Ethanol mileage
clams_casino
"It takes 1.33 gallons of E85 (85 percent ethanol) and 1.03 gallons of
E10 (10 percent ethanol) to travel the same distance as with one gallon
of pure gasoline, the Department of Energy says."
"A Postal Service study found the new vehicles got as much as 29 percent
fewer miles to the gallon."
and part that really hurts - "The U.S. pays oil refiners like Exxon
Mobil 51 cents in tax refunds for each gallon of ethanol they blend into
regular gasoline.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aj.h0coJSkpw&refer=us
George
No disagreement from me. Mindlessly pushing the idea of using ethanol
(no planning where the corn will come from, huge subsidies needed etc)
to keep the SUVs going instead of optimizing fleet fuel economy will go
down as one of the dumber moves in history.
Al Bundy
clams_casino wrote:
> A bit dated (May), but
>
> "It takes 1.33 gallons of E85 (85 percent ethanol) and 1.03 gallons of
> E10 (10 percent ethanol) to travel the same distance as with one gallon
> of pure gasoline, the Department of Energy says."
>
> "A Postal Service study found the new vehicles got as much as 29 percent
> fewer miles to the gallon."
>
> and part that really hurts - "The U.S. pays oil refiners like Exxon
> Mobil 51 cents in tax refunds for each gallon of ethanol they blend into
> regular gasoline.
>
>
That's about right except slightly more gallons needed for E10. I
can't quarrel with 1.03 vs. 1.034 rounded down though.
There are even more problems with trying to run in flex mode,
especially for certain manufacturers. Chrysler uses a crazy system to
calibrate the engine based upon when the vehicle is fueled up. After a
fuel up, the sensor makes a calibration. If you then went across the
street and fueled up with something different, the system gets
confused and the calibration is off. GM and probably Ford use an
actual real time sensor to calibrate continuously. It's not as easy as
dumping X, Y, and Z in and everything runs fine on it.
I had an old carbureted Chevy two years ago. I cleaned out a garage
with lots of old dry gas and mineral spirits (probably 2 gallons on
half a tank). I dumped it all in the tank and drove it off. The
vehicle ran very well and it never caused a problem. That 83' Chevy
had no fuel sensors to amount to anything.
catalpa
"clams_casino" <PeterG...@DrunkinClam.com> wrote in message
news:rH2ok.16525$yn5...@newsfe08.iad...
The ethanol money doesn't go to the oil companies, it goes to the crooks
that produce the overpriced and tax subsidized ethanol.
AllEmailDeletedImmediately
news:rH2ok.16525$yn5...@newsfe08.iad...
we lose about 3mpg (10%) when we use the 10% ethanol blends. i actively
search
out stations that don't sell it, but eventually, i think all will be forced
to do so. and the
pisser? it costs the same as 100% gas.
selling ethanol blends so far: sunoco, costco, sheetz, some exxons (the one
i found was in md)
i don't think citgo does, but it's hard to find one these days. and the
7-11 near me doesn't use
the ethanol blend either. can anyone else add to the list?
sunoco has sold the blend for quite some time, but the last three are
somewhat recent.
i emailed gasbuddy suggesting that they start tracking non-ethanol
stations. maybe we all should do that.
George
> "clams_casino" <PeterG...@DrunkinClam.com> wrote in message
> news:rH2ok.16525$yn5...@newsfe08.iad...
>> A bit dated (May), but
>>
>> "It takes 1.33 gallons of E85 (85 percent ethanol) and 1.03 gallons of E10
>> (10 percent ethanol) to travel the same distance as with one gallon of
>> pure gasoline, the Department of Energy says."
>>
>> "A Postal Service study found the new vehicles got as much as 29 percent
>> fewer miles to the gallon."
>>
>> and part that really hurts - "The U.S. pays oil refiners like Exxon Mobil
>> 51 cents in tax refunds for each gallon of ethanol they blend into regular
>> gasoline.
>>
>>
>> http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aj.h0coJSkpw&refer=us
>
>
> we lose about 3mpg (10%) when we use the 10% ethanol blends. i actively
> search
> out stations that don't sell it, but eventually, i think all will be forced
> to do so. and the
> pisser? it costs the same as 100% gas.
It actually costs more because there are significant subsidies to build
and operate the plants, tax rebates etc that are pulled out of the
taxpayers pockets to artificially lower the price. And the ethanol is
exempt from road use taxes.
>
> selling ethanol blends so far: sunoco, costco, sheetz, some exxons (the one
> i found was in md)
> i don't think citgo does, but it's hard to find one these days. and the
> 7-11 near me doesn't use
> the ethanol blend either. can anyone else add to the list?
The only one around me is a Mobil station and that is where I fuel up. I
hope the lack of ethanol labels means they are actually complying with
the ethanol pump labeling requirement.
AllEmailDeletedImmediately
news:1NSdnZIP_8HZEjzV...@comcast.com...
> AllEmailDeletedImmediately wrote:
>> "clams_casino" <PeterG...@DrunkinClam.com> wrote in message
>> news:rH2ok.16525$yn5...@newsfe08.iad...
>>> A bit dated (May), but
>>>
>>> "It takes 1.33 gallons of E85 (85 percent ethanol) and 1.03 gallons of
>>> E10 (10 percent ethanol) to travel the same distance as with one gallon
>>> of pure gasoline, the Department of Energy says."
>>>
>>> "A Postal Service study found the new vehicles got as much as 29 percent
>>> fewer miles to the gallon."
>>>
>>> and part that really hurts - "The U.S. pays oil refiners like Exxon
>>> Mobil 51 cents in tax refunds for each gallon of ethanol they blend into
>>> regular gasoline.
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aj.h0coJSkpw&refer=us
>>
>>
>> we lose about 3mpg (10%) when we use the 10% ethanol blends. i actively
>> search
>> out stations that don't sell it, but eventually, i think all will be
>> forced to do so. and the
>> pisser? it costs the same as 100% gas.
>
>
> It actually costs more because there are significant subsidies to build
> and operate the plants, tax rebates etc that are pulled out of the
> taxpayers pockets to artificially lower the price. And the ethanol is
> exempt from road use taxes.
it costs me the same per gallon whether 100% gas or 90% gas.
>>
>> selling ethanol blends so far: sunoco, costco, sheetz, some exxons (the
>> one i found was in md)
>> i don't think citgo does, but it's hard to find one these days. and the
>> 7-11 near me doesn't use
>> the ethanol blend either. can anyone else add to the list?
>
> The only one around me is a Mobil station and that is where I fuel up. I
> hope the lack of ethanol labels means they are actually complying with the
> ethanol pump labeling requirement.
>
ask. i think the local 7-11 guy told me they're dispensed separately.
George
specified) at the terminal when they load the transports.
I wouldn't count on the clerk knowing anything about what is being
dispensed.
Jeff
> 10% blend, am I better off? I always buy the blend because its
> cheaper, but if I can get 3more miles per gallon, it would seem to me
> that the pure gas is a better deal. However, I am terrible with
> mathematics. Can someone put this into a formula to determine which
> is the better deal, and how much price difference is needed to break
> even.
This is rough second grade math.
If you get 5% less mileage and gas is $4/gallon, that's 20 cents.
Jeff
>
Al Bundy
> letter...@invalid.com wrote:
> > On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 13:14:47 GMT, "AllEmailDeletedImmediately"
> > <der...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>news:rH2ok.16525$yn5...@newsfe08.iad...
> >>> A bit dated (May), but
>
> >>> "It takes 1.33 gallons of E85 (85 percent ethanol) and 1.03 gallons of E10
> >>> (10 percent ethanol) to travel the same distance as with one gallon of
> >>> pure gasoline, the Department of Energy says."
>
> >>> "A Postal Service study found the new vehicles got as much as 29 percent
> >>> fewer miles to the gallon."
>
> >>> and part that really hurts - "The U.S. pays oil refiners like Exxon Mobil
> >>> 51 cents in tax refunds for each gallon of ethanol they blend into regular
> >>> gasoline.
>
>
> >> we lose about 3mpg (10%) when we use the 10% ethanol blends. i actively
> >> search
> >> out stations that don't sell it, but eventually, i think all will be forced
> >> to do so. and the
> >> pisser? it costs the same as 100% gas.
>
> >> selling ethanol blends so far: sunoco, costco, sheetz, some exxons (the one
> >> i found was in md)
> >> i don't think citgo does, but it's hard to find one these days. and the
> >> 7-11 near me doesn't use
> >> the ethanol blend either. can anyone else add to the list?
>
> >> sunoco has sold the blend for quite some time, but the last three are
> >> somewhat recent.
> >> i emailed gasbuddy suggesting that they start tracking non-ethanol
> >> stations. maybe we all should do that.
>
> > So, if I can buy a gallon of 100% gas for about 10 cents more than the
> > 10% blend, am I better off? I always buy the blend because its
> > cheaper, but if I can get 3more miles per gallon, it would seem to me
> > that the pure gas is a better deal. However, I am terrible with
> > mathematics. Can someone put this into a formula to determine which
> > is the better deal, and how much price difference is needed to break
> > even.
>
> This is rough second grade math.
>
> If you get 5% less mileage and gas is $4/gallon, that's 20 cents.
>
> Jeff
>
>
I think it would be best to test it out and see what you get. Fill up,
set the trip meter and go 200 miles and refill.
There is some variation in mileage with the blends specific to certain
vehicles.
Dennis
<der...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>we lose about 3mpg (10%) when we use the 10% ethanol blends. i actively
>search
>out stations that don't sell it, but eventually, i think all will be forced
>to do so. and the
>pisser? it costs the same as 100% gas.
I dropped about 5% after the state-wide 10% ethanol fuel was mandated.
But for the last couple of tanks, the mpg has been back up to
pre--ethanol numbers. Same gas station, same car, same driving route
-- in fact, I have been using the A/C more often than usual lately.
Odd.
Dennis (evil)
--
I'm a hands-on, footloose, knee-jerk head case. -George Carlin
AllEmailDeletedImmediately
it was the store owner. maybe what he said was that he had to order it
that
way instead of it just arriving. it was a while ago that i asked him.
also, i
think you may be able to smell the difference. the ethanol might have a
alcoholly
smell. i remember yrs ago (pre '95) i filled up a a shell station and the
gas smelled
a lot like alcohol. i never went back. didn't know about ethanol, or even
if that
was what was being used, but i knew gas wasn't supposed to smell like that.
i have no sense of smell now, so i don't know if you can tell that way.
AllEmailDeletedImmediately
news:85b6af99-57b5-4f01...@y21g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
probably should empty and fill twice with the same blend to make sure
there's not much leftover of the other stuff.
Bay Area Holdout
>
> No disagreement from me. Mindlessly pushing the idea of using ethanol (no
> planning where the corn will come from, huge subsidies needed etc) to keep
> the SUVs going instead of optimizing fleet fuel economy will go down as
> one of the dumber moves in history.
This is right up there with planned government mandates eliminating
incandescent light bulbs in favor of flourescent(CFL) ones.
Totally insane, these CFL bulbs are considered toxic as they contain mercury
vapor. How many people will put them aside and take them to their hazardous
waste site for disposal? 10% maybe 35% tops. Then factor in the gas burned
to drive to the waste site. Ours moves around the county but it's alwasy
been at least a 15 mile each way drive and we live in a major urban area.
Add to the CFL waste issue, slow to light to full intensity, flicker
factors, you can't dim them, potential unknows in the circuitry to generate
the high voltages to arc the light. This was fine for a light fixture on a
ceiling but now it could be a fixture right next to your brain! Some say
they get headaches.
Now this is great stuff for certain applications and if people want to use
them great,
but to make it a mandatory thing!?? Give me a break!
Right up there with MBTE which was suppose to help air quality and ended up
causing huge SOIL and WATER pollution issues when it ate through hundreds of
inground gas tanks. Also car fires in older cars whose rubber fuel hose
couldn't handle it either. OPPS! Billions in clean-up and still counting.
Lord help us between the enviro's looking to stop global warming and save
the whales and clean the air and big industry looking to make a buck,
they'll end up killing us one way or the other. But the enviro's will be
happy as they feel there are too many people(especially we greedy, fat
Americans) now and industry will have all our money before they kill us off!
AllEmailDeletedImmediately
"Bay Area Holdout" <Line...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6I9pk.19296$89....@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
>
>>
>> No disagreement from me. Mindlessly pushing the idea of using ethanol (no
>> planning where the corn will come from, huge subsidies needed etc) to
>> keep the SUVs going instead of optimizing fleet fuel economy will go down
>> as one of the dumber moves in history.
>
> This is right up there with planned government mandates eliminating
> incandescent light bulbs in favor of flourescent(CFL) ones.
> Totally insane, these CFL bulbs are considered toxic as they contain
> mercury vapor. How many people will put them aside and take them to their
> hazardous waste site for disposal? 10% maybe 35% tops. Then factor in the
> gas burned to drive to the waste site. Ours moves around the county but
> it's alwasy been at least a 15 mile each way drive and we live in a major
> urban area.
hmmm, i see a money-making scheme for the govt(s). just institute a hefty
fine for
not taking them to the hw site and then go pawing thru the trash to get info
on whose
trash it is.
Don Klipstein
>
>>
>> No disagreement from me. Mindlessly pushing the idea of using ethanol (no
>> planning where the corn will come from, huge subsidies needed etc) to keep
>> the SUVs going instead of optimizing fleet fuel economy will go down as
>> one of the dumber moves in history.
>
>This is right up there with planned government mandates eliminating
>incandescent light bulbs in favor of flourescent(CFL) ones.
As the USA Federal ones scheduled for 2012-2014, there are exceptions for:
* Ones of light output at least that of better current 150W incandescents
* Ones with light output near or below that of "standard" 25W incand.
* Ones metting an energy efficiency standard that Philips 40W and 70W
Halogena "Energy Saver" (available at Home Depot) already meet
* Rough Service, appliance, home oven
* Decorative globe, flame, etc.
* Silver bowl reflector
* Colored, blacklight
Pointed out earlier this year by Paul Eldridge.
- Don Klipstein (d...@misty.com)
vjp...@at.biostrategist.dot.dot.com
bio-ethanol. THe problem is in the bonds. EtOH only has one C-C
bond. But Glucose has six carbons. Look at dimethylfuran at U Wisc Mad
as an alternative. The trick is to make hexane. It proves the whole
point is we need a long development time which is prevented because
oil prices swing on twenty year cycles. Too much inspiration, not
enough perspiration.
- = -
Vasos Panagiotopoulos, Columbia'81+, Reagan, Mozart, Pindus, BioStrategist
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/vjp2/vasos.htm
---{Nothing herein constitutes advice. Everything fully disclaimed.}---
[Homeland Security means private firearms not lazy obstructive guards]
[Urb sprawl confounds terror] [Remorse begets zeal] [Windows is for Bimbos]
Macuser
Nebraska, so it's not all a bad thing.
I read that ethanol has poorer gas mileage than dino-juice. Anybody care to
confirm this?
"Thrift is sexy." ;)