# Ethanol in Gasoline - Fuel Additives Gasoline - Truth



## Bedford24

For a Quick Way to Find this let me put the Brochure here under the Correct Title


----------



## Gregg

Thanks for the info !!


----------



## Bedford24

Your Welcome - sorry to see I have some typos


----------



## Cublover

Bedford24 said:


> For a Quick Way to Find this let me put the Brochure here under the Correct Title


Has anyone else noticed that the 'new' formula gasoline is eating all the rubber fuel lines off our older machines? Fuel lines used to last 10 years, now they are cracked and stiff in 2.
It's also causing electric fuel pumps to fail based on the season when they change the formula from cold weather to spring?
In April, more electric fuel pumps die than any other month, based on personal observations.

Input?


----------



## Mickey

E10 has been the way of life here for more than 10 yrs. Straight gasoline not available at service stations. Haven't had any noticeable issues with it but I'm fully aware fuel mileage won't be as good.


----------



## Gregg

In Canada , Shell V Power Super doesn't have ethanol. Same with Esso super. Check out your local station.


----------



## Hoodoo Valley

We have a couple stations that serve up the Ethol free, but it's about 50 cents a gallon more. Small price to pay for escaping the grief.


----------



## Chris-se-ILL

Bedford24 said:


> For a Quick Way to Find this let me put the Brochure here under the Correct Title


I read through the brochure. It is full of _false_ information and half-truths. It talks about methanol and ethanol as though they are the same thing (same forms of alcohol) and it talks about gasoline as though it is a pure form of petroleum distillate, which then has "bad" additives added to it after it is created. 

Gasoline (without ethanol) as it is sold to the public, is not a pure form of petroleum distillate! First of all, gasoline is a complex combination of several petroleum products (butane, ethane, pentane, tolulene, benzine...). The amount of gasoline that is distilled directly from a barrel of crude oil is roughly 10% to 15% (depends on the quality of the crude and the amount of light-ends which it contains). Yet, most (many) refineries produce gasoline from 40% of the same barrel of crude. They break down the petroleum molecules and then reformulate them into whatever fuel is in demand at the time (gasoline, diesel, whatever) 

Here too, if a person were to try to burn (use) the raw gasoline (that which is directly distilled from the crude oil) in a modern engine, the engine would "_carbon up_" within about 3k to 5k miles. Raw gasoline does not burn well (efficiently) at all in a modern engine! Raw gasoline has an octane rating of about 52 to 58 without any additives to control it's volitility. 

One glaring mistake in the article is that "_ethanol and methanol are acid at 7 Ph and above_". Really? Ignoring _the fact _that the Ph scale is _neutral_ *at 7 Ph* and alkaline (or caustic) at a higher Ph #. What makes ethanol acidic is the carbon dioxide content, which is closely controlled during production (after the molecular sieves purify the 190 proof to a 200 proof).

Anyway, it is obvious that the brochure is just another "propoganda" tool that mixes many falsehoods with some facts, which further clouds the whole gasoline controversy!

Chris


----------



## Lawrence1210

Yeah, Chris is right. Propaganda regarding fuel use is driving a lot of serious misinformation. I'm in a business that need to keep tabs on these things and it's getting really crazy.

E10 isn't taking off in my neck of the woods because people won't buy it. Lowers mileage and cars don't run as well. Politicians won't force the sale because all us red-necks would boot them out of office. And I'm okay with that.

Unfortunately for us the usable quality of normal gasoline is getting worse. I've started using 89 octane in my smaller gas engines instead of 87 (mowers/weed-wackers/chainsaw/leaf-blower). I had numerous problems with my gas lawn-mower last fall but with the "better" gas my stuff is running well this year.

Diesel fuel I get seems fine in so far as my 'pickup' truck, but I do use a lubrication additive for the tractor.


----------



## Chris-se-ILL

Lawrence1210 said:


> Yeah, Chris is right. Propaganda regarding fuel use is driving a lot of serious misinformation. I'm in a business that need to keep tabs on these things and it's getting really crazy.


What business are you in? Just curious. I am now a lead instructor at a college, but my previous job was starting up (_training operators_) in ethanol plants. I helped at some point in the start-up of over 30 ethanol plants across the US (_several in Kansas_). I now teach students about process technology (_including petroleum refining_). Among the graduates, three of my students are now employees in a refinery, one is employed at an ethanol plant, and three just got hired at a new bio-diesel plant.



> E10 isn't taking off in my neck of the woods because people won't buy it. Lowers mileage and cars don't run as well. Politicians won't force the sale because all us red-necks would boot them out of office. And I'm okay with that.


That's too bad that you all won't use E-10. Independant studies show that it actual increases milage up to around the 20% to 25% mix. Gasoline burns mushc more efficiently when it has an octane booster (oxygenate). I have been running E-10 in my Farmall 560's, IH 284, and all my small engines (_mowers, chainsaws, weedwackers, trimmers_) since 1992. Other than the initial replacement of fuel filters, the equipment has run just fine! No difference in performance or engine wear (BTW, I am also an ASE Cert. automotive mechanic and also have a second degree in diesel mechanics).



> Unfortunately for us the usable quality of normal gasoline is getting worse. I've started using 89 octane in my smaller gas engines instead of 87 (mowers/weed-wackers/chainsaw/leaf-blower). I had numerous problems with my gas lawn-mower last fall but with the "better" gas my stuff is running well this year.


That "better gas" is higher in octane because of the additives (most likely oxygenates, like ethanol) that have been added to the gasoline. What you don't want happening is if the fuel distributors start adding "methanol" to the mix. Not all alcohol is the same! Methanol is an oxygenate, but is is also a solvent that really has adverse affects on fuel lines and gaskets. The usage of methanol in gasoline is one of the reasons that "alcohol" mixed fuels have such a bad reputation! IT is the main additive that will attack rubber lines and seals. But the petroleum industry says that it is the "alcohol" that did it, not differentiating between the two forms of alcohol.


----------



## Lawrence1210

I'm in the college/university education business too. My role is to understand practical application of technology in real world applications.

As far as E10, practical experience shows it lowers my fuel mileage in my car. Cost-benefit analysis for me shows that it costs me more to use E10 even though E10 is cheaper. But then my engine isn't specifically designed for these new-fangled fuels.

Issue, really, is if the engine is designed for that type of fuel.

Engines designed for E10 should have no problems with it.

>>>>

Our real issue with regard to modern 21st Century fuel-blends is that most of us are using 19th Century combustion-engine technology. There is only so much you can do with it.


----------



## Mowerman

I agree with Lawrence1210 .I find that I cannot get the same milage as I can on regular fuel ,the E10 blend just seems to burn up quicker when your driving .I don't know how Chris reckons his 2 strokes run ok on it as out here in Australia it tells you on the bowser not to use E10 in 2 stroke engnines & also Aeroplanes etc .The mower shops are making a killing selling new brushcutters to folks as they have used E10 in their old machine & it got all blocked up in the Cylinder . Also we're lucky as now our lowest Octane fuel is 91 regular unleaded & 95 & 98 the higher fuels . E10 is 91 & 98 at most places .


----------



## Chris-se-ILL

Lawrence1210 said:


> I'm in the college/university education business too. My role is to understand practical application of technology in real world applications.


That sounds like a very interesting role. I have the perspective of teaching real world applications of technology in an academic setting (_distillation, extraction, reactors, boilers, cooling towers, Quality Control, Safety-Health and Environmental, etcetera_). One thing that I can say with definitive resolution is that Industry is far outpacing the academic world! Most of the administration, staff, and fellow faculty have _absolutely no idea_ how business and industry operate! I have seen folks working on "ideas" to improve industry processes and manufacturing, which are decades BEHIND the current industry. I worked in the R&D facilities of my former company on a gasification unit. Just last spring I visited a 4-yrcollege that is working on a "working gasification unit" and their design was from the 80's! It was so inefficient that I actually felt sorry for them, wasting their time while thinking that they were on the "cutting edge." I started asking them questions about their process and they were shocked that private industry was that far ahead of them. It is truely amazing, the cacoon that academia lives in.



> As far as E10, practical experience shows it lowers my fuel mileage in my car. Cost-benefit analysis for me shows that it costs me more to use E10 even though E10 is cheaper. But then my engine isn't specifically designed for these new-fangled fuels.
> 
> Issue, really, is if the engine is designed for that type of fuel.
> 
> Engines designed for E10 should have no problems with it.
> 
> >>>>
> 
> Our real issue with regard to modern 21st Century fuel-blends is that most of us are using 19th Century combustion-engine technology. There is only so much you can do with it.


So true! I agree. The "modern" internal combustion engine is at-best only 25% efficient on pure petroleum products (much of the BTU's are lost to heat-loss). And the older engines are even worse. The internal combustion engine has actually been "dumbed down" (low compression ratios, wedge-style head design, etc.) to accomodate gasoline. They are getting better, but they are a long way from what should be considered "good." Engines that can handle _HIGH_ compression ratios and hemi-heads can actually get as good, often better milage on pure ethanol, as any pure petroleum fueled engine.


----------



## Chris-se-ILL

Mowerman said:


> I don't know how Chris reckons his 2 strokes run ok on it as out here in Australia it tells you on the bowser not to use E10 in 2 stroke engnines & also Aeroplanes etc .The mower shops are making a killing selling new brushcutters to folks as they have used E10 in their old machine & it got all blocked up in the Cylinder .


I am not sure what the translation of "blocked up in the Cylinder" means, but I have run all my small engines on E-10 gasoline. I have two Echo' weedeaters, an Echo' gas hedge-trimmer, Echo' 24in. chainsaw, McCullough chainsaw, Stihl chainsaw, Techumseh pushmower, and several 4-cycle riding mowers (Simplicity). All run just fine on the E-10 fuel. I have had the weedeaters and riding mowers set over the winter months with fuel in them and they still start up each spring (five months later) on the old gas. I have used E-10 in my two Farmall 560's (circa 1960 and 1961) and my International 486 utility tractor (circa 1976) since 1991 when I went all E-10 in my bulk gasoline tank. I don't know what Aussies are getting for fuel, but I have no problems.




> Also we're lucky as now our lowest Octane fuel is 91 regular unleaded & 95 & 98 the higher fuels . E10 is 91 & 98 at most places .


I thought you wanted _pure gasoline _for your equipment. 91 octane is _NOT_ "straight" (pure) gasoline. Raw gasoline (right off the distillation tower) is about 58 octane at best. The non-alcohol gasoline (_as is sold around here_) is about 87 octane. If the refinery puts enough petroleum additives, solvents, and boosters in it they can get up to around 93 octane. add ethanol to 87 octane at 10% rate and you can get an 89 octane gasoline (it burns more efficiently than the 87). What you folks may want to ask the fuel suppliers is "Are you adding ethanol or _methanol_? If they are adding methanol... you will be replacing _a lot _of rubber hoses and gaskets.

_Modern Gasoline_ is such a conglomerate of mixtures that _the term gasoline_ is a "catch-all" for a wide array of petroleum products mixed together to make a fuel. Modern gasoline is _NOT raw gasoline_. It can't be... or your engines would be fouled up in no time at all.


----------



## Mickey

Chris, have read all your post to this thread and off the top of my head, don't think I can find anything to disagree with. Like you, have never had any issues with E10. As for mileage using E10, The blend is ~3% lower BTU's than gas without the alcohol. There is a bump in octane but octane has nothing to do with energy content.


----------



## Chris-se-ILL

Mickey said:


> Chris, have read all your post to this thread and off the top of my head, don't think I can find anything to disagree with. Like you, have never had any issues with E10. As for mileage using E10, The blend is ~3% lower BTU's than gas without the alcohol. There is a bump in octane but octane has nothing to do with energy content.


Thanks Mickey. The energy value of fuels is indeed measured in BTU's but folks do not seem to consider "efficiency" in their equation. True, that octane rating "has nothing to do with _energy content_." Octane rating has to do with "burn rate" (simplified definition). 

_Lower_ octane has a _faster_ rate of ignition and therefore some of the fuel is (or may be) _unburned_ during the power-stroke of the cycle. Thus, there are usually higher hydrocarbon content exhaust gases passed out of the engine with the lower octane fuels (_increased emissions, the reason for catalytic converters_). Here too, a lower oxygen content of low octane gasoline affects the amount (efficiency) of the fuel that is burned during ignition. This is also the reason that EPA insisted on adding an _oxygenate_ to the low octane gasoline.

The 3.9% loss of BTU's of 10% mix is quite often offset by the _efficiency increase_ in the way that the fuel is consumed by the engine. That being said, the older engines (automobiles) such as 80's and 90's often have an emission control system that incorrectly compensates for the increased oxygen content of the ethanol as sensed by the O2-sensor(s) in the exhaust system. The emission controls see the increase and read it as a _fuel deficiency_ and this tells the fuel control computer to increase fuel ratio in relation to throttle-plate and air intake rate. _It is the emission controls that are skewing the fuel consumption, not the BTU content of the fuels._ Also to consider is the fact that many O2-sensors are either not replaced during regular maintenance as they go bad or are "carboned up" (from the lower oxygen contenet fuel) and they don't read the correct exhaust content.

Ethanol has been the "_punching bag_" of the fuel industry for any and all maintenance and performance problems in the auto industry. I wouldn't doubt that some folks blame a flat tires on ethanol fuels. 

(BTW, Mickey; I figure that you already know most of these points of my posts. But I write my posts as though I am teaching one of my classes. Some folks already know these things, but there are also those that need to hear the critical thinking and facts, behind the point.)


----------



## Lawrence1210

Chris-se-ILL said:


> That sounds like a very interesting role. I have the perspective of teaching real world applications of technology in an academic setting (_distillation, extraction, reactors, boilers, cooling towers, Quality Control, Safety-Health and Environmental, etcetera_). One thing that I can say with definitive resolution is that Industry is far outpacing the academic world! Most of the administration, staff, and fellow faculty have _absolutely no idea_ how business and industry operate!


Sounds like we share similar job-related challenges.

I teach some of this as well, but as an administrative advisor to academia.

Yes, we're currently struggling with some new initiatives from our provost requiring significant "changes" in how the university does business.

Some of our colleges are indeed cutting edge, but most of them just think they are.

BTW, appreciate the detailed explanation of octane in relation to how fuel actually works.

Personally, my biggest beef with ethanol is that it requires resources I'd rather reserve for food production and keep those resources focused on feeding people rather than engines.

The efficient management of natural resources requires that we apply our resources to their greatest advantage, and the greater advantage of crop production for fuel is heavily out-weight by the benefit of crop production for food. Especially when we have such an abundance of petroleum reserves. And, as you noted, many of the engine technologies do not properly use the petroleum fuels. So the problem here is less about fuel and more about engine design.

In context of resources, this university is struggling to better manage resources which requires a higher level of accountability from colleges. And folks here aren't liking that very much.

But if we can't change, we'll soon become obsolete.


----------



## Chris-se-ILL

Lawrence1210 said:


> Sounds like we share similar job-related challenges.
> 
> I teach some of this as well, but as an administrative advisor to academia.
> 
> Yes, we're currently struggling with some new initiatives from our provost requiring significant "changes" in how the university does business.
> 
> Some of our colleges are indeed cutting edge, but most of them just think they are.


I have seen a lot of "high-brow" college professors that truely believe that they are smarter than the folks-in-the-trenches, and that _THEY_ are smart enough to solve industry's problems. When in reality they are trailing the standard. I do not doubt that there are many intellectuals that are cutting-edge, but they are not the majority in my opinion.



> BTW, appreciate the detailed explanation of octane in relation to how fuel actually works.


Not a problem!  Many folks don't consider the macro view of how gasoline works in an engine. My auto-mech background and the process-tech (both ethanol and petroleum processing) background give me some unique insight into the subject at hand that many folks do not have.



> Personally, my biggest beef with ethanol is that it requires resources I'd rather reserve for food production and keep those resources focused on feeding people rather than engines.
> 
> The efficient management of natural resources requires that we apply our resources to their greatest advantage, and the greater advantage of crop production for fuel is heavily out-weight by the benefit of crop production for food. Especially when we have such an abundance of petroleum reserves. And, as you noted, many of the engine technologies do not properly use the petroleum fuels. So the problem here is less about fuel and more about engine design.


I do not know how much you know about the actual numbers involved in ethanol production. Many of the resource papers that are out there are quite WRONG about the inputs, the process, and the returns. _Now, I want to make a disclaimer here... the numbers I am going to site are from memory. I can go look up all the info (and site my sources) if anyone would like me to do so._ The last time I checked, the amount of domestic corn crop (including white corn) that is converted directly to human food (_chips, corn syrup, corn flakes, etc._) is roughly 4% to 5%. Nearly 50% of the domestic crop is converted to livestock feed directly (which eventually becomes human food). Between 10% to 15% (and some years 20%) is exported to other Countries. Depending upon the price and upon the availability, foreign competition, and yields the remainder between 30% to 40% may get used for ethanol production. BUT... (and this is a biggie that the "experts" tend to leave out) nearly 33% (measured by weight) of the corn that is processed is used for livestock feed (cattle, poultry, and even hogs). And the other side of this "distillers grain" equation is that the dist. grains are extremely high in protein, so it is feed as a supplement and it is a high quality feed.  There is no food shortage caused by the conversion of #2 corn to ethanol! That is a proven fact. It is just not true. It is an "emotional trigger" (_and a distortion of the facts_) used to control public opinion by politicians and those that would, "control the masses!"

I farmed for 20 years (1984-2004; fifth generation farmer) and I can tell you that the prices of corn through those years drove me out of farming. One year I sold corn for $1.14. That sucks! Much of the price of corn today is driven by the world markets (exports). As these other nation's economies have improved over the last decade, they have demanded more grain fed meat. Ethanol just took up the slack (surpluses) in the market. Is that bad? Well, not if you treat your farm like a business. I still own my family's ground and make some darned good money off the crop sales. Marketing and advertising affect the price of commodities by a far greater amount than the price of the corn ever will.



> In context of resources, this university is struggling to better manage resources which requires a higher level of accountability from colleges. And folks here aren't liking that very much.
> 
> But if we can't change, we'll soon become obsolete.


I hear ya! The money for colleges is really tight here in IL. The State is owing every downstate college and institution millions of dollars and they are talking about increasing welfare spending even more. Our illustrious leaders just tried to pass a bill that would increase the "downstate" (non-Chicago) property taxes to pay for the inner-city Chicago school systems. Instead of cutting their budgets and being responsible, they want to soak anyone outside of the "emerald city" (or "the swamp," if you don't live there) so that they can maintain their lifestyles. I hate Chicago... but then so does anyone outside of I-80. It is a giant, malignant tumor that is literally killing this marvelous State!


----------



## Chris-se-ILL

Just wanted to add a note about 10% ethanol. One of my Farmall 560's (circa 1960) has set in the shed since the fall of 2009. It has a 6' bushhog and a front loader (homemade). It had a couple of ignition wiring issues (ballast resister and ignition switch; ballast went bad and then the ignition switch had corroded contacts) which needed corrected and I have been too way busy to get back to the repairs (new job and projects). Well two days ago I fixed (replaced) the errant devices. 

As soon as I had the issues corrected (and put a fresh battery in it), I hit the start-button and the tractor fired right up. It had a half-tank of fuel already, so I just went ahead and ran it. After checking all fluid levels and tire pressures, I took the tractor out and mowed for nearly 2.5hours (also pushed some brush and trees cleaning up an old home site). The fuel never gave me a bit of problem. The tractor ran fine. I will be filling it back up with the 10% blend (which I buy at the local convenience store).

For those that say that 10% doesn't keep well for long periods of time, I have to disagree with you. I have never had trouble with 10% blend in my old tractors.


----------



## Gregg

Here is a product : http://www.starbrite.com/sproductdetail.cfm?ID=1537


----------



## Chris-se-ILL

Gregg said:


> Here is a product : http://www.starbrite.com/sproductdetail.cfm?ID=1537


Here is a link that will take ya to their website: Star Tron Enzyme Fuel Treatment. 

I don't need to be adding solvent naphtha (_95% of the ingredients of the "Miracle In A Can" additive_). Naphtha is a general descriptive word for several varieties of "light ends" of petroleum distillation. The additive increases octane in the fuel (decreasing the volatility of the gasoline) but it can do several other things that are not so great. Naphtha may also contain some benzene (soon to be highly regulated in gasoline production). Exposure to benzene is not a matter of "if" you will get cancer... it is a question of "when" will you develope cancer.

I have had absolutely no problem with leaving my mowers, old tractors, or any equipment for that matter, with E-10 in it for years at a time.

Star Brite's website claims: "_Increases fuel economy, especially in older engines. Instantly cures fuel jelling caused by cold weather and E10---alcohol fuels._"

Gee... Star Brite claims that alcohol (which has and is being used as an antifreeze) is going to _*gel*_ your gasoline.... Yea, Right! Someone want to explain that one?


----------



## ZZ71

Well I hate to add my 2 cents but I have seen stickers on (BP) gas pumps in Wisconsin where I fuel up the truck warning consumers to not use Ethanol blended fuels (no E85 depensed there) in outboard motors, marine, motorcycles and other small engines not specially designed to use it. It says to only use Premium fuel with does not contain Ethanol. The sticker was applied pursuant to Wisconsin state law. It also implies on the premium pump that is not allowable to put premium (non-ethanol) into engines not designed for it (high performance etc), in other words to avoid E10, E15 if the vehicle can use it.

The lady said it was state law but I don't know that to be a fact. It could be BP/Owner policy to avoid liability. Its a big BP truck stop in Superior, WI. on US Hwy 2. 

There has been ethanol fuel promlems at a local Nat'l Park that is an island out in Lake Superior. No one supplier can get non-ethanol regular grade fuels and the are not allowed to purchase premium fuel (gov't regs). The Boaters association has been advocating against E10. Again, all hearsay from my perscpective but I do know a fair share of boaters who have had negative experiences with E10 out on the water. Motors died and fuel was the problem. Send Coast Guard Search and Rescue.


----------



## Bedford24

I can give you more - and more... working at a local college teaching numbers and information based on another person's reports is one thing, being in the trenches and seeing the effects first hand... different story... Even the US Army has conducted their own Top End Ring Wear research and using Ethanol/chemical based fuels affect the numbers they have determined... If you want the NASA reports, or the Reports From Stanford or other Government Funded Studies I have those... I had a good education that requires a person perform research and be prepared to present a Bibliography... just saying you work some where doesn't cut it for me... Yes the Fuel Conversation is E10, E15, or E20.... but the handout just as Chris has pointed out on MSDS sheets on additives are very clear... It's not just Ethanol.... The ones who are saying it's all 'Hog Wash' are making it all about ethanol... did you know you no longer buy from a Gas Station but a Fuel Terminal.... the word Gas Station is a historical context.... the point is when you purchase FUEL is it is not Gasoline as a whole.. there are trace amounts of acetone (used as Finger Nail Polish Remover) and traces of tulene (used in Paint thinner and stripper), Kerosene (Higher Concentrations in the summer so oil companies don't have to stock pile it - lower in the winter as they are selling thus Summer/Winter blends besides other chemical changes made due to temperature fluctuation.) and Naptha Formulates.... these chemical concentrations are higher in the last five years and contribute to Fuel Break Down and a lower shelf life... This conversation is more to educate persons with no knowledge.... as to why they may have issues with their fuel.. Most Auto and Equipment Manufacturers have turned to synthetic composites like plastics and rubbers in their manufacturering to make cars lighter and cheaper.. I can give you an example - don't take our word for it do your own experiments - pour gasoline in a jar and watch it... put it in a jar and put different types of metals and composites in it and then report back your findings...


----------



## Rusty

Corn should be used for food and liquor,not fuel. If you want the best alternative fuel it is by far hydrogen. this ethanol crap is being promoted by the government because alot of our "representitves" are invested in it, no other compelling reason that I can see.


----------



## Lawrence1210

ZZ71 said:


> Well I hate to add my 2 cents but I have seen stickers on (BP) gas pumps in Wisconsin where I fuel up the truck warning consumers to not use Ethanol blended fuels (no E85 depensed there) in outboard motors, marine, motorcycles and other small engines not specially designed to use it. It says to only use Premium fuel with does not contain Ethanol.


Along with ethanol fuels, I can also get 3 grades of no-ethanol. 87, 89, 91.

My latest small engine purchases (2-cycle weed-wacker, chainsaw, leaf-blower) suggest using minimum 89 octane.

So after my problems last year with mower, which is detailed in a separate thread, I started using 89 octane fuel exclusively in all my smaller engines. So far this year, no engine running/starting problems, and my 18hp B/S mower/tractor runs better than ever. I can't explain how or why 2 extra octane rating makes that much of a difference.

My little 3-Cyl Diesel runs just fine on modern diesel, although I do put in a lubricating additive just to pamper it.


----------



## Lawrence1210

Rusty said:


> Corn should be used for food and liquor,not fuel. If you want the best alternative fuel it is by far hydrogen.


We're worrying about modern fuel blends being used in 100 year old engine technology.

What we need are affordable hydrogen engines, and then this whole fossil fuel debate will go away.

... but industry can't just swap engines at the drop of a hat. We have so much invested in existing engine technologies that this kind of transition would take another 100 years to complete.


----------



## indianajo

Chris-se-ILL said:


> Exposure to benzene is not a matter of "if" you will get cancer... it is a question of "when" will you develope cancer.


I've been washing bicycle, mower, and car parts in gasoline since 1962. I use my bare hands, no smoking or flame of course. Iso-octane, a form of benzene, was a major component in gasoline until MTBE about 1980. When is this cancer going to strike?
I've been running about 10% hardware store ethanol, and recently E85 which is cheaper, in my Briggs & Stratton 15.5 hp vertical shaft mower for about 8 years. When I don't, water collects in the fuel filter and stalls the engine. I mow 23 acres with the B&S, since the MF 245 tractor I bought turned out to be a gearless wonder. When is all this engine damage going to occur? 
I ran some E85 in my 255 Ford V8 the last two years, Cuts top end horsepower, but it is very cheap, and mostly american made, which the amyl butyl ether (RFG) that comes up the ohio river probably is not. Had my engine all apart last year to inspect, found the crank worn out. No valve or ring damage. Put the old rings back in after honing the cylinder for helical score again. Runs great with the new crank. Tell me again about ethanol? I'm much more worried about the volatile components of RFG that evaporate in the tank if the car sits for a couple of months. After that, the car won't start, or run after the primer fuel runs out on the accelerator pump. And this heavy RFG leftover sludge won't lift through the idle circuit of a fomoco/rochester 2 bbl carburator, either.


----------



## Chris-se-ILL

indianajo said:


> I've been washing bicycle, mower, and car parts in gasoline since 1962. I use my bare hands, no smoking or flame of course. Iso-octane, a form of benzene, was a major component in gasoline until MTBE about 1980. When is this cancer going to strike?


The quote about benzene, is an "_exact_" quote that was told to me by a Marathon Petroleum engineer. I was setting in their training room at the refinery and talking to several engineers and chief-operators about their training program. We were also discussing their new billion dollar unit that is designed to remove benzine from gasoline, because the EPA is mandating it's removal. I too used to clean a lot of parts in both gasoline or diesel fuel all through the 70's, 80's, and 90's. I also was exposed to all sorts of chemicals (including carbon tetrachloride) during my years as an automotive machinist in the late 70's. You can draw your own conclusions about "when" or even if you will get cancer... I just quoted a refinery engineer. It all depends on whether you have had accute or chronic exposure. Go ask anyone that works in a refinery about their opinions and thoughts on benzine!



> I've been running about 10% hardware store ethanol, and recently E85 which is cheaper, in my Briggs & Stratton 15.5 hp vertical shaft mower for about 8 years. When I don't, water collects in the fuel filter and stalls the engine. I mow 23 acres with the B&S, since the MF 245 tractor I bought turned out to be a gearless wonder. When is all this engine damage going to occur?


I don't know to whom you were directing these comments (and question) about engine damage. If you have read any of my posts on ethanol and it's usage, I have never said that ethanol would damage engines. Never! EThanol is a good product in my opinion.



> I ran some E85 in my 255 Ford V8 the last two years, Cuts top end horsepower, but it is very cheap, and mostly american made, which the amyl butyl ether (RFG) that comes up the ohio river probably is not. Had my engine all apart last year to inspect, found the crank worn out. No valve or ring damage. Put the old rings back in after honing the cylinder for helical score again. Runs great with the new crank. Tell me again about ethanol?


Not my argument. You need to address this to the opponents of ethanol on this thread. The opponents are the ones that make outrageous claims of engine damage. Not me.



> I'm much more worried about the volatile components of RFG that evaporate in the tank if the car sits for a couple of months. After that, the car won't start, or run after the primer fuel runs out on the accelerator pump. And this heavy RFG leftover sludge won't lift through the idle circuit of a fomoco/rochester 2 bbl carburator, either.


Sounds to me like you need to have the carburator rebuilt. The accelerator curcuit of the carburator often uses a ball check-valve to retain the fuel in the accelerator pump "cup." There are some Rochesters that used a weir dam that allowed fuel to spill into the cup but requires that the fuel float-bowl maintains a proper level. A bad float bowl checkvalve can affect this sort of carburator. Either way a small amount of dirt, debris, or varnish can affect either of these checkvalves. A rebuild kit may take care of this problem. I have not had a bit of trouble woth the ethanol blended fuels in any of my carburated engines, even when they set for a year or too.


----------



## wjjones

I had heard the same about engine oil having the same effect as benzene?


----------



## Rusty

Lawrence1210 said:


> We're worrying about modern fuel blends being used in 100 year old engine technology.
> 
> What we need are affordable hydrogen engines, and then this whole fossil fuel debate will go away.
> 
> ... but industry can't just swap engines at the drop of a hat. We have so much invested in existing engine technologies that this kind of transition would take another 100 years to complete.


This is the technology that could put our country back on top ,if only we would make the investment,and not give it away once we have it figured out ,other countries are also working on this tech, we need to get there first,think of the jobs and industry this could create,we need to be the leaders here and not just the consumers.


----------



## indianajo

Chris-se-ILL said:


> Sounds to me like you need to have the carburator rebuilt. The accelerator curcuit of the carburator often uses a ball check-valve to retain the fuel in the accelerator pump "cup." There are some Rochesters that used a weir dam that allowed fuel to spill into the cup but requires that the fuel float-bowl maintains a proper level. A bad float bowl checkvalve can affect this sort of carburator. Either way a small amount of dirt, debris, or varnish can affect either of these checkvalves. A rebuild kit may take care of this problem. I have not had a bit of trouble woth the ethanol blended fuels in any of my carburated engines, even when they set for a year or too.


I've been repairing fomoco carbs since 1966. When the accel pump is working properly, and the tank is full of stale RFG, a cold engine will start on fresh fuel poured down the carburator, then a couple of squirts of stale RFG with the accel pump will put the fire right out. This is besides the leftover sludge not lifting through the idle circuit.


----------



## thirdroc17

Wow, lot of bigger brains than mine at work here. Most of what I read, I could either say I knew, kinda knew, or agreed with. However, and nope, I don't have the links to back up my thoughts, but everything I've heard about hydrogen is it takes more energy to split the water, than you get from burning the hydrogen. Not to mention the whole Hindenburg incident. Then again, name any source of transportable energy that hasn't had at least one disaster sometime in it's history.

Therefore, I like solar, wind, tidal, etc. as a source of energy.


----------



## timtim2008

thanks.......


----------



## Gregg

An interesting read .....http://www.forconstructionpros.com/...ix&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=RCL130927008


----------



## Gregg

http://blog.briggsandstratton.com/ethanol-free-gas-prevent-engine-damage-from-flex-fuel/


----------



## Gregg

http://opei.org/ethanolwarning/cons...il&utm_term=0_b0b29db93e-b903085044-267947337


----------



## Oldawg

*Ethanol in gasoline*

I don't know how Chris (older posts) is having such good luck with long-term storage of alcohol/gasoline mixtures, but my experience has been the opposite. Maybe it's because methanol has been added also, but I just wish the government would keep it's hands out of the fuel business. Everything they touch they screw up!!


----------



## wjjones

Oldawg said:


> I don't know how Chris (older posts) is having such good luck with long-term storage of alcohol/gasoline mixtures, but my experience has been the opposite. Maybe it's because methanol has been added also, but I just wish the government would keep it's hands out of the fuel business. Everything they touch they screw up!!


 I use fuel stabilzer and ethanol fuel. I have run it through my equipment for 8 years now.


----------



## msheron

I have not done alot of research on this but I do know from my last two purchases of a backpack blower and a higher end chain saw the dealer advised to use Ethanol free fuel in these and double your warranty period.

I can say the sound the engines make with a Ethanol free mixture is definitely noticeable! I buy the pre-mix so I don't have to mix it and will stay with these mixes that are Ethanol free until not available or they prove detrimental.

The dealer also told me the Ethanol is breaking down seals and gaskets prematurely and even if you have been running gas with Ethanol to quit ASAP and start using the Ethanol free. It can be found easily if you rather mix your own but no more than it takes to run a weedeater; chain saw; or blower the pre-mix to me and if you buy it in the gallon or better size will last quite some time.

Now I don't use commericially or do these things for a living so it is more advantageous for me to buy it that way.

Just my 2 cents on this subject matter.


----------

