Jump to content


Full Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by 1outlaw

  1. colchiro- In my S10 FFV (4cyl) I change at 3-7,000 miles no matter if I am running Synthetic or conventional 10W-30 diesel oils (10w-30 only in summer). If I am running 5W-30 conventional S series oil I change at 3-4,000. I do not change because of fear of oil breakdown or dilution- I change early due to being too conservative and fear of air filtration issues in the sandy area I live in. Our use is similar to your's- 2-2mile trips on weekdays and 30-60 minute drives on weekends. If I were to do oil analysis I might be more confortable with silicate (dirt) contamination. I have seen filtration issues take out multiple Detroit 2 stroke diesel engines in very high dust conditions (granted- 2 strokes take in a lot of air and once we started with oil analysis, we found our problem- damaged filters)
  2. I wonder if that is patially due to elevation. Insulating/ shielding the lines might help.
  3. GT- I will ask one of our guys who runs e85 in his T. I'll let you know what, if any, adjustments he made. I think they only run choke.
  4. mpersell- regarding ethanol use with oils and moisture. If we were doing oil analysis what would see if we read the report when run on the same oil at 3,000 miles, 6,000 miles, and 9,000 miles? Rapid loss of TBN? Rapid loss of viscosity? Wear metals? Unfortunately I have not ran an analysis on my stuff the last 3-4 years. The only one I have for reference is a friend who has a 1990 Non-FFV Ranger with 260,000 miles on it. This engine is all cast iron and has NO mods at all. It has operated on only E85 since it's 200,000 mile birthday in May of '05. John runs 15W-40 Diesel oil in it and showed me his oil analysis at 8,000 miles- everything was still in spec for a diesel oil but this vehicle runs pretty lean. I think John's pickup may be an exception to the norm Visually in my own vehicles- I get far less darkening on E85 than previous on NL gas and the oil never has shown any cloudiness or white slime on filler cap/ dipstick from moisture. I assume the less darkening is due to less carbon and less than 5 ppm of sulfur in the E85 i use. (I use ultra low sulfur natural gasoline instead of NL in the E85- it is water clear) Does this ultra low sulfur version of E85 prevent TBN loss?- probably since sulfur in fuels turns into acid when blowby and fuel dilution reaches the crankcase. I am not sure whether a difference of 10-20 ppm is significant but throw it out for discussion.
  5. It reminds me of when Henry Ford started building his T's and A's for alcohol and to be different the precurser to GM started endorsing fossil fuels from Standard Oil. (not that I was alive then )
  6. It is nice to see plants starting up in Texas- long overdue, especially cellulosic. Texas will need a whole lot more to avoid being an importer of ethanol- until then the ethanol price there will be higher than the Midwest.
  7. I do not know who the middleman is in Texas but most likely there is one or more since Texas is likely supplied by rail. This will make it difficult there because ethanol rail cars are usually shipped in lots of 5-50 cars, each holding 29,000 gallons. If these are transloaded to trucks- at that point the truck could go to a station if the station has blender pumps to blend ethanol with gas, if not the e85 will have to be blended at an oil terminal or a jobber's bulk facility. This is the main reason you do not see many e85 stations outside of the corn belt- it is too difficult to split these large shipments down w/o a jobber who wants to see e85 happen. It is not that there is a discount for full (8-8200 gal) loads, it is a matter of freight costs on less than full loads (LTL)- costs are the same to run a semi hauling 1000 gallons or 8200 gallons (2-3 cents freight suddenly becomes 6-16 cents) . This dictates then that LTL can only come from an oil terminal where the balance can be filled with other products. Thus the industry standard should be 12-15,000 gallon tanks like they are for NL gas. Unfortunately many stations take their midgrade or premium tanks which are typically only 6,000 gal and convert that tank to e85 because they can do that pretty cheap but it costs everyone in the long haul.
  8. Sorry there Greengenes and Dan- I did not intend to put my comments in your qoute :-[
  9. It may be that if only one plant in the area is selling to the jobber/ supplier is having high (ambient) temperature related production problems or the jobber contracted too little for the current level of sales- this could cause the disruption you are seeing. More likely is- stations tend to put in too small of tanks to hold a full load plus required dead space and enough reserve for sales between point of order and arrival. A location with sales of 800-3,000 gallons of e85 per day should never put in less than a 12,000 gallon tank. I have started putting 15,000 tanks at sites in bigger towns. Many E85 pumps are hooked up to 2,000-6,000 gallon tanks because they thought they would lift the product at an oil terminal at the same time they are lifting gas or diesel- they did not realize for best price they would need to buy direct in 8,200 gallon loads.
  10. I might speculate that those chemicals are under longer term contract and as a lower % of the final product, less effect.
  11. 1outlaw


    E.B. Cornburner- a perhaps oversimplified answer would be that the wholesale ethanol market has been relatively stable yet as you see Wisconsin stations have dropped NL gas about $0.37 (one big reason NL has dropped so much in WI. is the BP in Whiting IN has come back on line and now is flush with supply in the upper Midwest). If you leave ethanol as a constant yet NL drops it looks like; $0.37 change on NL x 15% (the gas portion of e85)= $0.055 change in e85 cost Longer term wholesale ethanol tends to follow gas but with some lag time due to changes in stations changing to or from ethanol in their "up to 10%" blends. This situation is a little different because the BP supply issue caused a localized (upper Midwest only) spike in NL that ran way ahead of the ethanol market for a while. Again- it's oversimplified but illustrative.
  12. uh- Cornburner, on your fuel cap- "Ford recommends BP" ;D
  13. Thanks colciro- I read Dans post too fast and only looked at the article- missed the video. I see the E20 now. You can see why they offered e20 in the video- they are selling it for less than straight RFG NL gas. This is a blender pump and they had an open position to put a product in- maybe someday the e20 position will be e98??
  14. Dan- I must have missed something in the article- I only saw E85. E20- No Wisconsin has no mandates at all. What it does have is the Milwaukee area must use RFG which contains some ethanol.
  15. For me the E20 is a short term product to have the 3 hose blender pump to dispense until we have more variety in the vehicles. Then I might offer e98, e85, e50!! ;D As Dan points out, e20 might get the automakers to move to standardize on high alcohol compatible parts. Maybe e10 is the least desirable fuel in the long run. What I really want is very high alcohol fuels in engines optimized for alcohol-not gas so that we have not only performance but the economy (mpg) we give up in today's flex vehicles. The real "wall" coming is the cost of corn that will be with us until cellulosic production costs come down to compete with corn. This "wall" may be difficult for ethanol plants to compete with selling ethanol cheap enough for e85 so it can be 25% under NL gas (depending on where gasoline goes in price)- thus many still hang onto selling ethanol for e10 where to date there has been a premium value. A more efficient FFV or dedicated alcohol vehicle would wipe out much of the premium ethanol producers get for e10 vs e85. In my mind- at that point i think more plants would take a harder look at e85 and stop supporting mandates for e10 and e20. To get thru the next difficult years most plants are quickly learning to get more ethanol and value from a bushel (ie -corn oil diesel, methane for electricity and boiler fuel) while also exploring new processes. We may use the warmth from the process water to raise fish/ shrimp. The ethanol industry needs to put some distance between itself and oil so that it is not so dependent- Direct marketed e85 or ethanol marketed to a dependable partner for e85 blending (ie-MFA model) is one way to do this over the long road. The concern is -can the discount in ethanol value for e85 be accepted financially until the automakers close the mileage gap with optimized vehicles. Just my opinion- fire away ;D
  16. I bet those OPEC boys are afraid that some day governments may start charging additional taxes on fossil fuels to cover defense of oil interests. They should not be afraid- the longer they hold their oil, the more they will ultimately get for it as it becomes more scarce. I think this is a PR move to emphasize the subsidies going to all alternatives and keep the focus off of oil subsidies.
  17. For many years Indy ran methanol- they went to it after a horrible fire with gasoline. They started looking at ethanol so they could use a fuel with far less toxicity and corrosion than methanol. Last year they ran 90% methanol/ 10% ethanol. This year was straight ethanol. It also gives them a more visible flame for safety in the pits should a fire break out.
  18. My understanding is this is exactly what Henry for did with the Model T and refined it a bit on the early "A"- 'course this was carburated. Both were flex fuel. Just set the choke.
  19. mpersell- see if the state govt of Texas has a petroleum inspection program and then if they can check E85 for % alcohol/ % gas content or at least do the water test for alcohol% in the Federal handbook. Take a quart sample to them. Also put some e85 in a clean glass jar and observe it for color- does it have a slight yellow tint, a heavy yellow tint like gas, or is it clear. Has water settled to the bottom- cool it down and look again for phase separation (water). Let us know what you see. I suspect it will still end up being the tune Daimler has in it.
  20. tschaid- You want your plant to be self energy sufficient? I do not know if it will work for you due to scale, investment, or neighbors but large ethanol plants are looking at making methane from the by-product syrup (solubles) and using the methane to run generators & boilers. What are you doing with your spent mash after second fermentation- will this be sold for cattle feed?
  21. Sadly- I am unaware of any organized push for these engines. Further- the "dream" of automakers is hydrogen which plays into oil's hands since that will be the source. These ethanol engines should be a focus of Epic, American Coalition for Ethanol, RFA, and the NEVC.
  22. Thanks Dan for finding and posting this research paper. This correlates to the single cylinder research paper EPA published earlier. Bring on these engines- when the efficiencies are improved like this, high alcohol fuels will be accepted by more consumers and the lack of ethanol/ methanol pumps across the USA will be corrected in time for the arrival of a flood of cellulosic ethanol. At that point I would see oil companies pushing methanol and ethanol producers needing to have their work done in getting up blender pumps to offer multiple high ethanol blends from E30-E100.
  23. Dan- the one benefit to e20 though might be to force automakers to upgrade fuel pumps in all cars to operate in electrically conductive fuels and increase pump and injector delivery rates-- then they might just go ahead and make them all flex!
  24. Thanks Cessna and mpersell, I hear you on the biofuel taxation issue- Wisconsin refuses to tax on BTU content so e85 users do pay more road tax per mile and the proposed WI tax on oil companies appears to also apply to ethanol (e85 might get exempted but this is unknown at this time).
  • Create New...