Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
BJoe

Best way to combat these posts?

Recommended Posts

There is yet another E85 thread on another forum I visit and these posts popped up

 

Produces Less Energy

 

                           

 

                                                                                                                                                                  Ethanol produces about 25 to 30 percent less energy than gasoline, which means you get less miles to the gallon in the long run. While many people have already heard this, they haven't considered how it affects the amount of energy it takes to produce E85 in relation to the amount of energy it produces. The United States Department of Agriculture reported in 2010 that ethanol returns 1.42 energy by ratio than is put into it. This number, however, does not take into account secondary inputs. Secondary inputs are parts of the ethanol creation process, such as the machines that gather the corn. Given this and the varying report numbers, there is no definitive study that proves ethanol produces more or less energy than it takes to produce it. However, even if you assume that ethanol produces the same amount of energy it takes to produce it, you're still getting about 25 to 30 percent less energy than you would get with gasoline in your daily driving.

                                   

                               

 

                                    Less Value

 

                           

 

                                                                                                                                                                  When you buy E85 at the pump, it does not cost more than gasoline. It costs less, but this is without taking into account how much energy you get out of E85 versus gasoline. You get about 25 to 30 percent less energy from ethanol. For example, to determine the comparative price of E85, with a purchase price of $2.49/gallon, you would divide this figure by .70 to get the true value of $3.56/gallon. The important factor here is to look at the numbers comparatively. Although E85 may look less expensive at a first glance, it's often not when you start doing the math and comparing the relative numbers.

 

   

 

Corrosive

 

                           

 

                                                                                                                                                                  Ethanol corrodes a number of materials, including plastic, fiberglass and other parts of the engine. Corrosion will either contaminate the fuel or destroy parts of the engine, such as the fuel line. However, this doesn't apply to cars that are designed to run on E85. These vehicles are built with materials that ethanol won't corrode. That being said, it's a factor to consider if you plan to convert your own vehicle to E85. To complete the conversion process, you'll need to replace any plastic or rubber engine parts, such as seals and hose lines, that the E85 comes into contact with. Many of the seals you'll need to replace are part of the engine block itself, making the conversion both difficult and expensive.

                                   

                               

 

                                    Hard to Find

 

                           

 

                                                                                                                                                                  Nationwide in March 2011 the United States only had 2,345 E85 fueling stations compared to 116,855 total gasoline stations in June 2008. Many states, such as Connecticut and Maine, didn't have any E85 stations, and many states had no more than 100 stations, with the most being located in Minnesota at 369 stations. While this number is growing, there is no guarantee about the production of future stations. You can find the most current listing of E85 fueling station locations on the U.S. Department Of Energy's website.

 

   

 

 

There's some typo's in the article. Yet it's basically stating that there are absolutely no soft gaskets that should come in contact with fuel at any point in time...So we have a special head gasket?

 

Most head gaskets out there today are multi layer steel. Hardly ever see composite head gaskets anymore. The intake manifold gaskets are a different story though. They are either going to be composite or most likely reusable rubber. I will personally never use E85 or anything similar because it has been known to be corrosive. However the engine is rated for that type of fuel so run it if you want and if something happens then who cares cause the warranty covers it.

 

Ya its just amusing because Iowa is a huge farm country and is important when pertaining to the election matters. Does the fact that the government is going to strictly Flex Fuel where applicable make anybody wonder what strings are being pulled? Also' date=' what foreign automakers make flex fuel vehicles? From what I see its strictly the Big Three. So who knows what strings are being pulled but if it was so great, the rest of the world would be making everything flex fuel.[/quote']

 

 

What would be the best way to counter them?  Preferably with studies that aren't easily linked to the ethanol lobby.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not always effective, but one way I like to respond is by sarcastically playing along. "Oh yeah, E85 has totally ruined my engine. I've had so many issues with it ruining the engine, I've spent a whole $0 on fixing it!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I've said before, I look at it with an environmental standpoint. Ethanol takes a fraction of the time to clean up that it takes to clean up oil. The environmental risks are far lower with ethanol. We also don't have to go to great depths to retrieve 'hard to get' 'sour' ethanol. ;D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

then there is the water issue...  a little water in gas is a BAD thing, a little water in ethanol is simply burned off with the fuel and never noticed.

 

I like to point out at gas stations that are hocking "HEET" at their counters in the winter that "why would someone pay $x for a pint of THAT, when you could pay $x.xx for a GALLON of e85?"  A few chuckle and say, "I know, but they want us to sell this stuff, and people want to buy it"...  but most get very confuesed as they not only know what e85 is, but also don't understand how HEET works, probably don't quite understand how a pint compares to a gallon either... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually is quite easy to find non-ethanol industry sources to counter each of their claims. Those are all old as the book. However, doing so will do no good because those talking just love to hear themselves and are not interested in the truth (they have their own ideas of truth). I find the only benefit to counter them is for the undecided-which is rare.

 

The corrosion thing-do you know there are at least two great websites for engineers or users to determine the best seal, elastomer for hoses, metals, plastics, etc. I used to have more but lost the links. You could show the unbelievers the sites but don't bet they will believe you enough to look when you post the link and tell them a much wider selection of elastomers have a excellent rating for methanol or ethanol as compared to gasoline-especially a high aromatic one. And metals- high aromatic gas was worse than ethanol. Nor do the non-believers want to admit that today the preferred underground tank for E85 is fiberglass--the bad rap on fiberglass was one brand of fiberglass made before 1990 (?) that had a poor type resin binder that was bad anyway but ethanol sped up it's decay- the only place it is found is about 1% of the very oldest boats. Last- the 1.42 conversion rate for energy had ALL energy inputs accounted for- the unbelievers will never admit oil is exhaustible nor that in refining alone for every 1 btu that goes in of crude- only 0.8 come out. And just how much energy does it take to heat tar sands, frack, or build pipelines?

 

All of that information is available but I do not have the time or energy tonight to look it up. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is an easy one. Kick the legs out from under the table and the argument falls apart.

 

The United States Department of Agriculture reported in 2010 that ethanol returns 1.42 energy by ratio than is put into it. This number, however, does not take into account secondary inputs.

 

As for the post in question. That's what GREET is for.

 

http://greet.es.anl.gov/results

 

Overall, Corn Ethanol uses large amounts of energy but most of it is clean renewable energy. Notice that the energy consumption is per mile so there's no confusion with energy density. Corn Ethanol in FFVs use less Fossil energy than even Hybrid vehicles. And a fraction of it is Petroleum based.

 

One more note on the charts is the GHG numbers. E85 is cleaner than Gasoline but emissions aren't nearly as clean as Hybrids. Automakers still need to figure out the PZEV issues with E85. I know that's been an issue with selling FFVs in the 13 states following California emissions for some time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...