scottf wrote:......There are increasing blending requirements though. The EPA originally required 7.5 billion gallons of renewable fuel (ethanol for gasoline) to be blended into gasoline by 2012, and it will be 36 billion gallons by 2022. ........

Is there any chance of this legislation and/or rule-making being reversed or otherwise going away? I'm sure the farmers & distillers like it but is it really doing what was originally intended? Which I believe that was to wean us off foreign oil. Increased domestic oil production seems to be taking care of that instead.
A bit off-topic but who in the world manadated these chickenshit curly-cue energy saving light bulbs and the demise of incandescent bulbs? First curly-cue bulb I tried, I had to look twice at the switch to be sure the light was really on. Brighter after they warm up but I still prefer the old-school incandescents. Is the lack of / high price of incandescent bulbs here to stay?
As far as I'm concerned, they should get rid of both the energy-saving bulb mandate and the ethanolized gas mandate, and give the freedom of choice back to the consumer.

How many of you BC gurus are flying MoGas in and around Oregon? My new STC is being installed and I want to join in. Thank you.

hotrod180 wrote: A bit off-topic but who in the world manadated these chickenshit curly-cue energy saving light bulbs and the demise of incandescent bulbs? First curly-cue bulb I tried, I had to look twice at the switch to be sure the light was really on. Brighter after they warm up but I still prefer the old-school incandescents. Is the lack of / high price of incandescent bulbs here to stay?
As far as I'm concerned, they should get rid of both the energy-saving bulb mandate and the ethanolized gas mandate, and give the freedom of choice back to the consumer.

The lightbulb law was signed by Bush (Dec 19, 2007) to placate a democrat dominated house and senate in another failed attempt to "play nice" and appease the eco-nazis on the left. This law also introduced the "Renewable Fuel Standard" mandating the ethanol contamination of our fuel supply.

contamination of our fuel supply

Evidently you never read CourierGuys posts about what fuel he uses and haven't bought any at the local gas station lately. Believe it or not, ethanol is being exported to Saudi Arabia because they need the octane and want to clean up their air. If I make any money next year on my investments, it's going to be because of exports. We could keep it at home and use it all if we upped the percentage to 30 like I have used in my vehicles since 2001. Talked to my eye doctor yesterday and he said his brother that designs ethanol plants just got done with one in Brazil. They're going to process corn to supplement their sugarcane since they're getting along so well with the stuff.

By the way, I have a 2012 Ford Focus that has had 95% E85 for fuel and gets a consistent 30 mpg. I saw a guy fueling one just like it with either E0 or E10 87 oct. a few days ago and asked what he got for mileage. He said 38---I'll keep using the E85 fuel I make locally.

I worked in the commercial HVAC industry for over 30 years. I was always glad when someone invested in a new HVAC system but would never think of forcing them to do so. If a product is worthy, then competition in the open market will bear that out.
If you can make (more) money selling your ethanol to the Saudis, more power to you. Feel free to send them my share. If your vehicles and/or airplanes run well on ethanol, whether it be 10% or 100%, again- more power to you. Just give me the freedom to choose that fuel (or not) for my own rigs. Currently I do have that choice, sort of. There are two local stations which sell ethanolized gas, and a shitload that don't. I'd like to see it available at more stations, and will gladly pay a reasonable premium for it.
BTW is your 180 approved for ethanolized fuel?

BTW is your 180 approved for ethanolized fuel?

Yes and no. If I put the Texas Skyways engine on yes, otherwise no. The same gov't rules that you hate also make it so that I don't have the freedom to use fuel that I want legally.

180Marty wrote:

BTW is your 180 approved for ethanolized fuel?

Yes and no. If I put the Texas Skyways engine on yes, otherwise no. The same gov't rules that you hate also make it so that I don't have the freedom to use fuel that I want legally.

This interests me. So the Texas skyways engine us approved for ethanol, yet when I talked to them, they told me that they are only approved for 100LL, no moGas period. Maybe they thought I was asking about the high HP one? Didn't know they had a stock engine conversion. Also, does the engine come with a new carb, or does the stock carb have to be rebuilt with new orings that can handle ethanol? How about all the fuel lines and fuel bladders? It all gets pretty costly just to run ethanol. I agree that choice would be good, don't force it on us.

I have the Texas Skyways motor and it is not approved for mogas or ethanol mogas, high compression 0-470-U/TS 250HP. It is STC'd for ethanol but not the ethanol blends you buy at the pumps as far as I understand it. It has to be a special blend of straight ethanol that Marty can most likely get in Iowa at the ethanol refineries. It's not to say this engine can't run on mogas, it is the same compression as our 0-320-B2B 160HP that is STC'd for premium mogas. I think there are just not enough of these TS 470 motors to warrant the STC on EAA or Peterson's end. Havnt checked in over a year so it's possible they have been added to one of their STC's. The TS 0-520 on Moonshine Express (C 180) was STC'd for ethanol but not sure if it carries over onto all their 0-520's?

Sorry for thread drift, last I filled up was at KAQO for $4.20 gal, out here in West TX it was $4.99 last fill at KPRS

The official ethanol fuel that is STC'd for TS is AGE-85. If I remember, it is 88% ethanol.11% pentane(one of many gasoline molecules) that is volatile for starting purposes, and ~1% biodiesel for lubricity. If you could bypass all the middlemen, a railcar full of ethanol should be easy to supply anywhere in the lower 48. The Orlando area has a pipeline from Tampa that supplies ethanol that might be imported from Brazil or barged over from the Mississippi. The Chicago price of ethanol right now is about $1.60---the cheapest high octane fuel anywhere in the world. Ethanol is way safer than transporting crude oil. The RV 3 guys at Sioux Fall SD prefer straight ethanol with a little tank of gas to prime for starting. High percent blends of ethanol are less volatile than gasoline.

I learned that a 337 and STC is needed for both Engine and Airframe when installing the Peterson Autofuel STC.

It is interesting that marinas have ethanol free Autofuel, compared to airports. Honokahau, Keehi, and Newport have it. Where I fly, only Lebanon (S30) seems to have it. The politics of GA is failing us owners and it makes flying more of a chore than it should be. The three letter groups seem to make this happen.

Skalywag wrote:......... I think there are just not enough of these TS 470 motors to warrant the STC on EAA or Peterson's end. Havnt checked in over a year so it's possible they have been added to one of their STC's. The TS 0-520 on Moonshine Express (C 180) was STC'd for ethanol but not sure if it carries over onto all their 0-520's? .....

Think it would have to be Petersen as I believe EAA only does 87 octane mogas STC's.

180Marty wrote:

BTW is your 180 approved for ethanolized fuel?

Yes and no. If I put the Texas Skyways engine on yes, otherwise no. The same gov't rules that you hate also make it so that I don't have the freedom to use fuel that I want legally.

Sure you can use it legally. Just do the testing required to prove it is safe, and get the STC for it. Once you own the STC, you can not only burn whichever ethanolized fuel you want, but you can sell the STC to others for their use. If getting an STC is too much trouble, maybe you can get your airplane re-certified as experimental R&D for the purpose of researching ethanol use.
E-zero mogas has been proven safe in the airplane I fly. Both Petersen & EAA have the STC to do so. If and when the FAA says E-10 (or whatever) is safe to use, and EAA Petersen or you can sell me an STC for it, I'll happily start burning it. But for now, governmental meddling with the free market is what is crimping my style.
I understand that you have a dog in this fight, Marty, but don't blame me when I gripe about the fight being rigged.

$4.68 at Byron, CA

I filled my 300 gallon tank at $5.65 a month ago so you can thank me for the price drop. Can't imagine using ethanol in a plane, the way it picks up condensation during phase seperation (and lowers octane). I've been running my vehicles on natural gas for years, I get the foreign oil argument, I just think corn makes crappy gas. I'd rather eat it. Jackson Hole's current $7.30/gallon avgas could make one consider running contaminated gas though. $7.54 for jet A. They will wave the handling fee if you buy enough of it.

Can't imagine using ethanol in a plane, the way it picks up condensation during phase seperation

Well I guess I have a test going right now----6 gallon plastic jug with about 4 gallons of E10 and it is foggy. It'll be foggy and raining for the next few days so even though I have the jug capped and sealed good, I'll pour some in a clear glass jar and see if it's still crystal clear. If it's still clear, then this moist air must not have made it by the cap---the cap is the secret.

180Marty wrote:

Can't imagine using ethanol in a plane, the way it picks up condensation during phase seperation

Well I guess I have a test going right now----6 gallon plastic jug with about 4 gallons of E10 and it is foggy. It'll be foggy and raining for the next few days so even though I have the jug capped and sealed good, I'll pour some in a clear glass jar and see if it's still crystal clear. If it's still clear, then this moist air must not have made it by the cap---the cap is the secret.

Hey, we finally agree on the ethanol issue!
If your 6 gallon jug is air tight it shouldn't pickup any moisture, But our fuel systems have vents in them that are not sealed tight.
It's the ethanol attracting water and setting for months in my carberators of various equipment that have been my problem. I do live in a wet climate though.
No matter how hard you try to sell it ethanol causes problems with equipment that's not used regularly. I would not hesitate to run it in my plane if I knew it would be used up soon. It works in my tahoe that is driven at least weekly, but it mostly gets non ethanol from my local Pac Pride.

delete

$3.20/litre for 100LL at the local field, or $12.11/gal. In USD that is $9.37/gal.

Pump price has come down about 15% in the last month but no change at the airfield, but its a small field so maybe once the tank is filled again the price will come down.

Fortunately the airfield is in the middle of some prime farmland (which is owned by the aero club), and the rental of the farmland subsidizes the rental cost of the 3 club planes. 172 goes for $115/hr wet. ($89/hr USD). Although I aspire to aircraft ownership one day, it makes a lot of sense to continue renting (at this field anyway).

Jeff

We were "down" to $5.49/gal at Nampa as of last Sunday. It's a good time to have an autofuel STC.

Llano (KAQO) will be $3.75 next week. Woohoo!