Impala exceeds the 30 MPG rating regularly on E-10 and has no trouble getting 26 on E-85. While the nay-sayers for E-85 claim a 30% drop in MPG, for this car that would be 21 MPG. You can't pour that much fuel through this car and the only time I've ever seen anything below 20 MPG is during extremely cold weather where that tank of fuel never saw an out of town trip.

 

[KurtG]

Re: More ethanol !

EPA has E85 and gas range numbers. The numbers following Gas and E85 below. I took the Yukon as an example since it was listed in this thread. There is a pretty big economy hit of ~25%.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/feg2000.htm

GMC
Yukon 1500 2WD A-4 5.3/8 14/20 $1,725 Gas 390/540
11/15 $3,524 E85 290/410
Yukon XL 1500 2WD A-4 5.3/8 14/20 $1,725 Gas 390/540
11/15 $3,524 E85 290/410

AAA has E85/gasoline conversion prices on their site:
http://www.fuelgaugereport.com/

Regular E85 **E85 MPG/BTU adjusted price
Current Avg. $1.961 $1.694 $2.229
Yesterday Avg. $1.952 $1.685 $2.218
Month Ago Avg. $1.792 $1.582 $2.082
Year Ago Avg. $2.979 $2.494 $3.28

As you can see, when adjusted for fuel economy, E85 costs more than gas; today, yesterday, last month, and last year.


The move from E10 to E15 or E20 is being pushed by the state of MN and the ethanol lobby saying that mid grade blends are the same as E10 and that there should be no difference. If EPA makes such a finding those levels above E10 will be allowed in ALL vehicles and motors, not just flex fuel vehicles.

 

[erikgreen]

Re: More ethanol !

There were a lot of problems in MN when the switch happened to people who hadn't kept their boats as clean as possible, or who stored them in situations where condensation could happen easily. I think people with steel fuel tanks fared the worst... all the corrosion got cleaned off and sent through the engine. But a switch from 10 to 20 percent ethyl isn't a big deal now engine-wise for us.

Depending on how old your fuel tank is, it may make sense to replace it before you start using ethanol fuel.

Eth use is a problem in that its major benefit is cleaner air in the area of use, and a false sense of "green driving". As others have mentioned, US ethanol is made from corn, which means fuel production is now competing with food production for raw materials, driving up costs for both, and ethanol from corn costs more energy to make than it produces... that would be acceptable pollution wise if it was made using nuclear, wind, or other non fossil fuel power, but it's made using petroleum products.

So essentially we're paying extra money and generating virtually the same pollution overall to get the same amount of usable energy in our vehicles and boats, plus we're driving up food costs and creating a false economy based on farmers profiting from growing the raw materials, which will be the source of another "Crisis" or "crash" when we finally stop using eth-boosted fuels in favor of a real fossil fuel replacement.

As someone said, there are cheaper ways to subsidize farmers.

But yeah, it's not a huge problem for most boaters. If you're dependent on that last 20 percent capacity of your tank to get to a fueling station, then you should carry a reserve tank on deck.

Erik

 

[rolmops]

Re: More ethanol !

May I ask what action radius means ? You are correct that ethanol is helping the farmers out, corn and tillable acreage has gone almost doubled in the past three years in the mid-west,where it had stayed the same for 20 years.Do not get me wrong, I think the farmers deserve an profitable business,but just not at the cost of our boating.

Action radius is an air force expression. It simply means the maximum distance you can fly (in our case navigate) in a given direction and still have enough fuel to enter (combat) action and return to base

 

[Dhadley]

Re: More ethanol !

We've seen a lot of E10 related issues around here. Reps from Evinrude and Yamaha both talked to dealers about E10 issues at the AMTECH meeting in January. There are real and perceived issues. And yes, mileage is worse with E10.

The bottom line is - if you even think E10 is harmful or bad for your boat, don't buy it. Simply get gas without ethanol. Period. Both on-water marinas here have it and all the BP stations have ethanol free fuel.

 

[erikgreen]

Re: More ethanol !

The bottom line is - if you even think E10 is harmful or bad for your boat, don't buy it. Simply get gas without ethanol. Period. Both on-water marinas here have it and all the BP stations have ethanol free fuel.

I'm pretty sure in MN we can't get ethanol free fuel at gas stations any more, it's required by law. We can at a marina, but who with a trailerable boat wants to pay $1.50 more per gallon there?

 

[Dhadley]

Re: More ethanol !

The marinas fuel around here is about 50-60 cents higher than "cheapie" stations. The BP fuel is about 10% higher than the "cheapie" stations. Seems like they've figured out the your mileage is about 10% less so the non-ethanol fuel costs 10% more.

 

[micel]

Re: More ethanol !

I checked for non-ethanol fuel here in SE Florida and had no luck. From what I was told all gasoline is the same now that comes into the port,although at one time amaco gold was different. Supposedly the additive packages are the only differences in the fuel.I was told this by a delivery truck driver that had been at the port for nearly 30 years. Being a organic chemist I find this interesting, but why would he lie and I had been told that before a few years back.