E15 is here next year

Yamaha FJR Motorcycle Forum

Help Support Yamaha FJR Motorcycle Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

JAB

Well-known member
Joined
May 6, 2014
Messages
70
Reaction score
10
Location
NEW BERN, NC
Well it looks like we have another executive mandate comming our way next year, E15 will be the law of the land at least till the current bunch is run out of town. They know a vast majority of motor vehicles will choke on the stuff, but what the heck, that's progress.

Questions I have are:

- Other than not using E15, is there a practical solution out there?

Apparently this new regulation will be put into effect in 2016, There will be no practical way to avoid the stuff on a trip of any distance.

- What would it take to convert the FJR to safely use this stuff?

- I did a Google search and found bellperformance.com . Has anyone had experience with this particular additive? Does it really work?

 
What are you reading? Google brings up nothing on any Federal E15 mandate.

Certainly corn prices are incredibly low and the supply is at all time record levels world wide ... but this sounds like just something that somebody on right wing radio ginned up to get callers.

 
And, FWIW, there are many vehicles, including the Prius, which specifically say NOT to use any fuel with more than 10% ethanol content, so it's not just in the motorcycle domain.

 
Locally, corn free fuel has become more available recently. It is only available in high octane, but a year ago I had to cross two counties to get that.

FWIW, I still have a couple of cans of lead additive from the days when lead free fuel replaced what was then regular gas.
unknw.gif
My point is that if E15 actually becomes the only fuel available then it will happen slowly enough that most vehicles will be able to use it safely at that time. I honestly don't think that will ever happen because other technologies will replace gasoline by then.

 
Apparently this new regulation will be put into effect in 2016, E15 will be the law of the land at least till the current bunch is run out of town.
***,

Please cite your source(s).

Until then its conjecture at best and misinformation at its worst. Meanwhile, the thread is being place in it temporary new home.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't have a problem with E-15 as long as it is an additional pump at the station. I've used E-10, and even with the addition of Stabil, have had problems with my small engined devices so in that vain maybe I do have a problem.

 
From the EPA website: (I do not see anything that says it is becoming mandatory) https://www3.epa.gov/otaq/regs/fuels/additive/e15/

E15 (a blend of gasoline and ethanol)

In response to a request by Growth Energy and 54 ethanol manufacturers under the Clean Air Act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) granted two partial waivers that taken together allow but do not require the introduction into commerce of gasoline that contains greater than 10 volume percent (vol%) ethanol and up to 15 vol% ethanol (E15) for use in model year (MY) 2001 and newer light-duty motor vehicles, subject to certain conditions. On October 13, 2010, EPA granted the first partial waiver (PDF) (58 pp; 4.6M; published November 4, 2010) for E15 for use in MY2007 and newer light-duty motor vehicles (i.e., cars, light-duty trucks and medium-duty passenger vehicles). On January 21, 2011, EPA granted the second partial waiver for E15 for use in MY2001-2006 light-duty motor vehicles. These decisions were based on test results provided by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and other test data and information regarding the potential effect of E15 on vehicle emissions.

E15 may be lawfully sold by a fuel or fuel additive manufacturer only after the manufacturer has registered E15 and met the conditions of the partial waivers, which include a misfueling mitigation plan for minimizing the potential for E15 to be used in vehicles and engines not covered by the partial waivers. For more information on fuel registration, visit the Registration and Health Effects Testing page. For more information on specific waiver conditions, visit the Misfueling Mitigation Plans page and the Survey Plan page. There are a number of additional factors, including requirements under other federal, state, and local laws, that may also affect the distribution of E15.

With EPA’s June 15, 2012 approval of a number of companies’ misfueling mitigation plans, EPA has acted on each of the Clean Air Act steps required to bring E15 to market. Some companies have now met all of the Clean Air Act requirements related to E15 and may lawfully introduce E15 into the marketplace.

Learn more about EPA actions related to E15 by using the following links to Frequently Asked Questions, Notices & Regulations, Petition for New Rulemaking, E15 Registration and Misfueling Mitigation Plans.

Recent Activities

  • On February 7, 2013, EPA approved a new blender pump configuration, submitted by the Renewable Fuels Association, for general use by retail stations that wish to dispense E15 and E10 from a common hose and nozzle. For more information, please see the Misfueling Mitigation Plans page.
  • On June 15, 2012, EPA approved the first plans for satisfying the misfueling mitigation conditions of the E15 partial waivers. For more information, please see the Misfueling Mitigation Plans page.
  • On May 24, 2012, EPA approved the RFG Survey Association’s E15 Survey Compliance Plan for the remainder of 2012. For more information, please see the E15 Survey Plan page.
  • On April 2, 2012, EPA approved the first applications for registering ethanol for use in making E15. For more information, please see the E15 Registration page and the Registration and Health Effects Testing page.
  • On March 15, 2012, EPA informed the Renewable Fuels Association by letter that its Model E15 Misfueling Mitigation Plan would generally be sufficient to satisfy the partial waivers’ requirement for a misfueling mitigation plan. For more information, please see the Misfueling Mitigation Plans page.
  • On February 17, 2012, EPA released an evaluation of information submitted by the Renewable Fuels Association and Growth Energy for satisfying the emissions and health effects data requirements for registration of E15. The Evaluation Document concludes that the submission would be sufficient to satisfy those requirements. Fuel and fuel additive manufacturers who wish to register E15 may choose to rely on the submission for completing their applications.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
As a motorcyclist with likely fueling needs of 4 to 6 gallons, you want to stay away from the blender pumps.

Blender pumps are OK if you've got plenty of gallons going in on your fill to average things out.

But if the guy in front of you went for a high E blend, and you want a low E blend, the residual ethanol that remains in the system waiting to go to your tank when you restart the pump can run your ethanol content up well beyond your target.

Don't get me started on ethanol as an alternative fuel. I'm wrapping up a semester long course on alternative fuels and powertrains for engineering seniors this week, and I'm loaded for bear.

 
One of the mags recently answered an inquiry on blender pumps and residual fuel left in the hoses. They consulted a pump manufacturer and determined something like one pint. In other words, virtually no effect. Was either Motorcyclist or Cycle World, within the last three issues.

Edit: Okay, here it is, Motorcyclist, Oct. 2105

HOW MUCH GETS LEFT IN THE PIPES?We’ve received numerous letters about it in the past, and it’s a hot topic on car and motorcycle forums—how much regular (or E15, for that matter) gasoline are you putting in your tank if you select premium but the previous customer bought the cheap stuff? And is it enough to dilute your purchase?

The gasoline retailers we spoke with didn’t have an answer, so we turned to one of the nation’s largest gas-pump manufacturers, Bennett Pump Company, for more information.

The engineer we spoke with explained that pipes for all three grades of gasoline feed into a manifold at the top of the dispenser, right where the hose exits the unit. The typical hose length is 10 feet, though some models use a 12-foot or even a 15-foot tube. The industry standard for the inner diameter of that hose (whether it’s in a coaxial vapor-recovery setup or a plain pipe) is 5⁄8 of an inch. A little number crunching yields a volume of 304.8cc for a 10-foot hose, which works out to 0.16 gallon. That volume rises to 0.19 gallon for a 12-foot hose and to nearly a quarter of a gallon for a 15-footer.

Assuming your bike’s capacity is 4 gallons, the 15-foot hose’s 0.24-gallon volume is only 6 percent of the tank’s capacity. For the more common 10-foot hose it’s just 4 percent—in other words, negligible. And that’s assuming the hose is completely full from the manifold to the nozzle valve, which is may not be. Our advice? Forget about it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I use non-ethanol in everything except my truck unless I can find non-eth regular.

I also complain by emails and phone calls about these questionable mandates to my elected officials and vote for those that support my views.

Almost more effective than fussing about it on a forum.
smile.png


https://www.americanmotorcyclist.com/blog

 
OK. I can't resist.

If I've got 15 liters of E10, about 1.5 liters of this is ethanol.

If the guy in front of me used E85, which I can't imagine anyone doing because it sucks so much as a fuel, then I've got about a liter of E85 to contend with, which would be about .85 liters more of ethanol.

So my original intent would have been to have 1.5 liters of ethanol in my tank, but now I've got 2.3ish.

We're still in the mode here where we have stations that sell real gasoline, and so we buy it.

And I made 169 bushels of corn to the acre this past growing season ... that's how I know how lousy prices are and how overblown supply is worldwide.

From a corn farmer perspective, it would help prices to have an E85 mandate, but it would lead to revolt among fuel consumers, even in the corn states.

 
They should mandate that the farmers, corn transport companies, and the fuel transport companies all switch over to E85 engines in their vehicles/harvesters. You know, use what you sell, right? How well will that fly?

 
A few people run E85 because their vehicles can handle it and it is normally a lot cheaper by the gallon. I know that may be a false economy, but that's what some people do.

A more popular reason in my neck of the woods is for people to use E85 in high performance applications because it runs cooler. They burn it fast to get the horsepower, but can run more boost without overheating, so it is useful for short runs.

I don't know if E15 will really cause problems in vehicles designed for E10, but I would not use it unless I had no other choice.

 
Apparently this new regulation will be put into effect in 2016, E15 will be the law of the land at least till the current bunch is run out of town.
***,

Please cite your source(s).

Until then its conjecture at best and misinformation at its worst. Meanwhile, the thread is being place in it temporary new home.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/11/30/epa-approves-lower-ethanol-increase-us-fuel-supply-than-2007-law/76574544/

Boiling the above news report down. EPA is mandating an increase in ethanol consuption above what it was, but not as high as the Democrat controlled congress had mandated in 2007. I may have read more into what I heard on NPR radio last night than I should have. The above report says the increase in ethanol is reflecting the increase in gasoline consuption rates.

I appoligize for alarming everyone. I thought there was confirmation on Fox News this AM. But I guess it was just reporting the EPA anouncment above.

.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Apparently this new regulation will be put into effect in 2016, E15 will be the law of the land at least till the current bunch is run out of town.
***,

Please cite your source(s).

Until then its conjecture at best and misinformation at its worst. Meanwhile, the thread is being place in it temporary new home.
NPR last night reported it and it was confirmed on a Fox News report this AM. Apparently the EPA has the controling power in this decision and there will be no put from the Republican congress. This will be an executive fiat. What I heard was that it would be implemented in 2016.
I think what you heard was that EPA was going to allow the (voluntary) sale of E15.....which is quite different than a mandate that E15 completely replace E10.

 
NPR last night reported it and it was confirmed on a Fox News report this AM. Apparently the EPA has the controling power in this decision and there will be no put from the Republican congress. This will be an executive fiat. What I heard was that it would be implemented in 2016.
See how Pterodactly actually pasted a source? That's what I meant. Or a link to your source? Otherwise, I think you've shared mostly commentary and speculation...which I think MCRIDER007 better captures the facts for. Optional sales is very different than mandatory single source and your thread title and OP are misleading.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
A few people run E85 because their vehicles can handle it and it is normally a lot cheaper by the gallon. I know that may be a false economy, but that's what some people do.
A more popular reason in my neck of the woods is for people to use E85 in high performance applications because it runs cooler. They burn it fast to get the horsepower, but can run more boost without overheating, so it is useful for short runs.

I don't know if E15 will really cause problems in vehicles designed for E10, but I would not use it unless I had no other choice.
Anybody who runs E85 because it is cheaper and chooses to fill the tank with it a second time is mathematically and financially challenged.

E85 has a much lower energy content compared to E10 or E0 (real gasoline).

Your mpg will drop quite a bit so that even the least casual observer should be able to notice it. The cost difference doesn't come close to making up the mpg difference, at least not around here.

 
Top