10% Ethanol and mileage

[toc]

Hmm, oxygenated - ok.
The higher volume of consumption required to deliver the distance is quoted in this thread at 5% by at least one person.

I wonder if the extra trucking (due to volume, you get less kM), is made up (I realise the USA is a bit different to Australia in terms of population density - so trucking of fuels must be longer here).

I still think food is an issue though - we burn more fuel, we have a thirst for even more, the price of ethanol rises due to supply/demand, farmers want in on the action so give up other producing activities (think cattle), and go straight for Ethanol!

If you can find it, check out Future of Food, specifically the scene in India where a village is shut out from public farming land whilst it's used for fuel producing activities.

I don't ever proclaim to fully understand production of Ethanol, I thought my post made for further discussion on Ethanol and merely put forward what I believed were facts.

I won't be using Ethanol - both, my Pulsar and Sonata are not compatible (see list for Australia here Can my vehicle operate on Ethanol blend petrol? : FCAI). The one time I did put Ethanol in the Sonata, the fuel gauge went bonkers.

[roosterk0031]

Last tank with E0, 34.8 mpg, previous 3 E10 tanks average 34.94.

I don't accept the concept of all cars loosing MPG with E10.

[ChazInMT]

"Despite extensive research, biofuels are still not commercially competitive. The breakthroughs needed, revealed by recent science, may be tougher to realize than previously thought.

Corn ethanol is widely produced because of subsidies, and it diverts massive tracts of farmland needed for food. Converting the cellulose in cornstalks, grasses and trees into biofuels is proving difficult and expensive. Algae that produce oils have not been grown at scale. And more advanced genetics are needed to successfully engineer synthetic micro organisms that excrete hydrocarbons.

Some start-up companies are abandoning biofuels and are instead using the same processes to make higher-margin chemicals for products such as plastics or cosmetics."

[p38fln]

The only vehicle I ever had that I noticed a huge difference on alcohol in fuel was a 1992 Chevrolet Lumina - its MPG would drop at least 50% and it would run like complete crap with a severe power loss. This was back when they were adding METHANOL, so not sure if that's why there were such terrible results.
The toyota I replaced it with and both Fords after that barely notice ethanol - they all had a very slight MPG drop using it, but not enough to justify paying 15 cents a gallon more for the non-ethanol fuel at the pump.

[dennyt]

I haven't done an A-B-A test, but my mileage jumped up 6% when I switched to E0, then back down 9% on the one tank when I couldn't find E0.

[Fat Charlie]

So that's more of a B-A-B test. Sounds pretty solid.

[roosterk0031]

No really a good test, E10 was on a road trip hauling bikes. Look back to 4-10 you got the 32.72 mpg with bikes on back using E0, almost the same as your 32.76 mpg with one E10 tank with also hauling the bikes.

[dennyt]

Agreed, this is not a "good test".

My local E0 stations don't charge any more for E0 87 than the E10 87 at the big-oil stations nearby, because they tend to be Grange-type farm supply stores. I did pay way too much on a road trip once or twice.

There was also a big price bump for all gasoline this spring, don't forget about that.

[roosterk0031]

Yep fuel changes, temp changes, did that E10 tank go up more hills. Glad to see some data but road trips have way too many variables. E10(89) is always $0.10 cheaper here so used to be a clear choice, but 10 cents is a less than 3% cheaper now so choice isn't as clear as it used to be.

A couple months ago I was almost convinced E0 was giving me a extra 1-2 MPG, more recent data doesn't show any difference. At E30 self blends I only lost 10-11% mpg.
(but that data has limited value as my driving habits were still changing & car repairs)

My current data is a consistant as tank to tank as I can do, it is used for 95% commutting.

[Allch Chcar]

Originally Posted by ChazInMT

"Despite extensive research, biofuels are still not commercially competitive. The breakthroughs needed, revealed by recent science, may be tougher to realize than previously thought.

Corn ethanol is widely produced because of subsidies, and it diverts massive tracts of farmland needed for food. Converting the cellulose in cornstalks, grasses and trees into biofuels is proving difficult and expensive. Algae that produce oils have not been grown at scale. And more advanced genetics are needed to successfully engineer synthetic micro organisms that excrete hydrocarbons.

Some start-up companies are abandoning biofuels and are instead using the same processes to make higher-margin chemicals for products such as plastics or cosmetics."

Please make a new thread. That quote from the article qualifies as offtopic since this thread was about MPG differences not biofuel production. Thanks!