E-85

[dsauve]

Kenny if E85 is going to provide enough fuel to get to that point you can plant corn in all of Wisconsin, illinoise, both Dakotas, Nedraska, Iowa, Kansas, Oklahoma and part of Montana. Face it guys E85 has a long way to go. We just can't grow enough corn to make it. I just dont know how much grass it will take. Folks around here think we can make it with patato leftovers too.

 

[kide]

I thought those states were already pretty much covered with corn....(except Oklahoma).

I think we need to move into Alaska with the corn growin'. Probably get pretty good subsidies up there to build the domes (and heat 'em) that we'd need.....

 

[mgonitzke]

I read in Scientific American about a year ago that if the entire continental United States was turned into a massive corn field, and the corn made into E-85, that this amount of E-85 would only supply 5% of this country's demand for fuel. So corn-based E-85 is clearly NOT the answer.

 

[kweaver]

Now you know why we're advancing on Mars.
The red planet is gonna be green with corn !

 

[kide]

Matt:
I'm not sure what all SA included in "demand for fuel", as that could include everything from power plants, vehicles and air transport to lawn mowers, but even if it supplied 95% of the need, we'd still end up importing food to replace that that we'd be putting into fuel..

 

[bbrigham]

Thats pretty bad, as far as I'm concerned we are already importing too much food.
If I can produce enough ethanol to fuel my tractors I'll be happy. I really don't expect anyone to find a good replacement for gasoline in my lifetime.

Bren

 

[dsauve]

Hey what about electricity, just to stay IHCC my 95 electric was built 30 plus years ago and I plug it in the wall after mowing an acre. Nuclear power killed 3 people in Arizona in a freak accident. Beyond that it is safe and a cheap source of electicity (just ask the Navy). I know this is also an unpolpular idea but Europe gets a very large portion of it's electrical power this way. It's old tech and with new battery tech it'll work for the new stuff and help out alot. It still wont work for all of our antiques tho.

 

[dsauve]

Thanks for not shuting off this thread Charlie and Bryann. This sure seems to be a political thread and could be a really hot topic, but it sure seems that everyone can handel this like an adult and has been a fun debate. (why cant the govment act like this and respect other peoples thoughts?) I hope that I'm not out of line here-- just tell me and I'll go lay down by my dish like a good boy.

 

[kide]

Dean - I echo your thoughts on keeping the thread alive... I think we've all steered it back towards the center when needed. AFAIK, Sandbox stuff doesn't need to be IHC related , but we do need to follow the rules. When I started the thread, one of the points I was bringing out was what modifications need to be done to use E-85, if that's where we're going.. I am not against the fuel, <u>if</u> the research points us in that direction. I am against subsidizing a particular technology, if there are many possible alternatives. I see our timing on this discussion is pretty good, as it's hot at the auto shows and in the magazines right now, also.

 

[stritle]

The one think that has not been factored in on the E85 debate is the amount of oil being used to defend the oil we import. How efficient is that???? Not only the oil, but the blood of our soldiers!!!

I agree that we import too much food. I would be happy with an E20 or E30 blend if it reduced our oil imports.

 

[jdiederichs]

Guys, Please do NOT run the E-85 in your Kohlers, we have done extensive testing and currently do not approve of any blend greater than 10%. Maybe someday, definitely not now. And remember this fuel is conductive, unlike gasoline.

I have run lots of it in my (FFL) Avalanche with less than impressive results.

 

[kweaver]

Jim - I agree with NOT using it , I'll just wait for the guvment rebuild kits to be shipped out for ALL the gasoline engines to be converted to run E85.

I dang sure am not going to use it in any 2 cycle engine.

 

[kide]

Jim - with the E-85 experience in Kohlers that you've had, can you add other required changes to those listed in the first post to this thread? Obviously some of those don't apply (modified pulse width on EFI), but a lot of them sure do....

 

[bbrigham]

Jim , is the E85 actually harmfull to the engine and carb ? I would surely like to know, I don't want to run anything in it thats gonna ruin it. I would like to run a batch of ethanol to try, yes I know there's more to it I've been researching it for a year now. I'm not lookin at doing 100's of gallons. Most of our money already goes into kerosene and gasoline so I would like to find an alternative for my play toys (cubs). But like I said, if it's gonna ruin my kohlers I will look elswhere.


Bren

 

[bwatson]

Jim, when you filled your Avalanche with E-85 did you drive it 7 miles before turning it off? I'm guessing there was a check engine light? When everything is working correctly, you won't be able to tell what kind of fuel is in the tank. Only fuel mileage is affected. Typically 2 to 3 mpg less. The folks claiming 40% lower mileage either made mathematical errors, failed to take all variables into account, or simply are against Ethanol no matter what. Originally GM had a fuel composition sensor in the fuel line to give the PCM ethanol/gas mixture. Now the PCM monitors the fuel level sensor and is able to detect a refueling event as small as 3 gal. When the PCM detects a refueling event it then varies fuel trim monitoring the primary oxygen sensors to determine ethanol content. The kicker is the driver must drive the vehicle that 7 miles after filling so the PCM can recalculate. If you don't, it goes back to previous values. If they were for straight gas or 10% blend and you put E-85 in, the PCM sets a lean code. Same thing happens if you go from E-85 to gas except it sets a rich code. The fuel system components are the same between E-85 and gas only. Only the electronics have changed. As far as running E-85 in small engines, it hasn't damaged/deteriated anything. Been doing it for a couple years now. Exhaust is cooler. Runs cleaner. Less carbon buildup. I'm sure the challenge from the manufacturer's point of view is how do we make a multi fuel engine work with a non adjustable carb that the average person can operate. Not an easy thing to do. The EPA is why carbs are not adjustable like they used to be. They want you to fix the reason your engine is running poorly, not just richen the fuel to compensate for leaking valves and rings causing higher emissions.

 

[kweaver]

Just how much alcohol is E85 suppose to contain ?

 

[tcbusch]

Brian,
"The folks claiming 40% lower mileage either made mathematical errors, failed to take all variables into account, or simply are against Ethanol no matter what." Do you have any proof? I am assuming you are getting your information from a scientific experiment or test? Do you have a link to this test? I would be interested in reading up on the findings.

Unless of coarse you "simply are for Ethanol no matter what."

 

[dsauve]

Boy this is getting fun. The fact will remain after all this is over "the US cannot produce enough corn to replace oil with E85". There are other altenatives, if E85 is such a pain in the a$$ why cant we drill off the coast of Florida or in ANWAR? ANWAR was originally set aside }Because of the oil and for the oil. Yup there probably is an alternative but not a ready alternative. What happened to being realistic and not saying that only one fuel source is the saviour of the world. No mater how much E85 we burn the third world will go on burning plain old 87 octane. Besides ethanol will not be able to replace oil in plastic manufaturing.

 

[stritle]

Terry, if you look at my chart in an earlier post, you will not find a 40% drop. The people who claim 40% have not used it long enough.

I could say that 87 is not very efficient if it was 9 degrees out side and I filled up my truck with it. Using it for more than one tank proves that 87 averages more like 15 in my truck. Same with E85, only I average 13 instead.

 

[hcole]

Folks, I have never used E-85 as it is not readily available in the area that I live in BUT there is a station in town that sells the 87 rated fuel that is cut with 15% ethanol. On straight 87 octane gas my 1987 Chevy Sprint which sports a Suzuki 3 cylinder gets a constant,unwaivering 47 mpg. Now when I run the ethanol blended fuel that is normally around 10 cents cheaper the car only gets 40 mpg! needless to say, with the gigantic 8 gal. fuel tank on the car it's more economical for me not to use the cheaper e-blend. I would like to see a move away from oil based fuels but I shudder to think how it would effect my poor Sprint