Removing Ethanol from Gasoline

[AeroModder]

Frank: Your recent posts in this thread are very unhelpful and unproductive.

[Chuck.]

I think Frank is frustrated with all this hypothetical discussion that goes nowhere - he's allright.

Meanwhile, he has been doing things to use less gas.

The most effective thing to get rid of ethanol is political action

[ShadeTreeMech]

While reasearching the history of ethanol as a fuel, I discovered an interesting sidenote. Methanol was used for a long time where we now use ethanol, but for some unknown reason (farmer's lobbyists?) thre was a switch. Even though methanol generally is made of waste wood product. And is about 1/3 the price per gallon.

The politics definietly need to get out of our everyday decisions. A decision should be made due to its merits over other choices, not who has the better lobbyist.

[Nerys]

well I am only one person. Let me tell you what will happen. I will squeak till some politician comes out with an oiler and he will have one thing to say to me IF he is willing to even listen.

Prove it. I can't. Have a nice day citizen as I am ignored.

I need MORE people to test and provide real consistent reliable data.

until then its all hypothetical except my bank account would have something to say about this hypothetical crap since it REALLY IS being robbed by E10 no hypothetical about it :-)

[autoteach]

Today most methanol is produced by synthesizing methane. It is not alcohol derived from degrading wood or other items.

[rmay635703]

Originally Posted by ShadeTreeMech

Methanol was used for a long time where we now use ethanol, but for some unknown reason (farmer's lobbyists?) thre was a switch. Even though methanol generally is made of waste wood product. And is about 1/3 the price per gallon.

Methanol is cheaply made from natural gas but is not a very good motor fuel, it has a low energy density, it is more corosive and likely to separate. It also is more hazardous. (and it is likely the alcohol that gave gasahol a bad name)

IFF Butanol fuel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Butanol could be made cheaply in place of methanol (as butanol is far superior to either ethanol or methanol as it is very similar to gasoline and much more suitable to blend with gasoline) (if thats what we feel we need to be doing)
I would support butanol production because we simply have a lot of domestic CNG to start with and because it can be made by yeast and bacteria from a variety of sources..

Personally I think a biofuel mix would be best, as researchers are finding out the chemical properties of blends of different fuels is much different than just one taken alone and different than expected. Likely a multiple alcohol blend made with a little top lube of esters and biodiesel components would provide a 100% gasoline compatible fuel. If it could be produced of waste and byproducts and still be a cost winner to gas you might see a major shift in what we burn without all the complaints about poor fuel economy.

Also butanol could be used in diesel engines and might be usefull in reducing the gelling point of biodiesel.

The more I read about butanol the more I wish half the dollars that went to ethanol would have gone to butanol as it has much more promise.
Also if half the money went to butanol we might have self sufficient alcohol plants now instead of fully subsidized. But then again crude is subsidized heavily also.

Hmm
http://www.americanenergyindependenc...olengines.aspx
A lot of info here that is applicable despite the obvious slant and some explanations of why ethanol isn't as bad as some think, at least on purpose built motors.

Cheers
Ryan

[user removed]

Originally Posted by AeroModder

Frank: Your recent posts in this thread are very unhelpful and unproductive.

205 replies and 8407 views on this single thread.

That's a whole lot of unproductive.

Nerys, you have made your point, to the point of writing a book on this topic.

Cars with knock sensors and automatic timing advance, in anticipation of engine knock, will to a great degree mitigate the lower energy content of ethanol.

Try advancing the timing on your vehicles, if it is adjustable, to see if it helps.

The last time I had the opportunity to use non ethanol fuel, was very early in the morning on a trip to Detroit from eastern Virginia. I was driving a 2006 Corolla. I filled with mid range fuel, because they had no regular, and I believe it was E0. Drove all the way to the western end of Ohio before I refueled again. Normally I got about 36.5 MPG in the Corolla. but on that one tank it was 39.5 MPG.

About 10%.

If you remove the alcohol from regular E10 the octane rating will be very low, because the alcohol itself has a very high octane rating.

Maybe the better option would be to try to fine tune the timing to get more advance. My neighbor has a 427 69 Camaro (Yenko clone) that runs fine on E10 here, but I am sure his mileage is terrible.

Best way to mitigate the lower BTU content of alcohol is higher compression.
The Nissan Titan flex fuel truck gets like 13 MPG on gas and 9 on E85, so you can see the huge difference due to energy content of the alcohol. Not practical to have 16 to 1 compression and run pump gas so you can run effectively on E85, or to increase the compression slightly to run on E10 instead of pump gas.

Is it really necessary to add to the 206 posts on this thread or the 8400 plus views to make a point that we all understand.

You could use the same argument about lead in fuel, which cost billions of gallons to eliminate by the time the manufacturers figured out how to get decent mileage while complying with emissions standards.

As far as getting 60 MPG in your Metro with an 1100 pound payload, that just is straining the credibility of your claims to the end of belief.

Take it any way you want, insult me, call me names. None of that will affect your situation to even the advantage on one penny.

regards
Mech

[Nerys]

"Normally I got about 36.5 MPG in the Corolla. but on that one tank it was 39.5 MPG.
About 10%."

So you save 1% foreign oil and how much did that COST YOU in both increased fuel cost increased food cost and increased taxes?

"As far as getting 60 MPG in your Metro with an 1100 pound payload, that just is straining the credibility of your claims to the end of belief."

Sorry nothing is strained here except maybe you misread something? I have yet to get 60mpg in my metro.

I have gotten just shy of 59mpg with the car AT max load rating (I am 400 pounds and I had 250 pounds of stuff in the car thats 650 rating is 688 IIRC) and I had the trailer (empty) attached.

but I was semi surfing so thats an unusual scenario.

My best FE on E10 is 54mpg and that HAS BEEN with 1100 pounds in the car.

I am 400 my sister is 340 brother is 225 and sister boyfriend is 165

thats 1010 pounds just in people and I had AT LEAST 100 pounds of stuff in the car. heck just the tools mass over 75 pounds and my laptop is another 20 with its stuff. and this is with and without the trailer.

I notice NO significant change in FE with all that in the car or just me in the car (remember very few stops on my commute so very few accelerations which is the ONLY time more mass will have any meaningful effect on FE)

I also notice no measurably reliable change in FE with and without the trailer no matter what I put ON the trailer. Even 250 pound lawn tractors or a pallet load of DVD cases massing over 450 pounds (Best guess 2200 dvd cases)

I attribute this to the trailer and loads being aerodynamically irrelevant IE they are "in the wash" of the car (the trailer and most of the loads are SMALLER in frontal area than the car so they "hide" in the cars wake)

at that point the only drag is bearings tires and mass bearings and tires are for the most part not relevant at this scale and the mass again only has an impact when your accelerating.

this is straight forward physics here. Nothing complex or magical.

If you don't like the thread there is a SERIOUSLY easy solution.

Stop reading it.

[jkp1187]

Originally Posted by Nerys

If you don't like the thread there is a SERIOUSLY easy solution.

Stop reading it.

I have to agree - Nerys has spent a lot of time presenting his findings and what he did to create those findings. It looks like he's been straight-up on most things. (Sure, he has an anti-ethanol agenda, but it's largely because of what he's found so far.) Complaining that he's spending too much time on the road and therefore isn't green enough is the equivalent of the old lawyer's adage: "if you can't argue law, argue facts; if you can't argue facts, argue law; and if you can't argue either, pound the table."

Although, Nerys, if Frank could get you a $75 fuel-efficient car in a condition that meets your specifications, would you buy it?

[Nerys]

are you kidding? of course I would then I would flip it for hundreds or if its good enough keep it as a backup :-) remember I already have a Geo Metro. I right now average 50mpg year round. My problem is my government raping me to the tune of a lot of money just to appease the corn lobby and "pretending" its clean green and cheap and renewable when its absolutely none of the above.

My GOAL is to see E10 either go away or become optional.

My skill set is quite a bit higher than the "average" person (by necessity) NOW I can go out and buy a $300 metro and "fix it up" in fact if I had the time, space, and cash I would do it just so I could flip them when gas hits $4 a gallon :-)

I am more interested in overall societal changes. Just because I got myself a nice gas efficient car does not change or make better the society at large problem we have here.

IE I want to help everyone not "just" me (though admittedly helping everyone DOES help me)

SO what happens in 25 years when its damned near impossible to find an operable fuel efficient car that does not cost $20 grand? what happens when there are no longer PLENTY of metro's Civic's etc.. road worthy? what happens when the only option is a pathetic excuse for an efficient car IE a prius or something like that that costs MANY orders of magnitude more than a metro.

IE think long term here. think 5 years 10 years 20 years into the future.

Can you stock pile enough "econo" cars to get you through your lifespan? will it even be legal? How many people could possibly do that?

My goal is this.

I want more of YOU FOLKS to perform these tests.

Assuming everything is above board there will be one of two results. Either my numbers are hogwash and something strange is happening to 7 of our families cars that is all the same and I need to figure out what it is.

I have driven out to colorado and back texas and back michigan and back so I know its not something "local" with the gas.

OR we will find out HEY this really is hogwash and with enough data from enough people I can goto my congress critters and show them. HEY this stuff is crap its killing us economically and ecologically. When they say prove it I want to womp a huge pile of "results" onto the table and say THERE. There is your proof.

will it work? I have no idea. I know they will resist because they make MONEY from this stuff. but at least it will be harder to dismiss and ignore. if ENOUGH people demand the change the change WILL happen.

but so far I have gotten ZERO results. ZERO testing ZERO feedback from anyone else even from people WHO DO in fact have access to E0

Lets go over it again what I need (if you guys have a better idea please speak up maybe I am doing this all wrong)

I think the person doing the testing should have a reliable consistent commute. IE your fuel economy reading for the last 15 or so tanks should not fluctuate all that much. you should have a pretty solid "trending" as to what your fuel economy is.

You fill ups should be AT LEAST 90% fill ups. if your driving a 10gallon tank you should be adding 9 gallons or more each fill up. If your driving a 20 gallon tank you should be adding 18 gallons or more per fill up if at all possible.

If your FE is reliable enough push it ever further. The more you empty the tank each time the more reliable your results.

Stop using E10 start using E0. TEST the E0 each time to verify it is indeed E0 (see below) go at LEAST 3 preferably 4 tanks (the last 2 will be the real data points) to get as much E10 out as possible and E0 in.

No additives or anything.

Then switch back to E10 for 3 or 4 tanks.

Then switch back to E0 for 4 tanks

Then back to your E10.

that should provide some very good solid data.

To test for ethanol is very easy. a small 20oz soda bottle works fine. add some WATER to the bottle (say 25%) use a sharpie and MARK the line where the water level is.

Now fill it with gasoline to say 75% or more

seal it up shake it up good and then let it settle (60-180 seconds is usually enough)

NOTE the separation line between the water and the gasoline. If its E0 there will be NO CHANGE the line will remain where you marked it.

If the line moves UP then you have alcohol present in the fuel (it moved up because the alcohol LEFT the gas and JOINED with the water. this is how I wash the gas BTW)

don't reuse the bottle more than once or twice. Ethanol is VERY aggressive toward the plastic and it will leak in short order and form many micro cracks.

Thats it. The results need to be reliable and accurate. I do not care if they JIVE with my results. I need repeatable accurate results.

I also need your car make model year and engine specs. (at some point I am GUESSING around 2004 or so the E10 stops having such a dramatic effect on the cars)