08-03-2010, 03:06 PM
|
#1 (permalink)
|
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 53
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
|
Gas stations without ethanol
I prefer not to get ethanol gas if I can help it. It seems QT (the local fill up station of choice is running ethanol, possibly in every grade of fuel). Does anybody know of a sure fire way to find out who does and doesn't add ethanol? Is it required by law to be posted on the pump, is it that simple?
I live in the kansas city area. If any of you know which ones do and don't add ethanol clue me in and I'll try to stop there more often. Also I use premium fuel fwiw. Maybe some places add it to one grade and not another? I know of one gas station that advertises that they do such a thing...
|
|
|
Today
|
|
|
Other popular topics in this forum...
|
|
|
08-03-2010, 03:12 PM
|
#2 (permalink)
|
Left Lane Ecodriver
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Posts: 2,257
Thanks: 79
Thanked 287 Times in 200 Posts
|
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to RobertSmalls For This Useful Post:
|
|
08-03-2010, 03:31 PM
|
#3 (permalink)
|
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 53
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
|
Ugh, Missouri REQUIRES 10% ethanol in all gas except that rated 91 octane or higher. Tho it still may be blended in and no visual indication is required.
KS is just as bad except they don't require the ethanol in the gas, but they don't have to tell you if its there. Sucks to live here if you care about that sort of thing.
|
|
|
08-03-2010, 06:11 PM
|
#4 (permalink)
|
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Illinois
Posts: 93
Thanks: 2
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
|
Rather have my gas stretched with something local than burning more oil in the long run through transport.
Guys, unless you're competing, or doing the best run you can, you must look at the big picture. Better mileage or better impact?
|
|
|
08-04-2010, 12:49 AM
|
#5 (permalink)
|
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 53
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
|
I suppose so, but it burns me when I pay the same per gallon as fuel that gives you better mpg. Plus until they switch away from something other than corn the whole situation is pretty screwed up anyways with the govt paying farmers NOT to grow corn because they're throwing it away, then they start making ethanol out of it and the price skyrockets driving up the price of corn, cornmeal, cornbread, corn syrup and other things and now we're paying an inflated price for the corn we paid them not to grow in the first place. And its not even that great for ethanol production... :end rant:
Plus even if my car is ok running it, and I don't 100% know that it is. What about my mower, did mower designers even consider this 3 or 4 years ago? Who really knows. Etc for other applications. I know it's shelf life is diminished. They don't even sell it in marinas because its hydroscopic.
|
|
|
08-04-2010, 03:32 PM
|
#6 (permalink)
|
Human Environmentalist
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 12,742
Thanks: 4,316
Thanked 4,469 Times in 3,434 Posts
|
Oregon and I believe WA require 10% ethanol in the gas. I watched my mileage plummet when this change occurred. Thanks for the link Robert! I might have to check out the CFN nearby to see if their gas prices are reasonable, and without ethanol.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecofreak
Rather have my gas stretched with something local than burning more oil in the long run through transport.
Guys, unless you're competing, or doing the best run you can, you must look at the big picture. Better mileage or better impact?
|
I am not sufficiently satisfied that burning corn ethanol is environmentally advantageous. The evidence seems to suggest just the opposite.
Most likely the ethanol in my gas is not local. Furthermore a lot of fuel is spent growing corn and fertilizing. My hunch is that if it was more environmentally friendly to use ethanol as a fuel, it would also be cheaper than gas (per unit of energy, and minus all subsidies).
|
|
|
12-23-2010, 05:10 AM
|
#7 (permalink)
|
Polymorphic Modder
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Utah
Posts: 307
Thanks: 188
Thanked 40 Times in 25 Posts
|
[IMG] [/IMG]
Took this photo 2 weeks ago in Hawaii. Seems that they are proud of the gas there!
|
|
|
12-23-2010, 09:02 PM
|
#8 (permalink)
|
(:
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
|
Ethanol free is good for older stuff- prior to '88?- that has carbs and non-ethanol resistant rubber parts. Since lots of boats are old, it's a legit selling point for them.
For cars, not so much. Not so much at all.
|
|
|
12-23-2010, 09:24 PM
|
#9 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: US
Posts: 1,016
Chief - '06 Pontiac Grand Prix 90 day: 26.7 mpg (US) SF1 - '12 Ford Fiesta S 90 day: 30.95 mpg (US)
Thanks: 195
Thanked 247 Times in 190 Posts
|
The amount of ethanol should be required to be posted, if any.
|
|
|
12-23-2010, 09:36 PM
|
#10 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: CT, USA
Posts: 544
RaceJeep - '98 Jeep Grand Cherokee (ZJ) 5.9 Limited 90 day: 13.62 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1
Thanked 26 Times in 23 Posts
|
In the marine world, ethanol rated fuel hoses and such started in 93. We had to re-do the fuel lines on our 86 Chris Craft due to issues, and one carb developed a seal issue after about 6 or 7 seasons of ethanol. Other than that, it hasn't been an issue. Fortunately, the fuel tanks are aluminum, not fiberglass.
I've never gotten to run E0 in the Jeep to compare mpg, but it runs fine on E10, and doesn't seem to care one bit. As long as it's got enough octane for it not to ping, it's happy.
__________________
Call me crazy, but I actually try for mpg with this Jeep:
Typical driving: Back in Rochester for school, driving is 60 - 70% city
|
|
|
|