For the better part of a year now, the auto industry has been pushing the Environmental Protection Agency to hold up on issuing a final ruling on whether or not higher blends of ethanol will be allowed at normal fuel pumps.
As most of you are surely aware, the current blend limit allowed by EPA is 10% ethanol/90% gasoline (E10) — and even that has met with resistance, especially among small gas-powered equipment owners. In light of the potential problems, the Auto Industry has stated all along that it wants the EPA to conclusively prove a move to blends higher than E10 won’t harm existing cars.
And now, armed with new data, the auto industry says that if the EPA goes ahead and approves E15 — as it is expected to within the next few weeks — that it is likely many cars will suffer damage to their emissions systems, fuel storage equipment, engines and computers.
The biofuels industry and associated groups have been pushing the EPA to allow the bump up to E15, because without that bump the industry says it will have nowhere to sell the ethanol it is being increasingly required to make under federal requirements — although their publicly used tag line has been that the move is needed to reduce our dependance on foreign oil. While this sentiment is true, the real underlying cause for concern within the industry is that the market will be flooded with ethanol with no place to go, driving down prices and causing havoc.
The EPA says the planned change would only apply to cars of the 2001 model year and newer, because those cars are better equipped to handle the change. But how that would work out at the pump is yet to be determined. Will there be special pumps for 2001 and newer cars? It could get ugly and people could end up making the wrong pump choice because they are uninformed.
According to a New York Times article, C. Coleman Jones, the biofuel implementation manager at GM and a representative of the Auto Alliance, said that half of all cars tested at the higher blends so far have had problems. And that, at the very minimum, the results show that the EPA should delay the decision until 2011 when all the testing is set to be completed. On the other hand, the biofuels industry claims that enough test have been done already to prove that E15 is safe for all cars.
As I see it, the real issue isn’t getting these lower level blends — such as E15 — approved for widespread use, it’s providing access to E85 for the 7 million or so Flex Fuel Vehicles already on American roads. The vast majority of those cars don’t have any kind of access to higher blend ethanol at all. If we could get the infrastructure built to provide E85 to most of those vehicles, that would surely help the ethanol industry find a place for its overabundance of ethanol… and it would get around the issue of whether or not E15 will harm cars that aren’t flex fuel capable.
Source: New York Times
PDF 
if you ever put gasline anti freeze in your car, then more than likely you’ve added ethanol. an engine can take a lot of punishment.
if you ever put gasline anti freeze in your car, then more than likely you’ve added ethanol. an engine can take a lot of punishment.
Ethanol is a joke, only supported by Archer Daniels-Midland and Monsanto. It reduces the mpg on the vehicle and causes damage to the engine. It’s also rumoured to reduce testicle size. Okay, I made that last one up.
But seriously, only the “corn cartel” has made any money off this monstrosity and ever will. However, if you wanna talk Biofuels or even Bio-Ethanol, both of which use non-food stock, I have no problems with that. But we gotta get the guv outta of subsidizing the Farm Co-ops so heavily on ethanol.
The price of Biofuels is coming down to be compatible with standard gas and diesel. It’s merely a question of increasing volume production.
Ethanol is a joke, only supported by Archer Daniels-Midland and Monsanto. It reduces the mpg on the vehicle and causes damage to the engine. It’s also rumoured to reduce testicle size. Okay, I made that last one up.
But seriously, only the “corn cartel” has made any money off this monstrosity and ever will. However, if you wanna talk Biofuels or even Bio-Ethanol, both of which use non-food stock, I have no problems with that. But we gotta get the guv outta of subsidizing the Farm Co-ops so heavily on ethanol.
The price of Biofuels is coming down to be compatible with standard gas and diesel. It’s merely a question of increasing volume production.
Biofuels are great since they can be adapted to current technology like the greasecar etc. However the main problem i have with biofuels are their carbon neutrality. I haven’t seen enough evidence to support the true carbon neutrality of biofuels on top of the fact that relying on them just diverts a true switch to zero emissions vehicles. Also Nox emissions aren’t exactly something to brag about either.
Biofuels are great since they can be adapted to current technology like the greasecar etc. However the main problem i have with biofuels are their carbon neutrality. I haven’t seen enough evidence to support the true carbon neutrality of biofuels on top of the fact that relying on them just diverts a true switch to zero emissions vehicles. Also Nox emissions aren’t exactly something to brag about either.
bio-fuels from hemp are carbon neutral as the crops soaks up as much as you burn.
bio-fuels from hemp are carbon neutral as the crops soaks up as much as you burn.
Yes, but the machines that harvest and process the crops use fossil fuels… hence why i never bought the carbon neutral argument.
Yes, but the machines that harvest and process the crops use fossil fuels… hence why i never bought the carbon neutral argument.
I wish to god people would stop harping on the whole “carbon neutrality” thing. We’re NEVER going to get any truly carbon neutral enterprise, especially when everyone keeps taking it back to the extremes of who drove what truck and what were the tires made of and hey! he smoked a cigarette, and yadda, yadda, yadda.
Y’wanna know something, chuckles? YOU are not carbon neutral! That’s right. As soon as your pasty ass fell outta momma and into her loving arms you were a waste to this planet. You ate food! You wore clothes! You read books! My god, the waste you’ve generated! In fact, the world would become a lot more carbon neutral if people STOPPED BEING BORN!!!
Now, wrap yer heads around that one. I’m gonna have beer….
I wish to god people would stop harping on the whole “carbon neutrality” thing. We’re NEVER going to get any truly carbon neutral enterprise, especially when everyone keeps taking it back to the extremes of who drove what truck and what were the tires made of and hey! he smoked a cigarette, and yadda, yadda, yadda.
Y’wanna know something, chuckles? YOU are not carbon neutral! That’s right. As soon as your pasty ass fell outta momma and into her loving arms you were a waste to this planet. You ate food! You wore clothes! You read books! My god, the waste you’ve generated! In fact, the world would become a lot more carbon neutral if people STOPPED BEING BORN!!!
Now, wrap yer heads around that one. I’m gonna have beer….
“…it’s providing access to E85 for the 7 million or so Flex Fuel Vehicles already on American roads.”
Let’s run some numbers to put your idea into perspective. You think the rest of America should fund the installation of E85 gas pumps for the less than 2% of the people who could use it. Using roughly a third of our corn crop, ethanol has replaced roughly 3% of our gasoline. Using half of our corn crop will replace maybe 6%. There is no cellulosic ethanol.
You support a fuel that needs a tariff to prevent consumers from having access to cheaper sources, bribes to the petroleum companies to blend it (the blending subsidy), and government mandated use to remain solvent in a country where the average citizen’s share of the national debt is about half a million dollars.
You support a fuel where 3/4 of its energy content is derived from non-renewable fossil fuels that requires gargantuan expansion of industrial agriculture to produce:
http://biodiversivist.blogspot.com/2009/10/transgressing-identified-and-quantified.html
that has doubled the price of corn (a 100% increase).
If you want to use less oil, then use less oil. Attempts to replace it with a liquid fuel derived from what remains of the biosphere is futile.
“…it’s providing access to E85 for the 7 million or so Flex Fuel Vehicles already on American roads.”
Let’s run some numbers to put your idea into perspective. You think the rest of America should fund the installation of E85 gas pumps for the less than 2% of the people who could use it. Using roughly a third of our corn crop, ethanol has replaced roughly 3% of our gasoline. Using half of our corn crop will replace maybe 6%. There is no cellulosic ethanol.
You support a fuel that needs a tariff to prevent consumers from having access to cheaper sources, bribes to the petroleum companies to blend it (the blending subsidy), and government mandated use to remain solvent in a country where the average citizen’s share of the national debt is about half a million dollars.
You support a fuel where 3/4 of its energy content is derived from non-renewable fossil fuels that requires gargantuan expansion of industrial agriculture to produce:
http://biodiversivist.blogspot.com/2009/10/transgressing-identified-and-quantified.html
that has doubled the price of corn (a 100% increase).
If you want to use less oil, then use less oil. Attempts to replace it with a liquid fuel derived from what remains of the biosphere is futile.