Ethonol push is not new

[Captgrumps]

The ideal of alcohol blended with gasoline is not new--soon I will post part of an article that was printed in Popular Aviation magazine in November 1934 (I remember that year I was born and we did not have air conditiioning and damn near died according to my folks) that said the only reason it was not done then was fact they had a drought--remember the dust bowl--wiped out the surplus of American farm crops, causing a strong price advance for major cereal products, particularly corn.

Article goes on -- It "put away on ice" at least for the time being, and quite possibly for all time, the ambitious scheme of various interested parties and organizations (and of course some disinterested ones as well) for the blending of grain alcohol with the nations gasoline supply to make compulsory an alcohol base motor fuel.

He goes on to say if it happened --"I belive the nation would have seen air tragedies on a wholesale scale, due to engine failures, the like of which have never been witnessed, even in the airmail fiasco earlier this year.

Remember that was 1934

[jc pacquin]

......and the reason it was done this time was....political. It was throwing a bone to the farmer to get his vote. It costs more to produce it than its worth and we, the taxpayer subsidize 55 cents on each dollar of fuel sold. In these troubled times its insane, not to mention the harm caused to engines. JP

[MikeB]

JC,
I'm not going to get into the political thing with you (again ) but I pretty much dispute the fact that ethanol, at least in the low percentage, damages engines. I've run engines that are designed for ethanol for hundreds of thousands of miles with no apparent damage. My 1979 Honda CX 500 runs great on it. My lawn mower could care less (designed for up to 10%). Even my old Farmall "H" smiles when I put a few gallons in. At times we run our airport mower on a mixture of unleaded premium and 10% ethanol and that's hard, hot running for a 22 horse Kohler.

But it does get down to the fact that if the fuel system components (hoses, etc) are not designed for alcohol based products you might expect some problems. Obviously, I can't use it in my 65 horse Champ in order to meet the spirit of my auto fuel STC but I suspect I might not notice too much difference until the rubber pieces that aren't designed for ethanol might start falling apart or the varnish in the cork float, "O" rings, etc. The point is, it isn't going to ruin your basic engine.

In Wisconsin, generally speaking, it's hard to find a station that doesn't mix ethanol with the gas so we're kind of stuck. However, as luck would have it, our local Cenex station carries "unleaded premium' but it cost about 20 cents a gallon more which is still a lot cheaper than 100LL and it doesn't load the plugs with lead. By the way, I test all the gas I buy for the plane, though.

At least that's my experience.....................

MikeB

[MikeB]

I should also mention that when I had my 2000 Ford Ranger with the 3.0 V6 that was a 'flex -fuel' engine I ran it for some time on E85 ethanol (that's 85% pure ethanol) to see how it worked. Seemed to work OK although I'm sure the mileage was down a bit as ethanol has less BTU's that regular unleaded. I used to get around 25 mpg and it seemed to drop to around 22 mpg. It was basically during the winter so it's hard to get a good idea. That being said, I'm not a big fan of ethanol but it is a 'renewable' fuel more or less. Sometimes I wonder about the cost/value when everything is taken into consideration. Usually it depends on whose 'spin' you're reading at the time. It's also important that while it's true ethanol producers get a subsidy, it's also true that there are 'tax breaks' for oil companies. Being pretty much a conservative and a capitalist, I'd like to see the market 'float' and let the strong survive but we know that 'aint gonna happen'.

Back to working on the L16........................ (Trouble is, it's too hot and humid to paint today).

MikeB

[jc pacquin]

Ethonol makes NO sense. Let me repeat.....it was and is a political bone thrown to farmers. It not only raises the price of basic food stuffs made from corn, most aircraft engine mechanics will tell you NOT to use it as it will eat up the seals on the engine. More BTU's are used to produce it than it is worth...(water irrigation, plowing, planting , harvesting, transport, etc.) Sugar cane is the best source of ethonol but our climate is not condusive to its growth. (Brazil runs 60-80 percent of their cars on ethonol using sugar cane. Brazil's cars are specifically designed to run on it. Small aircraft engines are not. (Brazils cars also use MUCH smaller CC engines hence they use far less fuel, same for most european cars. We still don't get the message. As for the subsidies big oil gets, that is also political and should be stopped. IE: BP is now asking for BIG tax deductions due to the cost of the oil spill cleanup that THEY CAUSED! ( the corn lobbyists are currently trying to RAISE the amount of ethonol in your gas from 10 to 15%! There is no "spin" to the fact that it does lower milage. Most auto magazine articles substantiate that. JP

[Paul Agaliotis]

I don't think ethanol is a magic pill but might slow down our importation of oil. The engines can be modified to use it if there was some kind of benefit. Subsidies might be a good thing for alternative fuels. We pay farmers in CA not to grow specific crops. So they take the money from the Feds and grow something else there. Kinda like double dipping.
I used to run a car on 100% Methanol. It really sucks the fuel but makes a lot of power, less BTU but higher octane. I never had a fuel system problem but it was designed for this specific fuel.
The spin doctors are versed in their art, rather than getting a country behind finding a substitute fuel, they run everybody's dirty underwear up the flagpole and laugh at the fallout. With our economic power we should be wolves not sheep, plus the benefits are better.
Going back to my black label brand of ethanol, Cheers
Paul

[MikeB]

JC:
Count down before you blast off!
Go back and read my two previous messages. I pretty much agree with you. I was just trying to make the point that I've driven cars and light trucks for probably hundreds of thousands of miles using ethanol with zero problems. I had no 'seal leaks' because the vehicles were designed to run on ethanol. I won't use it in my Champ because it breaks the STC requirements. And yes, it does have less BTU's so your mileage will most likely be less but I don't think it's going to make your engine 'blow up' .

Whether it makes sense over the long haul remains to be seen. As an old diesel mechanic I'm pretty sure that's what they said when they started to put diesel engines in trucks instead of heavy duty gas back in the 50's or when they phased out radial engines in lieu of jets as much as I love the sound of them.

MikeB

[jc pacquin]

I Think....I do not know, but I think, Damiler-Benz invented the diesel wayyyyy back in the late 1800's or early 1900's I think, but I don't know that they did it with no subsidies. Diesel engines conserved fuel and as they grew more efficient, they took over. Once the government gets into the act and Congressmen start twisting arms, as they did with ethonol, its over. Many people , on the make, went out and built alot of Ethonol CORN processing plants so we are stuck with them unless they are exposed and the true cost of making ethonol is made known to the general public. But...It IS all politics, and that s the problem! You may remember "PIC" or Payment in kind, a program in the 80's in which the "GovMint "payed farmers NOT to plant! A BIG player in this was BIG corporations like Exxon. (Exxon and other LARGE corporations own thousands of acres of farm land in the U.S. (Millions?) In any event, they were the biggest recepients of the PIC program. Personally, I think if the cafe standards were raised to 35-40 MPG, and Boone Pickens plan to run trucks on natural gas was put into practice on a gradual basis, the Saudis would be back to riding camels pretty quickly.jp

[jc pacquin]

Conserving energy isn't new either. Jimmy Carter sat in the oval office in his sweater, (to make a point) and asked America to turn the furnace down just a little. (I thought he looked silly.) He also touted solar panels and 35 mpg for cars.For a while ALOT of people started putting them on their houses. Carter put a bunch of panels on the roof of the White house to be used to heat water (to make a point.) I thought "This guy is far out!" Well.....Ronnie Reagan took the solar panels at the White House down as he thought they were "dumb.", I think Carter, on this subject, and on Three Mile Island, was VERY sharp. But then, he was an engineering major at the Naval Academy and went thru atomic sub school. Today, no one's laughing except the oil companys and the power companys! JP

[Paul Agaliotis]

If someone wants to build an Ethanol plant, more power to him. If he is able to have someone else pay for it, even the better. I don't think we will interrupt our food supply chain. But we may have to slow or stop our export of corn.
There are many in the US that survive on subsidies, Social Security for one. Now don't start with the,"but I paid into it", speach. I'm talking about crazy ol' Aunt Pheedlebaum that for any number of reasons didn't pay into Social Security but collects non the less. We can't pick and choose which to eliminate until all of the facts are presented.
I use a GEO Metro to commute with. It gets 48MPG and was built in 1991. Today you can't buy a car with similar mileage unless you go Hybrid, why? Ford has a diesel Fiesta for the European market only. It gets 70MPG and is not available in the US, why? These are relevent questions we should be asking, not worrying about which fuel better. If tomorrow Ethanol was 50 cents a gallon you would have a huge uproar of people demanding cars to use it. We need to change the way we utilize all energy not worry about which one is best.
Remember it was western corporations and the Dulles brothers who put the Saud family into power.
Paul

[joea]

Conserving energy isn't new either. Jimmy Carter sat in the oval office in his sweater, (to make a point) and asked America to turn the furnace down just a little. (I thought he looked silly.) He also touted solar panels and 35 mpg for cars.For a while ALOT of people started putting them on their houses. Carter put a bunch of panels on the roof of the White house to be used to heat water (to make a point.) I thought "This guy is far out!" Well.....Ronnie Reagan took the solar panels at the White House down as he thought they were "dumb.", I think Carter, on this subject, and on Three Mile Island, was VERY sharp. But then, he was an engineering major at the Naval Academy and went thru atomic sub school. Today, no one's laughing except the oil companys and the power companys! JP

First off need to say that I totally agree with Paul. I have solar panels in my back yard that powers part of my world. I am doing a lot more than the average American to save energy in many ways. Got a pickup truck that not only gets 27 mpg on the road but runs on biodiesel that we make as well as WVO (waste veggie oil) as well as filtered and mixed used crankcase oil. Have been this way since being a kid, just do not see any reason to waste things like this. Yes, Mother was Scottish...

Now JC! Jimmy Carter was a bumbling oaf and the best thing about Obama is that now Jimmy can say that he was not the worst President in our great countries history! Not only was he an idiot in office, he has progressively gotten worse and continues to stick his foot (and our countries reputation) in his mouth and munch on it a while.

Regarding Three Mile Island. America is 40-50 years behind the power curve in that we need nuke power again to help weaning ourselves from middle east oil. France does it, and has nuke power for 75% of their countries power. Why can't we do it? Answer is that we can and will, its just a matter of time and getting some people to wake up. Its save when done correctly and should have been done years ago. Also solar and wind power. In places like where I live or anywhere that its windy its stupid not to harness this energy and stop using oil which cannot be replaced when it stops flowing.

[MikeB]

I think all of us would like to see the Arabs back to 'riding camels' but we do use a lot of 'petro-chemicals' in this country for stuff other than motor fuel. We do need to do a better job of developing our domestic energy and gradually becoming more self sufficient. Natural gas has a btu content roughly about the same as gasoline (around 100,000). It might work for lighter duty engines but I doubt it will have the capacity to replace HD diesel engines with a BTU content of 130,000+ btu's per gallon. We also probably need to do a better job on our rail system. Our youngest and his family live in San Antonio but I don't believe you can get there from here by rail any more. At least not in a reasonable amount of time. I'm sure the situation with freight is about the same.

My personal opinion is that the energy problem (and the immigration problem) in this country can be solved by a few people with common sense. Unfortunetly, congress and the leadership in this country can't seem to get their act together. Is it any wonder that the congressional approval rating is 11% and the President's is only about 40%? I'm for throwing the bums out!!

MikeB

[seaheli]

Quote: Joe A. wrote;

"Have been this way since being a kid, just do not see any reason to waste things like this. Yes, Mother was Scottish... " (Wish I could figure how to quote!)

I wonder how many people in the younger generations understand that; the "Frugal (wealthy) Scottish!" Our country could learn to be frugal to hold wealth!

As for Jimmy Carter, I was very young during his time in office and only have knowledge about him, through others and history. Maybe one good thing he did was sign a bill from Senator Alan Cranston to lift the ban on homebrewing. Would we have the culture of micro-breweries without that? Oh, his brother had a brewery or brand of beer!

Charles

[Dennis]

Damn Charles, you sure have a way of putting things into perspective. I'm with you.

Dennis

[MikeB]

Known as "Billy Beer"