Slashdot Mirror


Has the Ethanol Threat Manifested In the US?

Five years ago today, we mentioned here what was characterized as "The Great Ethanol Scam." According to the central story in that post, the ethanol in gasoline was (or would be) "destroying engines in large numbers," and the only real winners with a rise in the use of ethanol as a gasoline supplement would be auto mechanics. An increasing number of cars are officially cleared for use with E15 (15 percent ethanol), and a growing number of E85 vehicles are in the wild now, too, though apparently many of their owners don't realize that their cars can burn a mixture that's mostly ethanol. When I can, I fill my car with no-ethanol gas, but that's not very easy to find (farmer's co-ops are one handy source), so most of my driving over the past decade has been with E10 fuel. I seem to get better mileage with all-gas, but the circumstances haven't been controlled enough to make a good comparison. What has your experience been? Have you experienced ethanol-related car problems, or were the predictions overblown?

14 of 432 comments (clear)

  1. Ethanol threat??!!! by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 5, Funny

    My God, someone's after the BOOZE?!

    Well, scam or not, we can't have that sort of behaviour. It was bad enough when we ran out of vermouth, without this sort of nonsense....

    --

    "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  2. ok if your car is new by indy_Muad'Dib · · Score: 5, Interesting

    2012 honda insight runs the e10 fine but gets better mileage using 0% ethanol gas from the local marina, ive had to rebuild the fuel system on my 65 datsun van because of the ethanol eating the hoses.

    1. Re:ok if your car is new by knightghost · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Ethanol cost me $2,000 in repairs to my motorcycle and a lot of hours of work on cleaning out carburetors from small engines.

      Corn ethanol is an expensive way to turn good oil into bad gasoline. It was pushed as corporate welfare for ag stages. Everyone involved has always known that it was a big lie.

    2. Re:ok if your car is new by sribe · · Score: 5, Informative

      Also, a fuel drying additive is a good idea if you have any ethanol, because that stuff collects water like mad.

      You do know what fuel-drying solutions are made of, right???

      Keeping the water in solution reduces fuel tank corrosion.

      Which is exactly what ethanol does...

  3. A lose/lose/lose situation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Ethanol is a lose/lose/lose situation all the way around here in the US:

    1: The corn used to make ethanol causes higher fuel prices, either directly or indirectly because feed for livestock is up in price, so ethanol takes food out of people's mouths.

    2: E-15 voids car warranties, and ECMs can tell if E-15 is put in and throw a code that can't be cleared by a ScanGauge, but only by a dealer.

    3: Gasoline has a very shitty shelf life. I used to be able to store gasoline for a lawn mower for 1-2 years. Now, even with fuel preservative, even six months may be pushing it, and can clog up the carb or cause a bad reaction.

    4: As an RV-er, the #1 cause of generator malfunctions is bad gas. This was not an issue 1-2 decades ago, but when looking at a used motorhome, the first thing you have to do is rebuild/replace the carb unless the previous owner either ran the generator every so often, or fogged it, with OnaGard fogging spray.

    Then there is the E85 scam. It has significantly less MPG than regular gas... but the cost difference makes it not worth getting. The only advantage it gives is that with a Flex-Fuel engine that can adjust fuel/air ratios, it burns hotter so you get 5-10 more horsepower.

    If the US had plants like Brazil did that were by products of growing, I'd champion ethanol, but as it stands right now, people are starving due to E-10, so anyone who has a shred of ethics can't champion this.

  4. Stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Corn ethanol is an EROI disaster. This is big-agra, some of the same people that ram HFCS into everything and spam tons of research trying to exonerate added sugar as the culprit in the obesity epidemic. Subsidize corn. We love it.

    "I seem to get better mileage with all-gas." You seem to have forgotten that the energy density of ethanol is lower to the point that aircraft will never under any circumstances use it. 42MJ/kg vs 30MJ/kg. Per liter it's even worse. You're not getting better gas mileage.

  5. Comment from a Chemist by NReitzel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The thing is, ethanol has a lower energy density per litre (or gallon, if you are metrically challanged) than does gasoline, just as gasoline has a lower energy density than diesel fuel.

    You get better mileage out of diesel than gasoline, and better mileage out of gasoline than ethanol, all things being equal. Laws of thermodynamics aren't to be bypassed. No amount of "clever" can change the basic fact that gasoline holds more energy than ethanol.

    However, and this may count for something for you, as it does for me, ethanol releases carbon dioxide into the atmosphere that was taken out of the atmosphere to grow the crop that led to the ethanol. There is no net increase of CO2, as there is with fossil fuels. Of course, a cynic might point out (and I might be one) that the carbon in the fossil fuel was also in the atmosphere at one time, to the tune of no less than 1500 ppm in the Carboniferous period.

    Using ethanol isn't for getting better mileage, it's for reducing carbon footprint, the amount of carbon added to the atmosphere when you go down to the corner store to buy a six-pack of beer. The beer, btw, doesn't add carbon to the atmosphere, because like the ethanol that's in it, that carbon came -out- of the atmosphere when the crops to make it were grown.

    --

    Don't take life too seriously; it isn't permanent.

    1. Re:Comment from a Chemist by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ethanol releases carbon dioxide into the atmosphere that was taken out of the atmosphere to grow the crop that led to the ethanol. There is no net increase of CO2, as there is with fossil fuels.

      So, how much fossil fuel is used to grow & harvest the corn? And then there's the whole "distill it" part. Not sure how much energy is used to distill corn liquor as opposed to gasoline....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    2. Re:Comment from a Chemist by sharkytm · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Here's where your net-carbon-zero falls apart: It takes energy to ferment and distill the ethanol. Where does that energy come from? Electricity, mainly produced by coal, natural gas, and oil. So, your tying a food commodity price to fuel, burning coal to do it, and causing the resulting fuel to be less efficient. Ethanol in fuel is a lose-lose. The only reason that it doesn't cause fuel prices to rise is that the government is paying farmers to grow the corn in the first place, artificially depressing the price.

  6. A brazilian point of view by morcego · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Brazil is considered one of the world leader in ethanol, the country with the most successful alternative fuel program, one of the cheaper (if not cheapest) ethanol technologies and, by using sugar cane, one of the most energy efficient. All cars here can easily handle up to E40, and most cars can handle any mix of gas and ethanol. Oh, and the flex fuel technology for any kind of mix? Mostly developed here also.

    That all being said, I don't use pure ethanol. We are not able to find pure gas here, because of local laws (the government mandates the ethanol level), but I avoid it as much as I can. Even with everything we have in our favor here, it is still most expensive, and the overall car performance is not as good as with gas. For ethanol to be a cheaper option for the consumer, its price on the pump has to be no higher than 75% of gas.

    There is, however, another side of the coin. Gas is a limited resource. We need to develop alternative fuel technologies, and right now ethanol is the best, if not only, viable option. The technology is getting cheaper everyday, and improving a lot. As someone who saw the so called birth of the car ethanol, in the 1980's, I can see how much that changed.

    Last, but not least, gas with some ethanol in it does pollute less. I remember seeing some time ago some studies regarding E20(ish), and the number was impressive.

    All told, it is an important technology, it is not a scam or a threat, but it is still improving. Luckly, we still have the luxury to choose, so we can say no. That won't last, tho.

    --
    morcego
    1. Re:A brazilian point of view by morcego · · Score: 5, Informative

      is the US climate and land conducive to growing sugar cane?

      Mostly it is not, unless you somehow genetically engineer sugar cane for different climates (some groups are working on it). The reason our climate and land are so conductive to growing sugar cane gives Brazil an edge, and is perhaps the reason it is more successful than a few other countries that also have a huge alternative fuel program.

      Corn based ethanol has less energy potential and is much more expensive. However, it is the only viable option available for the US right now. There are several studies involving kelp, sugar beat and castor beans that might benefit the US. Castor beans has a lot of potential. But it is much easier to pass laws and incentives for corn related programs in the US, for obvious reasons.

      --
      morcego
    2. Re:A brazilian point of view by Solandri · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yes, there are two issues here which unfortunately many people conflate. Ethanol as a fuel, and how ethanol is made.

      Ethanol as a fuel is just a different fuel. It has slightly different characteristics and requirements than gasoline. But these can mostly be designed around. Using ethanol fuel is a technical problem, one which can mostly if not entirely be engineered around.

      Brazil makes its ethanol from sugar cane, which is actually just about the best crop you can use for making ethanol. It grows fast and has high sugar content, which can easily be converted into ethanol. Unfortunately, sugar cane is rather picky about where it grows, and only a few tropical and semi-tropical environments support it.

      The U.S. makes most of its ethanol from corn. IIRC, corn is down around #12 for best crop to use to make ethanol, so low that many question if its even cost-effective (costs more to make than you can sell the ethanol for) or carbon-effective (production uses more energy than the ethanol contains). Why does the U.S. use such a poor crop for ethanol production? Because during the Great Depression, the U.S. suffered food shortages. In response, the U.S. began subsidizing food production to insure there's always an oversupply (this is why we pay farmers not to grow crops - so their fields are available for immediate use should a disaster like the Dust Bowl befall a signification fraction of our arable land). Most of those food subsides are for corn, which means we always have an oversupply of corn. Most of it gets used as feed for cattle. Some of it gets shipped overseas as foreign aid. And some clever chemists figured out a way to convert it into high fructose corn syrup as a substitute for sucrose.

      Then during the Arab Oil Embargo of the 1970s, someone got the bright idea of turning that excess corn into ethanol. It's a great idea because otherwise that corn would've rotted in grain silos, feeding rats and mice. You've already paid for its production so it's a sunk cost - the fact that corn isn't an ideal ethanol crop doesn't matter because by this point it's basically free. You're going to lose the money you spent growing the corn anyway, so might as well put it to good use. So in the context of things to do with excess corn, converting it to ethanol is a great idea.

      Unfortunately, the Corn lobby then got its hands on it. Now we're growing corn for the sole purpose of converting it into ethanol. The economics which make corn ethanol work for excess corn completely break down when you're growing corn just to convert it into ethanol. Now the cost to grow the corn is no longer a sunk cost; it's a real cost which needs to be added into the price of the ethanol. This is the scam. Ethanol as a fuel is fine. Corn ethanol is a scam. Eliminate the corn ethanol subsidies and the corn ethanol industry implodes because it's uneconomical and uncompetitive with other crops. I hear sugar beets mentioned frequently as a better ethanol crop which will grow readily in the U.S. (they actually produce more sugar than sugar cane, just grow slower).

  7. For those who usually get "irony" wrong.. by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I fill my car with no-ethanol gas, but that's not very easy to find (farmer's co-ops are one handy source) </quote>

    Priceless.

  8. Re:Get 10% less fuel economy with E10... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    I firmly believe that E10 is a total scam. Anecdotally, doing pure highway driving, I get 8-10% less fuel economy with E10 than E0 (pure gasoline), so what's the point?

    Well, if you actually paid attention to the science, you'd realize that the point was to alter the tailpipe emissions from your engine, to the point where you driving your car, even if you use more gas in the end, will produce less pollution.

    Seriously, you could look this up in the law they passed. The math is right there. So is the research. Believe it or not, they did look at alternatives. But ethanol worked out.

    This has been consistently the case with the last 3 cars I've owned (V8 RWD, turbo I4 AWD, regular I4 FWD). Losing 10% fuel economy for the privilege (more accurately, the forced subsidy of corn growers in many states) of driving E10 makes no sense to me. Just water down my gasoline by 10%--same effect but water is cheaper than ethanol...

    Water wouldn't have the same effects that ethanol does. In fact, it'd reduce your mpg even more than ethanol, without having the beneficial effects.

    So no, no, thank you.