Ethanol Usage

[Thug]

Hi gang

So we know petrol is up everywhere and here in Oz the pollies are getting a real bashing and are starting to **** themselves as the swing goes against them. There is talk here now of blending ethonol with the normal unleaded etc to bring the price of fuel down. Is there any danger in this from the US or EU perspective? I understand both countries have been using Ethonol for a while. Any issues for the bike?

Cheers in advance

 

[radman]

Minnesota's loaded with the stuff. You'll be ok as long as the blend doesn't exceed 10%. Beyond that you're in uncharted territory.

 

[Geezer]

Ethanol good, methanol bad.

The owner's manual says that up to 10% ethanol is OK but not to use gasoline containing methanol.

Since alcohol in general makes less power than gasoline per a given quantity, you may notice a slight decrease in mileage with 'gasohol'. Those race cars that make lots of power running alcohol do it by running a mixture that would be WAY too rich for gasoline. My experience is that the 10% mix does not result in any perceptible difference in performance. It would probably make more of a difference in a carbureted engine.

 

[yanktar]

Ethanol is good stuff. But you're gonna BURN IT?????

MUCH better in 15 year old rum.

 

[Thug]

There's a guy here who's company runs 85% ethanol and super high octane with just a simple 200 dollar electronic switch under the bonnet which hooks up to the engine injectors? He recons it runs like a dream...

 

[Jerry]

I live in Iowa where we grow the corn it's made from and it is cheaper than 87 octane regular (gasahol is 89 octane). I've used it in all my vehicles for years and have never had a problem.

 

[yanktar]

I live in Iowa where we grow the corn it's made from and it is cheaper than 87 octane regular (gasahol is 89 octane). I've used it in all my vehicles for years and have never had a problem. (hic!)

Fixed it for you!

Ethanol = Grey Goose :lol: :bleh:

 

[Craig]

Anyone ask themselves why the Ethenol industry still needs tax breaks to be profitable with fuel prices around $3? It’s because to grow it, distill it and distribute it uses about as much energy as the finished product contains. Not something the farm lobby wants you to know.

 

[radman]

Ethanol sucks as a fuel, I hate the ****. The Peoples Republic of Minnesota is in the process of mandating a 20% blend by the year 2012, and nothing I now own, Frank incuded, will run worth a tinkers damn on it. It is a political fuel, not a motor fuel, and is out there only because it pleases 3 groups-greenies, farmers and politicians, not because it provides any motor miracles. :angry:

 

[yanktar]

There are ways to distill ethanol that are energy efficient--but you can't get it pure enough for gasahol (for which is has to be about 98 or 99% pure). However, for simple alcohol fueling (not gasahol) the purity can be lower, about 85%. This can be easily achieved using solar powered distilliation--a simple plastic sheet at an angle over a fermented mash--the sun passing through the plastic causes the alcohol to evaporatate in a greenhouse effect, it condenses on the plastic and runs down and is collected. Lots of energy is used, but it's free solar. Of course, this is low tech so nobody wants to use it...

However, why anybody in the ethanol business needs a tax break is beyond me too.

Plus, I STILL think ethanol works best in 15 year-old aged rum, or Grey Goose vodka!

 

[valetz]

Ethanol sucks as a fuel, I hate the ****............ It is a political fuel, not a motor fuel, and is out there only because it pleases 3 groups-greenies, farmers and politicians, not because it provides any motor miracles.  :angry:

Hey man you can say that again..... and just for the record I'm a Farm Kid, and I hate the $hit ......

 

[Jerry]

Yes, it's a political fuel, but so what? Your gas money can go to farmers or oil companies or governments (in the form of gas taxes) but you are going to pay for the gas you use. Gasahol is cheaper because the taxes are reduced on it. I personally would rather have my money going to a farmer than the government. The fact that I come from a long line of farmers is irrelevant, of course.

Also, it is no longer true that it takes more energy to produce ethanol than you get out of it by burning it. That is very 1980's but is still referred to by opponents. The net energy returns on ethanol today is 134%. That is, you get 34% more energy out of it than it took to grow the corn, transport it, distill it etc.

I do have to agree though that burning ethanol is a terrible thing to do when it could be put into a good single malt scotch.