E85: Lets see who our real alcoholics are ;)

[thegreatfnr]

So I just found out the other day that I can run a flex fuel tune on my Saab to be able to run E85 or Gas. This is great news to me for a few reasons.

1. On those corn juices ;) my car will make more power, and run cooler
2. Its technically cheaper than gasoline (it does use more fuel though too so there is a trade off)
3. If I run out of E85 and have to fill up for gas my tune will also be able to run on gas
4. I think that the more people that get on board to run E85 the less dependent as a country we could be to foreign oil producing countries. (im no hippy but after all this BS recently with gas shortages/prices im willing to start doing my part)

I guess the only real problems are the fact that there are only a few stations that have E85 pumps, 12 stations in GA according to http://www.e85refueling.com/locations.php?resultpage=1&state=gaGeorgia

and the issue of less mpg. To run E85 you need somewhere between 20%-30% more fuel but at the same time it is also about 1 dollar or more less than regular gas so in the long run things get really close to evening out. http://www.e85prices.com/

SO WHERE ARE ALL MY ALCOHOLICS AT!!!!!! :cheers: :gulp: :drunk: :drink:


So does anyone else around Atlanta run E85?

[Black R]

i'm actually building a motor for e85 - it's octane rating is like running 105, so you can see that it'll hold higher compression motors without detonating, AND it's awesome for boosted applications.

I'll let you know how it fares soon enough. :)

[Capt._Ron]

E85 is completely infeasible for widespread use and here is why
1. producing E85 takes more energy than is released from the burning of E85
2. If every acre of the US was planted to corn it would produce about enough E85 to run the country for 6 months

* E85 is not a bad idea as an alternative track day fuel seeing as how it is roughly equivalent to 100 octane and does burn cooler as you said.

[thegreatfnr]

E85 is completely infeasible for widespread use and here is why
1. producing E85 takes more energy than is released from the burning of E85
2. If every acre of the US was planted to corn it would produce about enough E85 to run the country for 6 months

* E85 is not a bad idea as an alternative track day fuel seeing as how it is roughly equivalent to 100 octane and does burn cooler as you said.

I wouldn't say it is completely unfeasible, Brazil is moving this direction and they seem to be doing quite well using sugarcane. Although the method using sugarcane is more efficient than using corn.

Ive also heard of people using switchblade grass as opposed to both corn and sugarcane to make ethanol and that the switchblade grass is way more efficient to process than the other two.

[Black R]

E85 is completely infeasible for widespread use and here is why
1. producing E85 takes more energy than is released from the burning of E85
2. If every acre of the US was planted to corn it would produce about enough E85 to run the country for 6 months

* E85 is not a bad idea as an alternative track day fuel seeing as how it is roughly equivalent to 100 octane and does burn cooler as you said.


1. Not true.

http://www.e85fuel.com/e85101/faqs/energy.php

2. See #1.




Does it take more energy to produce a gallon of ethanol than the energy we get out of it?

Response: No. This has been a common misconception of the ethanol industry, that it takes more energy to make ethanol than is available to the final consumer. Remember, ethanol is produced from plant matter, today dominated by corn, wheat, potatoes, sorgum, etc. Plants grow through the use of energy provided by the sun and are a renewable resources. In the future, ethanol will be produced from waste products or "energy crops." In fact, a partner of the NEVC, BC International (BCI), is currently constructing an ethanol production plant in Louisiana that will use sugar cane waste to produce ethanol. Additionally, BCI is considering the establishment of ethanol production facilities in California that would use the waste hulls from rice growers and wood waste from the forest industry to produce ethanol. Energy crops such as perennial switch grasses, timothy, and other high-output/low-input crops will be used in the future.

Current research prepared by Argonne National Laboratory (a U.S. Department of Energy Laboratory), indicates a 38% gain in the overall energy input/output equation for the corn-to-ethanol process. That is, if 100 BTUs of energy is used to plant corn, harvest the crop, transport it, etc., 138 BTUs of energy is available in the fuel ethanol. Corn yields and processing technologies have improved significantly over the past 20 years and they continue to do so, making ethanol production less and less energy intensive.





*E85 is 105 octane.

[Capt._Ron]

^^^ Nice find and reps for a reliable source

[Cool Cat Racing]

So what you're saying in your copy and paste post is that E85 is nearly useless. It takes approximately 40% more fuel to run a vehicle on E85 and it only has a 38% energy yield. So even on a great setup you're netting out nothing or using more gas than if you just ran gas in the first place. If cars were built for the specific use of E85 we could seriously increase the potential output of them but with the current production of cars based on gas that can run E85 we won't see the real benefits of running it. The only benefit in further E85 use is that it will provide funds to further the technology and lower the energy needed to produce it. Sugar cane and sugar beets are both a much better source of producing ethanol but our climate only allows widespread production of sugar beets in the central US. Cellulosic Ethanol production is by far the best way to go because then the entire plant can be used, ie grass, corn stalks, and waste products. The only problem is the sugars contained in the cellulose is much harder to extract and is currently not a cost effective option. With the EPA standard passed last year there are quite a bit of dollars thrown out by the government to progress the enzymes used in Cellulosic production but they currently don't have the capacity to meet the 17 billion gallons the EPA requires. Its good if people do use it but don't think you are going to be saving any money or doing any great deed for the planet right now. Its basically an investment in the future energy production within our country.

[Black R]

So what you're saying in your copy and paste post is that E85 is nearly useless. It takes approximately 40% more fuel to run a vehicle on E85 and it only has a 38% energy yield. So even on a great setup you're netting out nothing or using more gas than if you just ran gas in the first place. If cars were built for the specific use of E85 we could seriously increase the potential output of them but with the current production of cars based on gas that can run E85 we won't see the real benefits of running it. The only benefit in further E85 use is that it will provide funds to further the technology and lower the energy needed to produce it. Sugar cane and sugar beets are both a much better source of producing ethanol but our climate only allows widespread production of sugar beets in the central US. Cellulosic Ethanol production is by far the best way to go because then the entire plant can be used, ie grass, corn stalks, and waste products. The only problem is the sugars contained in the cellulose is much harder to extract and is currently not a cost effective option. With the EPA standard passed last year there are quite a bit of dollars thrown out by the government to progress the enzymes used in Cellulosic production but they currently don't have the capacity to meet the 17 billion gallons the EPA requires. Its good if people do use it but don't think you are going to be saving any money or doing any great deed for the planet right now. Its basically an investment in the future energy production within our country.


My post was in reply to what Capt Ron posted.

I don't give a damn about gas mileage. I give a damn about getting 105 at the pump and once mileage is taken into consideration the cost is about the same or a little less than 93 octane supreme. So for the $ why would I run a 13:1 static cr motor on 93 octane when I can run it on 105? I have the fuel system to push those 550cc injectors. :)

AND I'm very happy about using less foreign oil + investing in future energy production here at home.

[Cool Cat Racing]

That's my point, in reality you're not using less oil, only investing in the furthering of the technology. And if everyone built motors that could properly use the increased octane then the power/mileage would increase and make E85 a truly viable fuel option. We have gotten the refining of gasoline down to a very cheap and efficient process and with some time and enough money the same can happen for E85. My point is that right now everyone is thinking they're using less oil and that's simply not the case. Maybe in the future it will be but the current hype and propaganda pertaining to E85 isn't completely true.

[thegreatfnr]

I don't give a damn about gas mileage. I give a damn about getting 105 at the pump and once mileage is taken into consideration the cost is about the same or a little less than 93 octane supreme. So for the $ why would I run a 13:1 static cr motor on 93 octane when I can run it on 105? I have the fuel system to push those 550cc injectors. :)
Exactly what I'm thinking :goodjob:

[Atlblkz06]

WTF.. The response is BULLCRAP. It just beats around the bush and says nothing to address the problem.

My claim: Making ethanol takes 131KBTU of energy and delivers 77KBTU.

Lets see some numbers if you would like to refute the argument.

[Atlblkz06]

I just posted my own thread on Ethanol:

http://www.importatlanta.com/forums/showthread.php?t=197422

I'm not pro or anti ethanol. I just want something efficient.
Ethanol may not even be cleaner. Check the thread above, in my 3rd post.

[Black R]

where are you drawing your numbers from? I think you hit upon the disparity in economy of scale.

you DO realize that fossil fuels are a FINITE resource, right?

that means in laymans terms that THEY WILL RUN OUT AND THERE WON'T BE ANY MORE MADE - unless you can somehow figure out how to repopulate the earth with dinosaurs, then kill them all, bury them, wait oh say 12,000 years for them to decompose and then mine for those underground lakes of their waste.....

That is aside from the fact that gasoline isn't efficient and doesn't burn as cleanly as ethanol (IMO since some claim VOC increases). Although I will agree that the ICE is horribly inefficient in and of itself.

The point still stands that my current alternatives are E85 (105 octane) at xxx/gallon vs 93 supreme at over $4 per gallon. As oil reserves get lower, or barrels of oil go up in price this disparity will suffer, and I expect the price delta to widen. But my real desire is to get that octane rating at the pump!

How old is that article you posted? It has gasoline at $2/gallon?

So once again I think there are people looking at e85 thinking their mpg will increase or it will be significantly cheaper to run their vehicle on it. I don't see anyone here saying that.

I am saying that I can get 105 octane at the pump, at about the same operating cost, and it isn't as dependant on foreign oil. It is more detonation resistant, and burns cleaner so as to not damage the ozone layer.
I also don't think the price on it will go up as much as say gasoline.

[Cool Cat Racing]

Just remember if its price is as closely related to the price of gas because of the fuel needed to produce it then without any more efficient methods of production then its going to increase at a rate relative to gasoline. The kicker will be when some chemist finds a new enzyme to break down cellulose easier.

[Atlblkz06]

Yes fossil fuels are limited, but we're not going to run out THAT quickly. Before we jump into the ethanol bandwagon, I just think more research is required.

As of right now, I think CNG is a better source of energy than E85.

Yes Ethanol burns cleaner but the process of making Ethanol is dirtier according to some sources. Huge amounts of VOCs are being released.

The article is comparing the price of gas today vs pre-ethanol days when it was $2 a gallon. Its trying to say that ethanol has increased the price of gas because large amounts of gasoline are being used to produce ethanol.

I understand that you want high octane gas at the pump, but exactly what does that achieve? Sure cars run on E85 but that doesnt mean they're running efficiently. To take advantage of the high octane and realize savings in terms of mileage, you'd have to have a CR of 12:1 or so.
Curently the cars just change timing and compromise to run on both gasoline and ethanol.

There is no way around the fact that Ethanol takes a TON of energy to produce at the moment. Its not worth making ethanol the way we're doing now unless we find a better way through research.

Dont forget that Ethanol is hygroscopic and cant be transported easily. If you have to truck it, that adds another cost in terms of fuel.

I'm all for alternate fuel vehicles. My DD is a Camry Hybrid.
As a fuel, YES ethanol is superior.
However I dont think we have the infrastructure to push it the way we're trying to. We're losing out on big quantities of gas to make small quantities of ethanol. And I think that is a lose-lose situation.



where are you drawing your numbers from? I think you hit upon the disparity in economy of scale.

you DO realize that fossil fuels are a FINITE resource, right?

that means in laymans terms that THEY WILL RUN OUT AND THERE WON'T BE ANY MORE MADE - unless you can somehow figure out how to repopulate the earth with dinosaurs, then kill them all, bury them, wait oh say 12,000 years for them to decompose and then mine for those underground lakes of their waste.....

That is aside from the fact that gasoline isn't efficient and doesn't burn as cleanly as ethanol (IMO since some claim VOC increases). Although I will agree that the ICE is horribly inefficient in and of itself.

The point still stands that my current alternatives are E85 (105 octane) at xxx/gallon vs 93 supreme at over $4 per gallon. As oil reserves get lower, or barrels of oil go up in price this disparity will suffer, and I expect the price delta to widen. But my real desire is to get that octane rating at the pump!

How old is that article you posted? It has gasoline at $2/gallon?

So once again I think there are people looking at e85 thinking their mpg will increase or it will be significantly cheaper to run their vehicle on it. I don't see anyone here saying that.

I am saying that I can get 105 octane at the pump, at about the same operating cost, and it isn't as dependant on foreign oil. It is more detonation resistant, and burns cleaner so as to not damage the ozone layer.
I also don't think the price on it will go up as much as say gasoline.

[thegreatfnr]

I understand that you want high octane gas at the pump, but exactly what does that achieve? Sure cars run on E85 but that doesnt mean they're running efficiently. To take advantage of the high octane and realize savings in terms of mileage, you'd have to have a CR of 12:1 or so.
Curently the cars just change timing and compromise to run on both gasoline and ethanol.

There is no way around the fact that Ethanol takes a TON of energy to produce at the moment. Its not worth making ethanol the way we're doing now unless we find a better way through research.

Dont forget that Ethanol is hygroscopic and cant be transported easily. If you have to truck it, that adds another cost in terms of fuel.

I'm all for alternate fuel vehicles. My DD is a Camry Hybrid.
As a fuel, YES ethanol is superior.
However I dont think we have the infrastructure to push it the way we're trying to. We're losing out on big quantities of gas to make small quantities of ethanol. And I think that is a lose-lose situation.

I understand all of what you are saying about how its not as cost effective to make or transport but that does not matter to us as the end consumer right now :blah:

Go look at the prices and compare them to gas.

3.00 for e85
4.20 for 93 gas

If I make 25 mpg on 93 gas I should make about 25% less mpg on E85 equaling about 18.75 mpg

10 gallons of gas would get me 250 miles while 10 gallons of E85 should get about 187.5 miles. The 10 gallons of gas costs $42 while the E85 costs $30

So 250 miles divided by the cost of the 10 gallons of gas comes out to 5.95 per mile while 187.5 miles diveded by the cost of 10 gallons of E85 equals 6.25

So in the end you end up paying 30 cents more per mile with E85 but with the addition of being able to make more power while doing so. Isn't that what alot of us are really trying to do anyways, is make more power and do it safer.

Once again it will also begin to start to ease our dependence of foreign oil.

[thegreatfnr]

I just posted my own thread on Ethanol:

http://www.importatlanta.com/forums/showthread.php?t=197422

I'm not pro or anti ethanol. I just want something efficient.
Ethanol may not even be cleaner. Check the thread above, in my 3rd post.
BTW you having to make another e85 thread to post a bunch of old ass isht = :gay:

[Atlblkz06]

BTW you having to make another e85 thread to post a bunch of old ass isht = :gay:

Have you considered that maybe I did that BEFORE I read this thread?

Thanks for the negative reps. I really dont care. But just so everyone knows, you're a dipshiit.

[Atlblkz06]

Its cheaper because tax dollars are also going into it from the government.

Cost isnt what I'm talking about. I am merely saying that AT PRESENT ethanol seems to cost more to make than its worth.

HOWEVER, I COMPLETELY agree that its better to support farmers vs foreign oil. No contest there.



I understand all of what you are saying about how its not as cost effective to make or transport but that does not matter to us as the end consumer right now :blah:

Go look at the prices and compare them to gas.

3.00 for e85
4.20 for 93 gas

If I make 25 mpg on 93 gas I should make about 25% less mpg on E85 equaling about 18.75 mpg

10 gallons of gas would get me 250 miles while 10 gallons of E85 should get about 187.5 miles. The 10 gallons of gas costs $42 while the E85 costs $30

So 250 miles divided by the cost of the 10 gallons of gas comes out to 5.95 per mile while 187.5 miles diveded by the cost of 10 gallons of E85 equals 6.25

So in the end you end up paying 30 cents more per mile with E85 but with the addition of being able to make more power while doing so. Isn't that what alot of us are really trying to do anyways, is make more power and do it safer.

Once again it will also begin to start to ease our dependence of foreign oil.

[ash7]

...dont forget to convert your entire fuel delivery system to be able to handle the corrosive qualities of E85...

or you may run into some serious leakage issues shortly.
-jonathan

[Cool Cat Racing]

Well guys you can thank E85 for the increase in food prices and is the leading reason that beer costs more and will continue to increase. E85 is causing many farmers to stop producing what they used to and switch to just corn. Corn rapes the soil and requires a lot of nutrients and chemicals to get it to grow properly. Since corn is also a leading part of feed stock all meat prices go up and consequently many food prices increase, so does leather and any other animal product. Using corn is simply not a great idea to produce ethanol, it affects the price of too many other products. The idea of ethanol is great but its current execution isn't. If you're using it to make more power, you're further decreasing your fuel mileage so your mileage estimates are off even farther. And the current price of E85 is only because of the huge amounts of money the government is pumping into it, if that bill had to be paid through sales like gasoline has to the price would be substantially higher and closer to that of gasoline.

[ash7]

Well guys you can thank E85 for the increase in food prices and is the leading reason that beer costs more and will continue to increase. E85 is causing many farmers to stop producing what they used to and switch to just corn. Corn rapes the soil and requires a lot of nutrients and chemicals to get it to grow properly. Since corn is also a leading part of feed stock all meat prices go up and consequently many food prices increase, so does leather and any other animal product. Using corn is simply not a great idea to produce ethanol, it affects the price of too many other products. The idea of ethanol is great but its current execution isn't. If you're using it to make more power, you're further decreasing your fuel mileage so your mileage estimates are off even farther. And the current price of E85 is only because of the huge amounts of money the government is pumping into it, if that bill had to be paid through sales like gasoline has to the price would be substantially higher and closer to that of gasoline.

my sentiments exactly - worth repeating twice - reps out the wazoo

they are finding other ways to produce ethanol, but corn is by far the worst of the ideas presented so far.

-jonathan

[thegreatfnr]

Have you considered that maybe I did that BEFORE I read this thread?

Thanks for the negative reps. I really dont care. But just so everyone knows, you're a dipshiit.
Timestamps :2up:

[thegreatfnr]

...dont forget to convert your entire fuel delivery system to be able to handle the corrosive qualities of E85...

or you may run into some serious leakage issues shortly.
-jonathan

Many mordern cars are designed to be able to handle e85 with no changes such as my car for instance. Other cars might need to up the injectors to deal with the need for the 25%-30% more fuel e85 requires.

I think all you e85 haters are just sold on the big gas companies propaganda ;)

It is well known that you can make more power off of E85 than off of 93 oct gas and it is only marginally more expensive per mile when you break it down. So there it is a fairly easy way to pick up some hp and do it safely with a proper tune

[VooDooXII]

Wonder if I can do that...

[SampaGuy]

Brazil is moving this direction

This made me lol, moving this direction? Theyve been using it successfully since the 1980s. Over there its 100% ethanol, not E85, and our gasoline has like 25% ethanol. Like you said though, ethanol production out of sugarcane is a hell lot more efficient and cheaper than making it from corn. We export it but not to the US, you guys have this $.55/gallon tariff thing on all imported ethanol.

[Atlblkz06]

This is all I have to say:

(Removed ridiculously long pictures showing that the US Govt Spent 100x as much money on the IRAQ war vs all other forms of alternative energy in 2007)

[thegreatfnr]

Wonder if I can do that...
Pretty sure you can. All Saabs since 2000 are flex fuel capable IIRC

[allmotoronly]

e85 is cheaper, but much less efficient than gasoline...

[Atlblkz06]

e85 is cheaper, but much less efficient than gasoline...

Wow you love pullin' stuff out of your arse don't you?

In a flex fuel vehicle, the efficiency ADVANTAGE of E85 is not used to its potential. In a pure Ethanol only vehicle the higher efficiency is obvious because of the high octane of the fuel. High octane = higher compression = more efficiency.

[Elbow]

e85 is cheaper, but much less efficient than gasoline...

LOL :no: you should research before you keep making posts

[SampaGuy]

e85 is cheaper, but much less efficient than gasoline...


You are right. You definitely get better MPGs from a gasoline car than from a pure ethanol car, even a flexfuel car will drive further if you fill it up with gas rather than ethanol. Gasoline has a higher energy content than ethanol. Thats why ethanol engines need bigger injectors and higher fuel pressure. It does have higher octane, which means yes you can run a higher compression, but that has nothing to do with efficiency in terms of mileage.

:no: at this thread

[twinj]

I would if I could there arent any filling stations in my area.

[1badgvr4]

...dont forget to convert your entire fuel delivery system to be able to handle the corrosive qualities of E85...

or you may run into some serious leakage issues shortly.
-jonathan
This statment is false.Yes you do have to upgrade the system to flow more, but e85 being corossive to your fuel system is a myth.THe fuel has enough lubricant in it not to be corossive People in the dsm crowd havw been running e85 for couple years on the all the stock lines and filters.Just be sure to change them often when you first convert.

This fuel has done wonders for the dsm community.There have been guys putting holes in there blocks because thay run into super high cylinder pressures when running ALOT of timing with no knock.A buddy of mine couldn't run more that 22psi on a small turbo on 93 oct with 13 degrees max timing.Now using e85 he runs 28psi on the street with 22 degrees max timing.E85 FTMFW

[superboost]

Many mordern cars are designed to be able to handle e85 with no changes such as my car for instance. Other cars might need to up the injectors to deal with the need for the 25%-30% more fuel e85 requires.

I think all you e85 haters are just sold on the big gas companies propaganda ;)

It is well known that you can make more power off of E85 than off of 93 oct gas and it is only marginally more expensive per mile when you break it down. So there it is a fairly easy way to pick up some hp and do it safely with a proper tune


sounds like you were sold on the corn lobbies propaganda. In all honesty, you do burn more fuel, you have to upsize your injectors, it does increase the cost of food and older cars don't like it.

Brazil had the right idea using sugarcane to burn ethanol because sugarcane is more energy dense than the crap we are using. Corn just dosn't do it.

I too hate E85 and that E10 shite they're trying to sell us at the pump now. bring back the old gas with MTBF.

edit:
E85 does give an octane increase, but you also have to richen up a bit to burn it....