I heard this on OPB today and looked up the story. I guess this state senator who used to fully behind the 10% ethanol mandate now feels it was a mistake. At least they're not afraid to admit they were wrong and are trying to do something about it. Unfortunately it took some bad gas mileage rather than any vocal opposition prior to passing the law to make her wake up.

http://news.opb.org/article/2666-oregons-ethanol-mandate-under-fire/

At first, she was getting up to 40 miles per gallon. Now, she gets nothing but bad news from her instrument panel.

Walker: "I'm at 33.6 on this tank, which is horrible. It's absolutely horrible gas mileage.

Wonder what she did to wreck the mileage. A guy here in town with a Honda CR-V had to put straight unleaded in when he took a trip and told me he couldn't see much difference in mileage--- a couple of tenths less for the 10%. Here's a test done under controlled conditions where 30% did better than straight unleaded in a 2007 Camry.
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/12/06 ... n-ethanol/

I'll give you one guess on what kind of fuel this plug was igniting.

Love the disclaimer on that report

LEGAL NOTICE This research report was prepared by the Energy & Environmental
Research Center (EERC), an agency of the University of North Dakota, as an account of work
sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy and the American Coalition for Ethanol (ACE).
Because of the research nature of the work performed, neither the EERC nor any of its
employees makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or
responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus,
product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights.
Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name,
trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement
or recommendation by the EERC.

I had a neighbor when I lived in Germany that told me the Germans had a saying "Statistics are like a prostitute. If your paying, then she will do whatever you want"
It's simple really, Ethanol has less BTU's per volume than gasoline so if your running it in an engine that does not have greater thermal efficiency than it does running on straight gas, then you mileage will suffer. Of course I'm sure the there are ways to manipulate reports to prove whatever you want.

Hey Marty, good for you for running linux!

I have to argue your points though:

Just because a spark plug appears to have no deposits or carbon doesn't necessarily mean the fuel is inherently good. That's great that it's burning clean, but the bottom line is that it does have less energy output, and people are noticing reduced fuel efficiency with 87 octane + 10% ethanol. I personally, and everyone I know who pays attention to their gas mileage has noticed it. I did read the article though and find it interesting that a greater amount of the lower energy fuel (E20 or E30) can increase efficiency. Hmm.

Aside from the benefits for you personally, as you have a stake in the ethanol production industry, what benefits is the end consumer seeing, weighed against the impact on the corn market and the increase in fuel spending due to a diluted product at the pump?

Not even mentioned is the 1-1.5 gal of diesel fuel required to produce a gallon of ethenol. By the time the corn is farmed and hauled and processed.

Here we go again

I'll shut up so we don't keep going.

Not even mentioned is the 1-1.5 gal of diesel fuel required to produce a gallon of ethenol

I'll have to learn not to argue with farmers like m7flyer that have a better handle on corn production inputs than I do.[/b]

I heard that on my last trip to Oregon and thought it sounded funny but I liked it so much I had to throw it in to stir the pot... and it looks like it worked

Jr.CubBuilder wrote:Here we go again

Yep. Here is my story. I got home a few days ago from a 3000 mile motorcycle trip from Oregon to Canada and back. While in the US I was getting 200 miles before my 2003 Honda Goldwing was close to empty. Before E10 I was closer to 300.

So I get to Canada, and close to 300 miles before refill.

US gas I was getting 38 MPG Canada 50 MPG

I still think 180marty is a genius for figuring out how to make money at this time.

Rob

They just installed the E20 and E30 blender pumps at our local co-op, and they have been hearing good results from almost everybody, little or no change in mileage.

What kind of yota hybrid gets 33.6 mpg? That is terrible, my wifes VW jetta TDI gets a consistent 42-43, even better if you slow down and drive longer legs.

You Oregon folks have it all; A female US senator driving a toyota hybrid waffling on her vote.

I gotta go check my cornfields

Here is a site to check out http://www.stopeio.com/

lancef53 wrote:You Oregon folks have it all; A female US senator driving a toyota hybrid waffling on her vote.

No, that is California and Washington. Oregon has two male US senators - - not that I think either way is a problem.

The article was about a State Senator in the legislature. She still had stupid reasoning, though.

Some cars will burn this stuff well (newer cars), but yes it has less energy, so less power.
That means the car will de-tune itself, or just spray more in to deliver the power needed. It does burn cleaner, but you use more of it for a given power setting in a car....so it depends on you demands. Don't put it in an airplane, as water attraction and corrosion are a problem.

Zona wrote: Don't put it in an airplane, as water attraction and corrosion are a problem.

Here we go again. Texas skyways has an STC for an engine to put into a 182 or 180 with rubber bladders and no airframe changes. It runs on 85%
ethenol (aviation grade) whatever that means.

Give em a call if you do not believe me.



Tim

lancef53 wrote

They just installed the E20 and E30 blender pumps at our local co-op, and they have been hearing good results from almost everybody, little or no change in mileage.

My brother from north of Minneapolis just reported he got the same mileage going home from Oshkosh as when he went down in his Chrysler Sebring. He used Minnesota E10 and got 30 mpg. For the return I filled his tank with E20 at the Renew station blender pump about 25 miles west of Oshkosh---he was impressed. The E85 the blender could dispense was 91 cents less than the E10. Also, met Joe Norris and N1593Y at the auto fuel forum at Oshkosh. I thought that was pretty neat. The Swift fuel guy sounded encouraging----hope it really is as good as he says.

1SeventyZ wrote:I heard this on OPB today and looked up the story. I guess this state senator who used to fully behind the 10% ethanol mandate now feels it was a mistake. At least they're not afraid to admit they were wrong and are trying to do something about it. Unfortunately it took some bad gas mileage rather than any vocal opposition prior to passing the law to make her wake up.

It will make no difference if they repeal HB-2210, except for the tax incentives that they gave away to the ethanol companies unnecessarily. The Oregon legislature still does not understand that they were overtaken by the 2007 Federal Energy Independence and Security Act before they even passed HB-2210. Ethanol has to be in all auto fuel everywhere in the country in ever increasing amounts through 2022. Since the terminal gets the blending credit, once they have installed the ethanol injector infrastructure they crank out E10 to all of their customers, because they get a $0.51 federal tax credit for every gallon of ethanol they blend, and for the time being a gallon of ethanol is cheaper than a gallon of gasoline. Once a large area, like the state of Oregon, goes E10, the refineries can drop the AKI level by 3 points and pocket the refining savings, you wouldn't know that. Everyone in the oil system benefits. It the gasoline majors don't meet the ever increasing requirement to blend ethanol there will be economic penalties. (Look up RINS)

So they can try to repeal HB-2210 but they will be fought tooth and nail by the ethanol industry that is benefiting from the state tax credits, but it will not change the fact that you can't get unblended fuel in Oregon short of passing a new law outlawing the blending of ethanol. I wonder if any state is prepared to do that ... yet?

lancef53 wrote:They just installed the E20 and E30 blender pumps at our local co-op, and they have been hearing good results from almost everybody, little or no change in mileage.

I doubt that. The physics doesn't compute. And if you have a car still under warranty, check it. There are no American cars whose warranty allows ethanol above 10%.

You Oregon folks have it all; A female US senator driving a toyota hybrid waffling on her vote.

It wasn't a US Senator, she is a state legislature Senator. Actually we have a lot of state legislators now waffling on their vote.

I am just repeating what I hear, I have no firsthand experience with it. I have a Duramax and my wife has a VW TDI.

It is what the people that were using it have said, you can believe whatever you want--I will sleep just fine either way.

I realize now that she isn't a US senator, I incorrectly assumed that because of the quotes in the article from politicians from other states. Sorry for the mistake.

Lance

N1593Y wrote:And if you have a car still under warranty, check it. There are no American cars whose warranty allows ethanol above 10%.

Ford has had "flex fuel" vehicles for a number of years, and Ford says they are fine with E85.
http://e85vehicles.com/taurus-2006.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexible-f ... ted_States

Of course, people still complain about the mileage, starting problems, etc.