Is E 85 Gas really the solution advertised???

Greetings Fellow Readers,

Just saw this new article on E 85 gasoline. For myself - I've been not a supporter of E 85 gas and all the advertising we see about it. But instead of opinions - here is more substantial facts both pro and ocn on the topic:

Below this line is the article info:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

http://netscape.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Columns/articleId=109914

Inside StoryE-mail

Gas and Alcohol Really Do Mix: Is E85 the Answer to Easing the Oil Crisis? The President Thinks So.
Date posted: 04-10-2006

On the last day of January, President Bush delivered his "addicted to oil" speech. Coming from an oilman president, this is akin to Milton S. Hershey warning us that we're addicted to chocolate, but this administration does not seem much interested in irony.

Anyway, President Bush said it is time for the United States to "move beyond a petroleum-based economy and make our dependence on Middle Eastern oil a thing of the past." He asked Congress to fund a 22-percent increase in federal energy research to focus on several strategies, including ethanol, which is typically made from corn but can also be made from agricultural waste and other sources. "Our goal is to make this new kind of ethanol practical and competitive within six years," he said.

In other words: Let's pay Farmer Brown rather than Sheik Bin Lootin.

Since then, alcohol is the overnight success story that was decades in the making. There's a lot to like about alcohol. True, it's more corrosive than gasoline — I mean, have you seen Teddy Kennedy? — but manufacturers seem able to build fuel delivery systems and engines that can run happily for a long time on heavy doses of alcohol. It's the fuel of choice in Brazil, which makes Brazil our template for two things: running cars on ethanol and swimsuit design.

The fuel Bush was talking about is E85, so called because it's 85-percent alcohol, 15-percent gasoline. (Or, for Senator Kennedy, "170 proof.")

Why do we need the 15-percent gasoline? Because the alcohol is less volatile, and the gasoline helps the engine start and idle, especially in cold weather. Diesel engines can run on E95, which has just 5-percent gasoline.

Corn or, as we call it, "maize"
The alcohol in ethanol is produced from grain in a process that is similar — fermentation and all — to distilling alcohol for drinking. But there's a new ethanol plant in Louisiana that, when completed, should be able to make ethanol from rice hulls and bagasse, which is what's left over from harvesting sugar cane, as well as from rice straw, which is residue after rice harvesting. Disposing of rice straw costs California farmers as much as $18 million a year. Among the 30-odd ethanol plants under construction are some that could make alcohol from municipal solid waste, which is more plentiful even than rice straw.

Corn, though, is the current crop of choice. How much corn to make how much alcohol? According to the National Ethanol Vehicle Coalition, "One bushel of corn produces about 2.7 gallons of ethanol, 11.4 pounds of gluten feed (which is 20-percent protein), 3 pounds of gluten meal (60-percent protein) and 1.6 pounds of corn oil."

At most pumps, E85 costs about the same as regular gasoline, but the price should drop when government subsidies kick in and production rises. Illinois, for instance, charges sales tax on gasoline but not on E85.

E85 is similar enough to gasoline — but burns cleaner — so the changes required to make an engine compatible with either E85 or pure gasoline are simple and inexpensive. These flexible-fuel vehicles, or FFVs, can run on gas, E85 or any combination of the two.

Do you already own an FFV?
None of this is new, as there are about 5 million FFVs already on the road, everything from trucks and SUVs to family sedans from Chevrolet, Chrysler, Dodge, Ford and GMC. There are a handful of other FFVs on the road from Isuzu, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz, Mercury and Nissan. How do you find out if you have one? Log onto e85fuel.com, which is hosted by the National Ethanol Vehicle Coalition, and click on the "Is your vehicle compatible?" link. If you are in doubt, there's even a guide that uses your vehicle's identification number to tell you if it is an FFV.

So what's the downside to E85? The central problem is that a tank of E85, despite having a slightly higher octane rating, just doesn't have as much energy as a tank of gasoline, so your miles-per-gallon declines. According to the EPA, a new Ford Crown Victoria FFV with a 4.6-liter V8 engine is rated at 17 mpg in the city, 25 mpg on the highway on gasoline. On E85, that mileage drops to 12 mpg in the city, 18 mpg on the highway. With a Nissan Titan — the only Japanese-brand E85-capable vehicle listed — city/highway mileage is 14/18 on gas, 10/13 on E85. The Dodge Caravan with the 3.3-liter V6 gets 19/26 on gas, 13/17 on E85.

Also at e85fuel.com, you'll find what could be considered another downside of E85 — a state-by-state list showing where you can buy it, and can't. Mostly can't. Ford says about 500 out of 180,000 filling stations in the United States sell E85. The vast majority is in the Corn Belt — which includes Illinois, Indiana and Missouri — but more pumps are being added daily, part of a joint push involving the government, auto manufacturers and fuel companies.

According to e85fuel.com, more than a dozen states have no E85 outlets, and many others have E85 pumps that aren't accessible to the public, only to government agencies. Florida, for instance, has two pumps — one at Kennedy Space Center, the other at an air force base — but you can't use them. Texas has five outlets, but only one, in San Antonio, is open to the public. California has four outlets, with just one in San Diego that's accessible to civilians.

But Missouri, home to the National Ethanol Vehicle Coalition — and lots of corn farmers — has 25 outlets, with 24 open to the public. Illinois has more than 100.

American as apple pie, if pie used corn
Some manufacturers, particularly Ford and General Motors, are solidly on the E85 bandwagon, and both assembled elaborate ethanol presentations for the Chicago auto show, which took place just two weeks after Bush's speech. Ford says that during the 2006 model year, it will build 250,000 FFVs. GM thinks it can sell 400,000 FFVs a year.

Currently, E85 is pretty much the domain of U.S. brands, putting them ahead — in this area, at least — of the Japanese, Koreans and Europeans.

But given that — at present anyway — E85 gives you worse mileage than gasoline, those U.S. manufacturers are counting on at least a little home-team support, as well as sentiment that would allow you to pay more if you could contribute to cleaner air and reduce dependence on foreign oil.

On that, even George Bush and Ted Kennedy can agree.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Above this line ends the article

One last comment from me - pipelines, containering etc. are all major issues with handling alcohol based fuels. Whether its terminals, pipelines, or gas stations or transfer locations - E85 requires special handling that other fuels do not. Are current vehicles gas pumps and gas lines "really" able to adequately handle the rigors of this "solutions"?

If you have questions about E85 - here is a great site about it - however remember - this site supports the use of E 85 - so it may not show the "whole story" :)

http://www.e85fuel.com/index.php

E85 has potential. I posted somewhere else here (can't remember where) that I was worried what large scale use of corn for ETOH production would do to meat prices b/c most animals have a corn based diet. But apparently, there is large scale research going into making ETOH from yard waste, prarie grass, and other less expensive items. Here in NC, they have been working on making it from the solid waste from hog farms and selling the remainder as fertilizer. I also found out that the leftovers from the production of the ETOH from corn is still usable as a feed. I think it just leaves the protein and strips out the carbs. Can anybody say atkins?

Hog farmers would love to be able to produce this stuff and sell it as fuel, or just to use it in their own equipment without taxes and such.

The other problem is related to farm subsidies with corn. No one knows how much it really costs the country to make ETOH from corn because of the huge amount of money the US govt gives to farmers to grow/not grow certian crops each year really distorts the true value of corn. I was talking to my dad (farmer) the other weekend and he said there is concern that corn prices could be going far higher because of the increased use of/interest in E85.

The problem is the same as we had with HDTV. Nobody was making shows in HD because nobody had the TV's that would show them. Nobody made the tv's because there was no need for them without programming. There just are not enough flex fuel vehicles on the road yet. I wish my truck would run E85, I'd give it a try if it was significantly less expensive.

If alternative production methods (non corn) can be made viable, I think it could go a long way to reducing our reliance on oil and that would be great. But, they better do lots of testing to make darn sure it will not hurt these flex fuel vehicles either, I mean ETOH is corrosive stuff to some plastics.

I think E85 has real potential. It may have down sides, but so does gasoline. At least automakers are starting to look at other options that would reduce the dependency on oil.

At crismas last my friend in rockford,ill was filling up at 1.76 a gallon (e85) while i ,visiting with out the flex motor had to buy gas at 3.30. he's consistantly geting 14-15 in a 5.3 half ton suberban..say what you want but ill gladdly fill my tank if i could for 1.76 a gallon anyday. Im lucky to get 18 a gal with my 4.8...jj

At crismas last my friend in rockford,ill was filling up at 1.76 a gallon (e85) while i ,visiting with out the flex motor had to buy gas at 3.30. he's consistantly geting 14-15 in a 5.3 half ton suberban..say what you want but ill gladdly fill my tank if i could for 1.76 a gallon anyday. Im lucky to get 18 a gal with my 4.8...jj

I think we would all be willing to use it if we could get it for half the price of regular gas, that's impressive. I know I would use it till it's gone if my truck would run it. That's not really a big decrease in mileage either compared to some of the stories I've heard. On campus at NCSU, one of the professors has a flex fuel Ford Explorer. According to him, on E85 he gets 7 to 9 mpg and on gasoline he gets 15 to 18 mpg. In this case, you just as well be using gas, because it is going to cost the same either way. The only upside here is that it is not payin the saudis.

White Lightening,

You are correct in saying that e85 is not perfect. In fact, Hydrogen or electrical powered cars would probably be the best, they will have no polluting emissions at all. But the technology for these are still in development. Also, the main problem with these two are, we need electricity to produce hydrogen and we need a lot of electricity to power electric cars, yet we still produce most of our electricity from burning coal. So we are still creating more pollution.

I kind of look at ethanol as a stepping stone to a better system. Ethanol can be used with our current level of technology, does not cost much more to produce and keeps US dollars in the US. It is true that ethanol is not the ideal solution but a step in the right direction.

I kind of look at ethanol as a stepping stone to a better system. Ethanol can be used with our current level of technology, does not cost much more to produce and keeps US dollars in the US.

Actually, - my understanding is - that the cost to actually produce ethanol is considerable. It takes large sums of Natural Gas and/or methane gas to produce ethanol - and we don't have ample supplies of either of those (ng or methane). I'm told that right now - if E85 was not subsidized - it would cost between $4.40 and $5.00 a gallon to produce - and lets remember - this is based on not additional demand on the raw components to produce it.

Unless other sources of material to produce ethanol are found - I believe the price and cost will soar. Look at pellet stoves. The pellet manufacturers used to get the raw materials for free - now - they must pay for them as demand increased to some extent. A 40 pound pag of pellets used to cost $1.50 to $1.75 and now the same bag size for the same quality costs $4.45 to $4.95.

But my greatest concern about ethanol - beyond the fact we (our taxes) are subsidizing it) - beyond the fact that the economics of corn are better used on other things - beyond m.p.g. decreases - is that ethanol is so very very corrosive that pipeline companies can not normally transfer the product thru normal lines and normal process. Literally ethanol must be "final" mixed at terminal and transport trucks require special cleaning after use. Why? Because it is not oil based - but alcohol based. It doesn't have lubricants in it to speak of. At present it is my opinion that the public is being used as a giant "test case" to see how long vehicles can last or operate using this product. I believe the ethanol producers don't know - don't have a clue.

Such a concept causes two great issues if that is true.

1. If vehicle life is shortened - there is no "savings" in using it - it becomes an actual added expense.

2. Environmental arguments become almost the reverse if it is true. If vehicle life is shortened - it becomes an advanatge to the automakers - and a huge environmental issue for metals, plastics, and our landfills.

I believe considerable more testing and evaluation is required before turning E85 loose on the public. The oil and gas companies and pipeline companies are not fans of it. Some claim its because it takes profits out of their hands. I disagree as to their motivations for disagreement. Interestingly - 2 to 3 ounces of acetone is "questionable" as to use in 20 gallons of gasoline. Ethanol is 85% alcohol - a very close cousin to acetone. 3 ounces in 20 gallons for acetone - versus 17 GALLONS in 20 gallons for ethanol. It is tough on alot of things beyond just plasitcs and rubber components. Like bearings, copper, aluminum, steel, etc..

All just my opinion.

The biggest reason E85 is so expensive now is that the production of ethanol has not kept up with demand. But, there is good reason to believe that the price could drop if other means of producing it are found. Oil is only going to go up in price. I understand that ethanol is by no means a solution right now, but it is a step in the right direction.

White Lightening,

The oil companies are already switching their systems over to handle ethanol because new laws are requiring ethanol to be used in place of MTBE as an additive in gasoline. Mainly due to the fact MTBE is a potential carcinogen. The reason they are not using pipelines to transport the ethanol is because ethanol absorbs water and would absorb water from the ground.

The flexible fuel vehicles mass produced by US companies have been around since 1999 and they do have considerable data about the reliability. Also, they are not testing this technology on us. The entire country of Brazil is switching to ethanol and have been working toward this goal since the 70's. Now they are almost energy independent. GM has been one of the big providers of ethanol burning vehicles to Brazil. Take a look at these websites.

http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6817
http://www.usatoday.com/money/world/2006-03-28-brazil-ethanol-cover_x.htm

Also, here is another website that addresses some of your other concerns:
http://www.agriculture.state.ia.us/e85q&a.html

and an excerpt:

Will we deplete human and animal food supplies by using corn and other grains for fuel production?
No, actually the production of ethanol from corn uses only the starch of the corn kernel, all of the valuable protein, minerals and nutrients remain. One bushel of corn produces about 2.7 gallons of ethanol AND 11.4 pounds of gluten feed (20% protein) AND 3 pounds of gluten meal (60% protein) AND 1.6 pounds of corn oil.
Granted it is a pro ethanol site.

I have an '05 Sierra with the FFV option. The engine block is cast iron rather than aluminum. The fuel tank is stainless steel as well as the fuel lines etc. The fuel system seals are also a different material. In other words, the FFV vehicles are properly designed for E-85. E-85 is a little less per gallon but actually costs a little more to use due to the decrease in mpg. I recently got 20 mpg in town on a tank of gas. Best I've seen with E-85 is about 16. When I have the money, I try to run E-85. The nearest E-85 pump is about 17 miles away from my house.

I believe energy independence is very important for our national security. It would be wise to harvest our own oil while we are developing other energy sources. I enjoy the unadultered views of the earth's wonders, however I don't think that's worth being vulnerable on security and defense. As a country, we need to keep pragmatic priorities.

before long your going to be hearing about the health problems with e85. I live down wind from one of plant. its worse than a oil refinery.

so far thay have closed all swimming pools near the plant. A black fungus problem with the pools. the horse stables near have had a bad problem with rashes. it was so bad that the plant paid to have the horses moved. thay are now housed in a brand new stable on the other side of town.

now for the good for the environment problem. it takes a 22 inch natural gas main to get the still up to temp and hold it. thay use so much gas when asked why such a big line and how much do you spent, well you would be better asking questions on area 51. at lest you get better answers.

there have been 3 fish kills on the river from leaks from the plant. asthma is up in the kids in town. its high enough that ppl are going from town to town to get inhalers. when the plant shuts down there after burners witch happens a lot in the winter there is a rush on inhalers. 3 hours after dark and every day below 30f out thay turn off the the after burners. you can not go out side, the smell and junk falling all over town is bad.

i could go on all day.

E85 in our area is approximately 15% cheaper in price than normal gasoline. Lets also bear in mind - that the Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa area I live in is corn country.

My concerns with E 85 are several and I see contradictions that are concerning.

1. concern in that the EPA has not allowed a new Refinery of oil/petroleum products in the last 20+ years in this country. The reasoning is both government regulation based and EPA cost/pricing based. Meanwhile technology to improve refineries has been developed but can not be implemented to increase our refinery capability and percentage of efficiency.

The contradiction is - that ethanol plants are springing up all over in this part of the country. they are frequent - and in each case - they are small and run by small Coop operators (plant costs of $100 million or less). EPA studies and restrictions are far lower for these ethanol plants - yet the smell and output to environment are concerning factors. What happens if spills, polution, or concerns are discovered about these plants? These small Coops will simply disappear and who will be left to pay the damages and cleanups. Meanwhile - large oil companies that have operated for many decades are told new refineries need ........ (and the list is extensive).

2. Price. We hear how ethanol can reduce the cost of our fuel costs. Yet currently with the actual product (corn) at very low prices - and with huge subsidies by government - we don't find ethanol is "cheap" in any of our areas where it is produced. My understanding is that without subsidies - the cost of ethanol per gallon would be considerably over $5.00 a gallon.

The conflict coming. Corn raw materials for ethanol right now is less in demand and very low priced - if ethanol became popular - corn prices would skyrocket (just as raw materials for wood pellets have gone from "free" to over $1.75 for the raw material cost). Because Corn is used as a staple or our diet and that of foreign countries now - use of it for ethanol would sharply effect supply and demand further. Then factor in yet another issue. corn and corn waste are being used in bio digestors and in corn fed wood furnaces as new energy supplements. It seems ironic that we are focusing so much value and future demond on a single commodity product - just as we do with oil now. In my opinion - this is not in our best interests.

3. We read often about "the scourge of big oil companies" - yet fail to recognize that the vast percentage of farms are currently corporately owned in most states in the U.S. It appears that we are not diversifying our needs any more than we are with oil. I've heard we may need to have ethanol or corn imports from countries like Argentina, Australia, and others - just as we do with beef from them today - or oil from Africa, MiddleEast, and South American countries.

4. Some will argue that ethanol is a "natural product". Yet isn't it ironic that it is more caustic than oil and gasoline. It is more corrosive than oil or gasoline. And while oil and gasoline also come from the ground - those are not considered "natural products" by many. If you have an ethanol spill on the ground and a similar sized oil spill - which will harm the ground more? The answer from my understanding - is ethanol will hurt the ground more and is more difficult to clean up from ground or air release/spills.

Just some thoughts.

White Lightening

Good thoughts. We would diminish the corn supply domestically if everyone suddenly went e85. Prices would skyrocket.

Environmentally? E85 is produced almost identically to whiskey. We can only hope when the fad passes, that bourbon becomes dirt cheap!!
State EPA, then federal EPA hold the bag if coops go under on environmental liabilities. Effectively, you and I subsidize their prices now and their failure later.

The political intensity comes from a strong farm lobby and pork barrel political support in this case - but to the benefit to the US economy and consumer vs external beneficiaries.

Any way you cut it, hydrogen technology is the ultimate goal in alternative fuels, and we probably not that far away from making it commercially feasible.

The biggest reason E85 is so expensive now is that the production of ethanol has not kept up with demand. But, there is good reason to believe that the price could drop if other means of producing it are found. Oil is only going to go up in price. I understand that ethanol is by no means a solution right now, but it is a step in the right direction.
How can it be that production has not kept up with demand? There aren't nearly enough vehicles out there that can run E85, nor are there that many stations that carry it.

As far as it's envirnomental safety it's better obviously. But it's the mileage that needs to become better.

Honestly I don't think it will stick around as long. They will continue to find and change new renewable energy sources. But I don't fall for all this global warming political stuff. It's all part of the earth's cyclical change.

Liberal Polatitions find a topic to use to get into the whitehouse and then all the american sheep follow. Next they will want to extinguish the volcanoes and kill all the animals emiting methane just so, here in america our air will be much cleaner then anyware else on the planet. fucking idiots.Actually we are going into an ice age and the earth is still under its average mean temp. This means the earth has been much colder and much warmer, And remember the Earth has been here 4.8 Billion years. Global warming my ass, the problem is allowing big corperations to dump waist into our water while they distract the sheep in America by waving the Global Warming campain, Wake up America .jj

Actually, I partially agree with JJ. The fact of the matter is, our understanding of global climate is very weak. In the 70's, all you heard was global cooling, now it's the opposite. It is all about fearmongering the public to get what you want. Now, that said, there is solid science to support the "theory" for global warming, we just don't know the full model. The problem is scientists do not understand how many things produce gh gasses. It was just published a few months ago that many plants actually produce methane gas, a gh gas, which completely screws up their models for how human made gh gases would impact the climate. But this is not reported. This is something I understand better than cars/trucks because I spent my undergrad days in botany.

As far as ETOH goes, I agree with most of you as I've already said. The only statement I disagree with is one made by lightning about corporate farmers being the majority instead of family farms. I would bet if you look at numbers, yes corporations do run most farms. However, who owns the corporation. US tax laws provides for benefits for incorporating farms. My family's farm is incorporated, but is still family owned and controlled. I would bet most are this way right now.

Actually, I partially agree with JJ. The fact of the matter is, our understanding of global climate is very weak. In the 70's, all you heard was global cooling, now it's the opposite. It is all about fearmongering the public to get what you want. Now, that said, there is solid science to support the "theory" for global warming, we just don't know the full model. The problem is scientists do not understand how many things produce gh gasses. It was just published a few months ago that many plants actually produce methane gas, a gh gas, which completely screws up their models for how human made gh gases would impact the climate. But this is not reported. This is something I understand better than cars/trucks because I spent my undergrad days in botany.

As far as ETOH goes, I agree with most of you as I've already said. The only statement I disagree with is one made by lightning about corporate farmers being the majority instead of family farms. I would bet if you look at numbers, yes corporations do run most farms. However, who owns the corporation. US tax laws provides for benefits for incorporating farms. My family's farm is incorporated, but is still family owned and controlled. I would bet most are this way right now.
Don't forget the vast amount of methane cows give off.:grinyes:

Not to mention that politicians and the environmental wackos try to throw global warming out there as though it's strictly a problem cause by man.

you could try this. turn your trash into oil.


http://www.mindfully.org/Energy/2003/Anything-Into-Oil1may03.htm

Unlike other solid-to-liquid-fuel processes such as cornstarch into ethanol, this one will accept almost any carbon-based feedstock. If a 175-pound man fell into one end , he would come out the other end as 38 pounds of oil, 7 pounds of gas, and 7 pounds of minerals, as well as 123 pounds of sterilized water. While no one plans to put people into a thermal depolymerization machine, an intimate human creation could become a prime feedstock. "There is no reason why we can't turn sewage, including human excrement, into a glorious oil," says engineer Terry Adams, a project consultant. So the city of Philadelphia is in discussion with Changing World Technologies to begin doing exactly that.

"The potential is unbelievable," says Michael Roberts, a senior chemical engineer for the Gas Technology Institute, an energy research group. "You're not only clean ing up waste; you're talking about distributed generation of oil all over the world."

"This is not an incremental change. This is a big, new step," agrees Alf Andreassen, a venture capitalist with the Paladin Capital Group and a former Bell Laboratories director.

Andreassen and others anticipate that a large chunk of the world's agricultural, industrial, and municipal waste may someday go into thermal depolymerization machines scattered all over the globe. If the process works as well as its creators claim, not only would most toxic waste problems become history, so would imported oil. Just converting all the U.S. agricultural waste into oil and gas would yield the energy equivalent of 4 billion barrels of oil annually. In 2001 the United States imported 4.2 billion barrels of oil. Referring to U.S. dependence on oil from the volatile Middle East, R. James Woolsey, former CIA director and an adviser to Changing World Technologies, says, "This technology offers a beginning of a way away from this."