A Look at Ethanol As a Gasoline Additive

The Associated Press | 06/01/03

[Libertarianize the GOP]

http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/bump-list

[CdMGuy]

Here are some comments I made elsewhere on ethanol:

Well, if you lived in CA, you wouldn't have any choice. About the only thing that Gray Davis got right in 5 years was his opposition to replacing MTBE with ethanol. When CA ordered gas refineries to stop using MTBE because of the mess it was creating with drinking water wells, he asked the Bush administration to waive the requirement that an additive be used. The reason was because the gas made in CA was clean enough on its own to meet clean air standards. Ethanol would just create lots of additional expense, and could result in gas shortages at times when refineries were unable to get a sufficient supply.

Well, thanks to the Archer Daniels Midland lobby, the Bush administration turned Davis down flat. So, now that MTBE is no longer used, it costs more money to refine gas adding ethanol. Unfortunately, an example of Bush bowing to big business.

With regard to your comments on gas mileage, my experience has been that I have seen no difference. I drive a vehicle that calculates MPG and displays it. I drive 30,000 miles per year, and my driving is about 85% freeway. Since 1999, my mileage has remained consistent even though CA has converted from MTBE to ethanol. Now, it could be that MTBE reduces mileage when compared to not having any additive, but in my case, MTBE and ethanol gave the same results.

[Navy Patriot]

Out here in Kalifornia we have gone though this scam a couple of times and this is what it is about: money.

Originally, the People's Republic of Kalifornia was blessed with "better" smog laws than the other 49.

These laws required an oxegenate added to the gas. Alcohol of several varieties was used, supplied by American (agribusiness) farmers at a lucrative profit as it was required by law and was uncompetitive.

Enviromentalists, state and federal government, oil companies and chemical companies saw the potential for enormous wealth and formed a conspiracy to change the required oxygenate to MTBE (a synthetic, poisonous, carcinogenic alcohol with a high affinity for water), and OUTLAW everything else.

MTBE is manufactured from petroleum refining wastes previously classified as toxic that refiners had to pay to dispose of, and it cannot be produced by agribusiness, thus shifting billions of dollars of forced purchases to the conspiritors.

After completely trashing the enviroment and the auto fuel supply infrastructure in Kalifornia, MTBE was outlawed and replaced with (sigh) ethyl alcohol, a re-reversal, but it's still here as Goverdork Red Davis ordered its continued use as we can't "afford" not to.

Here's the truth:

Any oxeygenate reduces the efficency of gasoline and produces an overall increase in pollutants from its use.

The least polluting gasoline can be refined from petroleum at a slight increase in cost over generic unadulterated gasoline, and needs NO added alcohol of any type.

[Paleo Conservative]

Any oxeygenate reduces the efficency of gasoline and produces an overall increase in pollutants from its use.

Modern computer controlled fuel injected engines don't need oxygenates at all. The oxygenates were put in gasoline so older cars could operate more cleanly. It would be a lot cheaper to get old clunkers off the road.

[Paleo Conservative]

Well, thanks to the Archer Daniels Midland lobby, the Bush administration turned Davis down flat. So, now that MTBE is no longer used, it costs more money to refine gas adding ethanol. Unfortunately, an example of Bush bowing to big business.

That is exactly the problem with regulations that specify means rather than goals. Ultimately regulations are used by rent seekers. Policy is being driven by powerful constituents and contributers rather than science and economics.

[c-b 1]

Now, it could be that MTBE reduces mileage when compared to not having any additive, but in my case, MTBE and ethanol gave the same results.

When MTBE was added to the gas I noticed an immediate mileage drop of about about 3 MPG. When I have traveled to areas that don't have MTBE in the gas I have noticed an increase in gas mileage.

[Navy Patriot]

Modern computer controlled fuel injected engines don't need oxygenates at all.

Agreed, but in actuality, no gasoline engine needs oxygenate additives, the maximum pollution reduction can be achieved by properly refined gasoline without alcohol additives.

The oxygenates were put in gasoline so older cars could operate more cleanly.

True, but they failed to accomplish that stated goal. Not surprisingly, that theory was based on disingenuious junk science. The purpose was to sell alcohol by force at non-competitive prices.

While getting "old clunkers" off the road will reduce pollutant output (if they are replaced by those admittedly efficient computer controlled, fuel injected vehicles) the cost-benefit should be thoroughly investigated as said vehicles are more expensive to manufacture and maintain.

[El Gato]

To put it another way, a 10% ethanol mix has the same energy content as if you added 5% water to your tank. Now would you put 19 gallons of gas in your tank and then top it off with a gallon of water?

Water doesn't burn, and it will corrode the system. It's true that ethanol doesn't have the energy content of gasoline, but as an additive to control emissions, it's got lots of advantages over MTBE and other crud they have put into gasoline. For one thing, it's not toxic, so if it gets into the water supply it's not really a problem. (Ethanol is the same kind of alcohol that's in beer, wine and other potable spirits.) MTBE and some of the others are not only poisonous, but also are carcinigens.

With modern closed loop fuel control systems, I doubt one would see any increase in inefficiency. The system will just as for more fuel. One upside is that adding ethanol (or methanol for that matter, but it's nasty poisonous stuff) raises the octane level of the gasoline. 10% ethanol comes out between super-unleaded and midgrade, but the basic gasoline is regular grade (or lower) and thus takes less of a barrel of oil per gallon of gasoline to produce. If your engine can take advantage of the increased octane, then you might actually get better gas mileage as the enginer will run leaner without knocking. It tends to clean your fuel injectors too, and absorbs moisture like a gas line dryer that many folks "up north" use in the winter. I've used the stuff off and on for nearly 30 years, mostly off these days, but I get it when I go to Kansas or Nebraska, and I have had no problem with it.

[jwh_Denver]

MTBE and ethanol gave the same results.

MTBE did not seem to affect my gas mileage but ethanol did. Also my friends have said the same thing about ethanol. Might be the altitude, I don't know. For every 1000 feet in altitude the engine loses %4 power. 5 times that and the engine at best will give %80. The difference in power at sea level is very noticeable.

The studies I've seen here on ethanol for Denver is that because a gallon of "gas" (ethanol) will not go as far as regular gas the hydrocarbon emissions are the same.

Thanks for the info on how we got stuck with this ethanol. Damn government just can't keep their goof up everything little fingers out of our lives.

[El Gato]

This is because it takes more oil to refine a gallon of diesel fuel than a gallon of gasoline.

Are you certain about that? Generally heavier fuels, like diesel or jet fuel (almost the same thing if you are talking about automotive/light truck diesel) take more of the heavier fractions in the oil, and generally there are more of them than of the lighter stuff.

[jwh_Denver]

At least gasohol is cheaper at stations near me (Detroit). I still won't use it though.

Here in Denver we have no choice from November through Feb because of air inversions we get. And the gas ain't a cent cheaper either. Matter a fact we may have no choice at all now because all the stations I've seen are gasohol. But seeing your post I'm going to start looking around.

[Paleo Conservative]

Are you certain about that? Generally heavier fuels, like diesel or jet fuel (almost the same thing if you are talking about automotive/light truck diesel) take more of the heavier fractions in the oil, and generally there are more of them than of the lighter stuff.

Beginning in the 1920s chemcial engineers started using catalysts to break down some of the heavier fractions of petroluem to increase the amount of gasoline produced. There isn't enough natural gasoline in petroleum to meet the demand for gasoline. Heavier fuels may still be cheaper per BTU because they require less refining, but a gallon of diesel or jet fuel contains more hydrocarbons than a gallon of gasoline. Fuel economy ratings that equate MPGs for gasoline and diesel are foolish, because they just encourage switching engine types without actually affecting the demand for crude oil.

[dozer7]

"Modern computer controlled fuel injected engines don't need oxygenates at all. The oxygenates were put in gasoline so older cars
could operate more cleanly. It would be a lot cheaper to get old clunkers off the road."

My '57' chevy will always be on the road, as will my '49' ford and my '59' Bug Eye Sprite an my '68' Beatle. You can take my clunkers off the road when you pry my cold dead fingers off the stearing wheel.

regards

the dozer

[Paleo Conservative]

By clunkers I don't mean well maintained older cars, I mean the poorly maintained cars that spew out pollution.

[dozer7]

"By clunkers I don't mean well maintained older cars, I mean the poorly maintained cars that spew out pollution. "

I maintain Jack. They are restored in the elagance of the period. High performance high octane spewers are great. My super Bee cammed up when I get the time to restore the 440 six pack it will be a thing of beauty. To destroy historical cars of interest is so typical of lets just do the right thing. Look it up how many of those old cars are out there. california crap the power plants get credit for squashing these cars for smog credits. Squash a classic get credits to spew from the power plant. Do some research.

Glad I moved to Kansas we know classics.

Preserve history or just surrender. I bet your lederhosen would twist if you hit 95 mph in second gear. You might even turn a wrench for me. Your life is small.

the dozer

[Fish_Keeper]

In Wash. State some stations sell 10% ethanol in all grades, and others do not. The ethanol makes my "check engine" light come on, and it turns off when I switch back to regular gas. I never buy the ethanol stuff anymore even though it is cheaper on average here too.

[CdMGuy]

Yes, it is likely the altitude. A friend of mine who is involved in auto racing made the statement that now that CA is on ethanol, he did not look forward to driving in the mountains due to the loss of power and MPG. He also, said that vapor lock was a lot more likely to occur.

[jwh_Denver]

auto racing

Or should I say drag racing. We've got one drag strip in town and I've heard the mechanics talk about what they needed to adjust racing in altitude. The crew with the edge takes it.

Our conversation has made me think about octane, carbeurators, fuel injection, etc, that I just don't know the answers to. I know here at altitude we run a much leaner mixture of gas to air. How fuel injectors, superchargers would/do affect that I don't know. All I know is I want my gas straight up.