# Kiss your fuel pumps good bye Americanos.



## pony_trekker (May 26, 2003)

From the NY Times

December 2, 2009
E.P.A. Says It Expects to Raise Amount of Ethanol Allowed in Fuel Blends to 15%

By MATTHEW L. WALD
WASHINGTON — The Environmental Protection Agency said Monday that it would probably increase the amount of ethanol that gasoline retailers could blend into ordinary fuel, to 15 percent, if tests established that the blend would not damage cars.

The maximum ethanol blend is now 10 percent, except for cars specially equipped to handle higher blends. The agency said it was likely to approve the increase to 15 percent next summer, perhaps for use only in cars of the 2001 model year and later.

This raises the possibility that gasoline retailers might need to carry different ethanol blends in different pumps, and that drivers with older cars might have to be careful about which blend they buy.

The E.P.A. was responding to a petition from ethanol manufacturers, who have complained that unless a higher blending level is approved, within two years they will not have a big enough market to absorb their production.

A coalition of environmentalists, oil refiners, grocery industry representatives and the makers of power equipment has vowed to fight the change, and the auto industry has also expressed concern.

In a letter to Growth Energy, an ethanol trade association that filed the request for a higher blend in March, the E.P.A. said that “our engineering assessment to date indicates that the robust fuel, engine and emissions control systems on newer vehicles (likely 2001 and newer model years) will likely be able to accommodate higher ethanol blends, such as E15.” But the agency added that it would wait for the Energy Department to test a dozen vehicles, a task that should be completed in May.

The decision drew mixed reviews. At Growth Energy, Wesley K. Clark, a retired general who is co-chairman of the organization, said the reply was “basically a positive answer,” and sent a signal to his industry to invest in more plants, including some advanced plants that would make ethanol from corn cobs, wood chips and other nonfood sources.

Congress ordered increased use of ethanol in energy bills that passed in 2005 and 2007, but the plan has not worked as backers had hoped. Millions of “flex fuel” cars are on the road that can use ethanol blends as high as 85 percent, but fewer than 2 percent of service stations sell blends above 10 percent. Adjusted for its lower energy content, E85, as the higher blend is known, is more expensive than gasoline, and motorists thus have little reason to use it.

The automakers’ trade association praised the E.P.A.’s decision to wait for more test data, but expressed some concern about the idea that gas stations would begin selling fuel that might be good for younger cars and bad for older ones. A system based on model year “would create a tremendous likelihood of consumer confusion and misfueling,” said Charles Territo, a spokesman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers.

Kris Kiser, executive vice president of the Outdoor Power Equipment Institute, said that high ethanol blends could force the clutch on a chain saw to engage, and spin the chain, when the user thought it was in neutral, and that such blends could cause leaks and fires in equipment held in the hand or carried on the back. Mat Dunn, legislative director of the National Marine Manufacturers Association, said such blends could make boats break down far from shore. “We cannot just pull over and call AAA,” he said.

And Bill Holbrook, a spokesman for the National Petrochemical and Refiners Association, said some of his group’s members were already being sued on the basis that their 10 percent ethanol blends had damaged engines.

But another ethanol producers’ group, the Renewable Fuels Association, argued against any delay in approving higher blends. Ethanol backers intend to ask Congress to supplant the E.P.A.’s decision-making and simply require a higher blend.


Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company
Privacy Policy Terms of Service Search Corrections RSS First Look Help Contact Us Work for Us Site Map


----------



## Tedj101 (Nov 24, 2009)

Beenthere said:


> Many parts in the fuel system can be negatively impacted from alcohol not just fuel pumps. In addition engine operation can suffer when using fuels containing alcohol. Unless the vehicle is designed to use alcohol when built, the more alcohol the more headaches. It's not like your engine is going to blow up but if you have a choice, alcohol free gasoline is a better choice. E15 is a bad idea IMNHO as is E85. You end up with an ~40% drop in mpg with E85 so you can subsidize the U.S. corn industry. :thumbdwn:


Actually, it's not just subsidizing an existing industry - - they want this so that they can grow larger. Usually, an industry is sized to the demand for their product. Here the industry is trying to get the government to create demand for their product not because people need it, but because they want to grow larger.

It's sort of as if the automobile industry asked congress to pass a law requiring that every household have one car for each person in the household.

Just another POV,
TED


----------



## pony_trekker (May 26, 2003)

Beenthere said:


> Many parts in the fuel system can be negatively impacted from alcohol not just fuel pumps. In addition engine operation can suffer when using fuels containing alcohol. Unless the vehicle is designed to use alcohol when built, the more alcohol the more headaches. It's not like your engine is going to blow up but if you have a choice, alcohol free gasoline is a better choice. E15 is a bad idea IMNHO as is E85. You end up with an ~40% drop in mpg with E85 so you can subsidize the U.S. corn industry. :thumbdwn:


What ever happened to free market economics?

How about letting buyers choose between no alcohol gas for 3.00 a gallon and E15 for 3.15?


----------



## Jakked (Feb 6, 2009)

pony_trekker said:


> What ever happened to free market economics?
> 
> How about letting buyers choose between no alcohol gas for 3.00 a gallon and E15 for 3.15?


actually, in order to promote the administration's agenda, you'd have to discount the E15 (or penalize the ethanol-free buyers, depending on your perspective), so it would be $3.00 for the E15 and $3.15 for plain gas.

Shell 93 octane already has about 12% ethanol, which is about all that i buy, so i'm not overly concerned, but in a broader sense this is a step in the wrong direction for so many reasons.


----------



## BM2W (Aug 9, 2007)

Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.


----------



## Solidjake (May 10, 2007)

I'm going to buy like 1,000,000 gallons right now and store it


----------



## Jakked (Feb 6, 2009)

N.Y. Times said:


> "The E.P.A. was responding to a petition from ethanol manufacturers, who have complained that unless a higher blending level is approved, within two years they will not have a big enough market to absorb their production."


i hate lobbyists. this too p.s.??

on the plus side, the EPA has promised to conduct tests to see whether E15 would damage vehicles, and only approve the change if no damage is done.


----------



## Bill_R (Sep 20, 2006)

The latest Scientific American had an article on the "Cars of the Future". They interviewed a few high end auto industry people. One of the questions was about the use of ethanol in fuels. The industry concensus was that by the 2020's there wouldn't be ethanol in gas.

Nothing about making ethanol from corn, other grains, or even corn cobs and wood scraps makes sense in the longer term. This is all biomass that we're either going to need to eat or to enrich the soils so that we can eat.

Rather than mandating more ethanol our governments should mandate cars like the BMW Hybrid Concept which delivers M3 performance with better than Prius fuel economy!:thumbup:


----------



## ColoradoKraut (Aug 30, 2009)

pony_trekker said:


> What ever happened to free market economics?


The Marxists are in charge!!


----------



## Blubaron79 (Feb 16, 2009)

It has nothing to do with the Obama admin. as many of you right wing nuts want to believe. It is all about the ability to make gasoline cheaper to make, but still charge us the same amount. The oil companies will spin it as we are using less foreign oil; Though what really is happening is that the oil company's pockets are getting bigger...


----------



## Jakked (Feb 6, 2009)

Blubaron79 said:


> It has nothing to do with the Obama admin. as many of you right wing nuts want to believe. It is all about the ability to make gasoline cheaper to make, but still charge us the same amount. The oil companies will spin it as we are using less foreign oil; Though what really is happening is that the oil company's pockets are getting bigger...


do you actually understand what the issue is? ethanol is not gasoline. ethanol is not made by oil companies. In fact, oil refiners are lobbying *against* ethanol, as it only serves to displace gasoline.

if you want to talk about "right wing nuts," you can take it to PS


----------



## Rich_Jenkins (Jul 12, 2003)

Poopers.

Where can I get E0 gas? :angel:


----------



## Blubaron79 (Feb 16, 2009)

You just don't get it do you?.... I won't waste my education on you. 

The fuel companies use more ethanol in the fuel to use less oil, which in turn makes producing gasoline cheaper.... but they charge the same price, so they can make more money.. Was that so hard to understand??


----------



## Jakked (Feb 6, 2009)

Blubaron79 said:


> You just don't get it do you?.... I won't waste my education on you.
> 
> The fuel companies use more ethanol in the fuel to use less oil, which in turn makes producing gasoline cheaper.... but they charge the same price, so they can make more money.. Was that so hard to understand??


:rofl: :tsk:


----------



## MattieB (Dec 2, 2008)

Drill baby drill.


----------



## pony_trekker (May 26, 2003)

MattieB said:


> Drill baby drill.


Tiger?


----------



## FIA (Apr 6, 2003)

wingspan said:


> Poopers.
> 
> Where can I get E0 gas? :angel:


Marine grade fuel has 0E.


----------



## MrBones (Oct 26, 2007)

Jakked said:


> actually, in order to promote the administration's agenda, you'd have to discount the E15 (or penalize the ethanol-free buyers, depending on your perspective), so it would be $3.00 for the E15 and $3.15 for plain gas.
> 
> *Shell 93 octane already has about 12% ethanol*, which is about all that i buy, so i'm not overly concerned, but in a broader sense this is a step in the wrong direction for so many reasons.


Is that true? Because I have used exclusively V93, and am on my 3rd hpfp at 15,000! Top Tier, right? Are there other good brands that are premium, but only 10 %?


----------



## Jakked (Feb 6, 2009)

MrBones said:


> Is that true? Because I have used exclusively V93, and am on my 3rd hpfp at 15,000! Top Tier, right? Are there other good brands that are premium, but only 10 %?


pretty sure. shell _is_ top tier. one of the members here posted a fuel analysis not long ago, showing Shell 93 actually having an octane of some 97 or 98, and also a couple of %age points above the listed 10% ethanol content.

here it is:

http://bimmerfest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=411398&highlight=shell+98+ethanol


----------



## Nightmare5336 (Sep 6, 2009)

*hahah!*



Solidjake said:


> I'm going to buy like 1,000,000 gallons right now and store it


( Shell premium :gallon) 2.67 x 1,000,000= $ 2,670,000

....... in 2 years sell the gas for 2.85 (a gallon) and make $ 180,000

hmmmm thats enough for an 2009 m6. and the rest of the money you have can go towards mods!!:rofl:


----------



## Tedj101 (Nov 24, 2009)

FIA said:


> Marine grade fuel has 0E.


Don't count on that! There may be places where that is true, but the vast majority of marinas in my area are selling E10 and have to by law. It's all about the air quality in your neck of the woods. Mine isn't so hot so we get E10.

BTW, it is in marine applications that I have seen by far the most substantiated problems with the use of E10. Some big cruisers have had to change their fuel tanks -- and changing the fuel tanks on a big cruiser is no laughing matter.

Regards,
TED


----------



## captainaudio (Jul 17, 2007)

ColoradoKraut said:


> The Marxists are in charge!!


----------



## lild (Sep 11, 2007)

i heard a story on the radio the other day, that a woman with a accord, coupl yrs old, went to the gas station filled up, and a few trips to the dealer and 700 bucks later, her car ran good again. 
the problem, she filled up on e85, ruined all injectors and pump.


----------



## ptrcd003 (Dec 19, 2008)

Shell in Canada has 0% ethanol in their 91 octane gas


----------



## Andrew_BR (Sep 18, 2006)

Just for info, here in Brazil we use this blend for AGES, and as a LOT of imports running every day, my 325i 1995 has stock pump, injector, bla bla bla yet.

You shouldn't really be bothered about it.


----------



## Jakked (Feb 6, 2009)

Andrew_BR said:


> Just for info, here in Brazil we use this blend for AGES, and as a LOT of imports running every day, my 325i 1995 has stock pump, injector, bla bla bla yet.
> 
> You shouldn't really be bothered about it.


I am aware that your government has a long history of using Ethanol, dating back to the 1930s. I'm also aware that your country has E25 as the sole option (or thereabouts).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that your government also began requiring car manufacturers in the 1970s to modify car engines to be suitable for E15-E22 with the following:

* Nickel-plating of steel fuel lines and fuel tanks to prevent ethanol corrosion (registering at E20)
* Higher fuel flowrate injectors to compensate for oxygenate qualities of ethanol 
* Changing cylinder walls, cylinder heads, valves & seats, pistons & rings to compensate for ethanol corrosion.


----------



## jusmills (Nov 18, 2005)

This is ridiculous....E15 will damage current vehicles considering that most cars on the road aren't designed to handle this grade of furel, so how does this make any sense? Additionally, did they every stop to think that the higher the ethanol content, the more absorbed water in the fuel. The worst part of this is that, as other's have said this is all because of a lobby that suggests that using FOOD as a fuel source is a good idea. We'd be alot better off pushing low sulfur diesel. Further researching how to use microbes to make fuels Gas from Microbes


----------



## cali311soca (Oct 24, 2009)

Two things. Ethanol is hygroscopic and is a solvent. Need I say more?


----------



## Lucifer23 (Dec 5, 2009)

Jakked said:


> I am aware that your government has a long history of using Ethanol, dating back to the 1930s. I'm also aware that your country has E25 as the sole option (or thereabouts).
> 
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that your government also began requiring car manufacturers in the 1970s to modify car engines to be suitable for E15-E22 with the following:
> 
> ...


Jakked is very well informed,perhaps the government its just trying(on the long run) to get of the streets older cars?
I am in fact the opposite of Jakked,i am misinformed so don't take my post too seriously its just something that came in my head...


----------



## GoVols! (Dec 14, 2009)

This is the EPA doing its own economic stimulus coupled with environmental go-goodiness. 

Make people fill up with fuel that will destroy their cars that were not designed for "green":rofl: fuel, leaving them with a choice to either spend a buttload of money to keep it going or to buy a new econo-box transportation module death trap. Either way, just one more example of how the government is invading our lives.


----------



## FIA (Apr 6, 2003)

Tedj101 said:


> Don't count on that! There may be places where that is true, but the vast majority of marinas in my area are selling E10 and have to by law. It's all about the air quality in your neck of the woods. Mine isn't so hot so we get E10.
> 
> BTW, it is in marine applications that I have seen by far the most substantiated problems with the use of E10. Some big cruisers have had to change their fuel tanks -- and changing the fuel tanks on a big cruiser is no laughing matter.
> 
> ...


I didn't know that. At my marina they insist no alcohol in the fuel, it absorbs water. To change out my fuel tanks you'd have to remove both engines, the generator and part of the top deck. OUCH!


----------



## bluesjuke (Dec 21, 2009)

Beenthere said:


> Ethanol use in autos was a lie from the beginning so now we must promote the myth instead of promoting Diesel and a sustainable future energy policy. :thumbdwn:


Funny thing is that now many enviormentalist realise the mistake and want to reverse this folly but other idiots are running with it and running us into the ground as well. Not to mention the costs of food & feed prices going up in part from this.

I know in my pickup for work ethanol has resulted in a 10% decrease in my MPG so in effect the cost has gone up in more than one way.
More $$$, less mileage.

What's the sense it that!?!


----------



## anE934fun (May 10, 2008)

pony_trekker said:


> What ever happened to free market economics?
> 
> How about letting buyers choose between no alcohol gas for 3.00 a gallon and E15 for 3.15?


Because the ethanol producers can't survive on their own. They need to have alcohol mandated as a gasoline constituent. This is more FUD (if you don't increase the amount of ethanol in gas, we will be forced to lay off workers...).

The only economics in this move is to increase the wealth transfer to the alcohol producers. If they get their wish to move to 15%, the next step will be to go to 20%. What a crock of sh*t!


----------



## Tedj101 (Nov 24, 2009)

FIA said:


> I didn't know that. At my marina they insist no alcohol in the fuel, it absorbs water. To change out my fuel tanks you'd have to remove both engines, the generator and part of the top deck. OUCH!


Many older Hatteras Yachts and (I believe) Bertrams have fiberglass fuel tanks that can't hold gasohol - even at 10% levels. There are companies that are making bladders to put in the old tanks and some have had them removed and replaced, but gasohol has been a nightmare in the boating community.

Don't come up to the northern part of the Chesapeake if you're not gasohol capable. There are a couple of counties on the Eastern Shore that still have "real" gas and, I think, South of Soloman's Island you are all right -- for awhile!

Best,
TED


----------

