Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[2018_FLTRXSE]

We don't let the good stuff leave the area. We drink it!
Mike
 

I KNEW somwething was fishy!

Guess I gott go visit my redneck sister down south soon!

[spydglide]

I KNEW somwething was fishy!

Guess I gott go visit my redneck sister down south soon!

Just so it's now a cousin.  har.  spyder

[tazmun]

I have now read a few articles and found that if you mix it like 50/50 you get the best of both worlds. You save some $$$$ and your milege is not 20-25% less. I was getting 15.5 city/hwy  now I'm getting 12.2 with it mixed.

Well if I take 15.5 MPG, and subtract 21% that equals 12.245 MPG on my calculator.

[grc]

I have now read a few articles and found that if you mix it like 50/50 you get the best of both worlds. You save some $$$$ and your milege is not 20-25% less. I was getting 15.5 city/hwy  now I'm getting 12.2 with it mixed.

From 15.5 mpg down to 12.2 mpg still works out to more than a 20% decrease in mileage (12.2 is about 78% of 15.5).

It doesn't matter what percentage you mix it at, unless the price of E85 is about 75% or less of the price of regular gas, it still doesn't work out economically.  For a rough estimate, if gas is $4.00, E85 needs to be around $3.00 or less.  That is just looking at out of pocket economics, not any "green" benefits.


Jerry

[kraut]

forget any "green benefits" - or stop smoking, drinking and foul-mouthing 

[FLSTFI Dave]

Now.. maybe its just me.. but a buddy hails from GA and during his last trip he brought some moonshine back.... heck.. that stuff tastes like gasoline... why cant we put it in our tanks?

Sorry... that was the most horrendous stuff I ever tasted!

Odds are if your not a local, you did not get the good stuff.

There is shine in TN that is very smooth

[2018_FLTRXSE]

Odds are if your not a local, you did not get the good stuff.

There is shine in TN that is very smooth

is it as good as JD single barrel?

[Keats]

Sucks,  not sure what the point is

[Supershooter]

A view from the Heartland where ethanol is made.
1. Living in the ethanol belt, we feed a very high percentage of the corn ethanol byproducts to cattle, hogs, chickens and other livestock. Its a great feed stock.
2. The ethanol industry employs a lot of Americans everyday.
3. No soldiers get shot making ethanol.
4. Subsidies are not exclusive to ethanol, the Oil Companies have had some govt help in the past also.
5. I hope that ethanol can also operate without subsidies in the future also.
Supershooter

[spydglide]

It's all political and makes no sense at all.  From the area I'm in with the tobacco props for years and now food stock going into making fuel in a inefficient manner, to payouts to big oil that are making their biggest profits ever, on and on.....it's not a free market system at all, rather a corrupt political system that is becoming more and more dysfunctional.  But, it's not just here, it's everywhere I've ever been and worse in most other places.  Greed & Corruption must be a basic human nature.  Everyone points fingers at others, but always is willing to take their benefits at others expense.  Uh Oh, must be time for another percocet.    Sorry 'bout that irrational rant that only made sense in my feeble pain infested pea-brain Wish I could drink a beer.    har.  spyder

[Para Bellum]

Here's part of the problem.  Pure (100%) ethanol only has 67% of the energy that 100% gasoline has, so we'd only get 67% of the mileage--so it should cost only 67% of what gasoline costs.

To calculate how much energy is lost (compared to 100% gas), so we know how much lower our mileage will be, and how much cheaper than pure gas it should be:
1. Multiply 33 times the per cent of ethanol (i.e., E10 = 10% ethanol).  Example: 33 x 10% = 3.3% loss of energy;
2. To find how much cheaper the E10 should be than E0 (0% ethanol = pure gas): multiply the 3.3% by the cost per gallon (say, $4.00), 4.00 x 3.3 = E10 should be 13.2 cents per gallon less than E0.

E85, then, should cost 33 x 85% = 28.05% less than E0 ( & 28% lower mileage), so $4/gal x 28.05% = $1.12 less than E0.

From 49445CVO's post above: since E50 has 33 x 50% less energy (= 16.5% less), it will get at least 16.5% less mileage, and should cost $.66 less per gallon ($4/gal x 16.5% = $.66).      See my post below for why things aren't even that good!

[Para Bellum]

The next problem(s):  Ethanol absorbs way more water than gasoline.  The more ethanol, the more water is absorbed, so our fuel is diluted even more; also, the air/fuel ratio of the fuel injection system isn't optimized for E(whatever).  So our fuel mileage is usually worse than the numbers would indicate.  Your mileage WILL vary (pun intended).

99% of the benefits of burning E-whatever go to the very few people who work in that field, and even they are hurt by the higher taxes we all pay to subsidize ethanol-as-fuel, and by the higher price of food-corn, and by the lower gas mileage their vehicles will get.  And don't forget the many engines/fuel systems/gas pumps that have, or will be, damaged by the corrosive effects of ethanol.  The net result is a LOSS for many, many, many!

[Yes, I know this is geeky; I'm an engineer/economist by training.]

[TinSpinner]

Thank the "greenies", ADM and the deep pockets of the Agricultural lobbyists who have crammed this "E" nonsense down out throats. If a lower carbon footprint is what they are after they have obviously ignored the production of ethanol in their calculations. We would be better off converting to compressed natural gas or just plain more fuel efficient dino fuel vehicles than converting a food crop into a fuel. Food prices have taken a hit, fuel mileage has taken a hit, our older vehicles that weren't designed for the new, more corrosive fuels are taking a hit. Every one of those hits means dollars out of our pockets. I'll step off the soapbox now, next...

[Supershooter]

Food prices are more a function of high fuel price not increased ethanol production.
Supershooter

[grc]

Food prices are more a function of high fuel price not increased ethanol production.
Supershooter

Believe what you want, but when you divert a large amount of the corn crop from food production to fuel production, the price of cornflakes will go up.  And when farmers plant more corn instead of soybeans to take advantage of that artificially propped up corn price, the price of soybeans goes up as well.  This stuff is all interrelated, and there is no such thing as a free lunch.

If we were serious about alcohol as fuel, we would be using nonessential stuff to make it, like garbage, sawgrass, etc, and not food crops.  With all the people on this earth who are starving to death as we speak, I think it's just plain wrong to divert food to the inefficient production of an inefficient fuel that doesn't make a tiny dent in the overall energy needs of this country anyway.  DoubleCoppers is right on the money.  A tiny portion of the country benefits from the current ethanol fiasco, at the expense of the vast majority. 

IMHO this entire ethanol program is just a prime example of the special interest mentality that is so prevalent in this country; give me my special deal and soak everyone else for it.  Then when someone else asks for a special deal, speak out vehemently against it.  I wonder how many beneficiaries of the ethanol boondoggle were violently opposed to loaning money to the Detroit automakers for instance.   At least there was and is a good chance the taxpayer's will see all that money returned (with interest).  I don't see any return for the taxpayer's from the ethanol BS. 


Jerry