Using automobile gas with ethanol

[[email protected]]

Apparently congress has mandated that <all> automobile shall be mixed
with ethanol in the near future. Are there airplane engines that can
use this fuel? Or ways to mitigate the problems caused by ethanol?

An article on EAA says there are three issues with ethanol
(http://www.eaa.org/education/fuel/knopp_alcohol.html)

-First, the addition of alcohol to gasoline adversely affects the
volatility of the fuel, which could cause vapor lock.

-Second, alcohol present in automobile gasoline is not compatible with
the rubber seals and materials used in aircraft.

-Third, phase separation, which happens when the fuel is cooled as a
result of the aircraft's climbing to higher altitude. When the
alcohol separates from the gasoline, it may carry water that has been
held in solution and that cannot be handled by the sediment bowl.

[Michael Horowitz]

On 23 Apr 2006 22:21:15 -0700, wrote:

>Apparently congress has mandated that <all> automobile shall be mixed
>with ethanol in the near future. Are there airplane engines that can
>use this fuel? Or ways to mitigate the problems caused by ethanol?
>
>An article on EAA says there are three issues with ethanol
>(http://www.eaa.org/education/fuel/knopp_alcohol.html)
>
>-First, the addition of alcohol to gasoline adversely affects the
>volatility of the fuel, which could cause vapor lock.
>
>-Second, alcohol present in automobile gasoline is not compatible with
>the rubber seals and materials used in aircraft.
>
>-Third, phase separation, which happens when the fuel is cooled as a
>result of the aircraft's climbing to higher altitude. When the
>alcohol separates from the gasoline, it may carry water that has been
>held in solution and that cannot be handled by the sediment bowl.


I've heard speculation the ethanol and aluminum gas tanks produce a
deposit; water is absorbed by the alcohol and cause corrosion in the
tank. No idea if that's true and to what extent. The Stromberg carb.
in my A-65 needs to be examined for rubber-tipped needles (believe
associated with the float valve) - Mike

[M]

Congress did not mandate all automobile fule to be mixed with ethanol.
What's mandated is all the metro area that're currently using MTBE as
oxygenate to reduce air pollution shall switch to ethanol as an
oxygenate.

For the areas that're NOT currently required to have oxygenated
gasoline, there's no federal requirement to add ethanol into the fuel.
Certain states may have separate ethanol requirements.

Honestly, the ethanol industry in this country doesn't even have the
produciton capacity to supply a nation wide ethanol mix of 2%. They
can barely supply the current requirement the replace MTBE in those
metro areas and the ethanol price is shooting through the roof.

[Tater Schuld]

"M" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Honestly, the ethanol industry in this country doesn't even have the
> produciton capacity to supply a nation wide ethanol mix of 2%. They
> can barely supply the current requirement the replace MTBE in those
> metro areas and the ethanol price is shooting through the roof.

odd, I could swear all the pumps in wisconsin have placards on them warning
buyers that the gas has 10% ethanol in them

I've been contemplating switching some vehicles over to 100% ethanol, and
grow my own, to kill off the demand for it at the pump. if the demand is
high does than mean seed corn is going to skyrocket too?

remember seeing a 100% ethanol plane at oshkosh, so it cannot be impossible
to convert.

[Jim Carriere]

Tater Schuld wrote:
> "M" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> Honestly, the ethanol industry in this country doesn't even have the
>> produciton capacity to supply a nation wide ethanol mix of 2%. They
>> can barely supply the current requirement the replace MTBE in those
>> metro areas and the ethanol price is shooting through the roof.
>
> odd, I could swear all the pumps in wisconsin have placards on them warning
> buyers that the gas has 10% ethanol in them

Do the placards read the gas contains that, or something like "may
contain up to 10%"?

Also, it may be the gas station chains simply post the notices on all
pumps... just speculation on my part.

[Ron Wanttaja]

On Tue, 25 Apr 2006 21:44:31 -0500, Jim Carriere >
wrote:

>Tater Schuld wrote:
>> odd, I could swear all the pumps in wisconsin have placards on them warning
>> buyers that the gas has 10% ethanol in them
>
>Do the placards read the gas contains that, or something like "may
>contain up to 10%"?
>
>Also, it may be the gas station chains simply post the notices on all
>pumps... just speculation on my part.

For those who are interested, I included the procedure for testing for alcohol
in my last EAA chapter newsletter. See page 5 on:

http://www.eaa26.org/apr06.pdf

Ron Wanttaja

[M]

I see those placards saying "may contain up to 10% ethanol" a lot in
Washington state. However as of today most of the gasoline sold here
does not contain any ethanol. The reason is ethanol is expensive to
blend into the fuel because it needs to be transported in trucks or
barges from ethanol producing states.

[M]

One of the interesting thing is Winsconsin has quite a few number of
airports that sell mogas, according to
http://www.chouby.com/apps/autogas.html

Since autogas STC prohibits ethanol in the fuel, this seems to indicate
that those airports somehow can get autogas free of ethanol.

[Ron Wanttaja]

On 25 Apr 2006 21:45:13 -0700, "M" > wrote:

>I see those placards saying "may contain up to 10% ethanol" a lot in
>Washington state. However as of today most of the gasoline sold here
>does not contain any ethanol. The reason is ethanol is expensive to
>blend into the fuel because it needs to be transported in trucks or
>barges from ethanol producing states.

I tanked up here in Seattle just last Saturday, filling my cans at the local
Chevron station. I ran the test...the gas was clear. However, I have detected
alcohol in the past in cases where the pumps indicated that the gas would NOT
contain booze....

Ron Wanttaja

[[email protected]]

FYI, here in Pennsylvania, where until recently I drove a tank-truck
delivering fuel, the "branded" SUNOCO is blended 10% etanol in all
grades. I know of no other retailers selling ethanol-blend unless they
buy blended specifically, from SUNOCO.

However, several of the convenience stores have placarded their pumps:
"...may contain ethanol" in anticipation of perhaps buying the blend.

We hauled the ethanol (denatured with addition of 2% gasoline) 9200
gallons per load, 100 miles from Philadelphia (rail and sea-port
terminal) to the SUNOCO bulk-plant (pipeline terminal) in
Mechanicsburg, at the rate oif three or four loads daily. So there is
some use (demand) for the stuff. Most ethanol arrived by ship.

[Scott]

In fact, it was a whole SQUADRON of planes...called something like the
Vanguard Squadron...an aerobatic team flying RV-3s or RV-4s...back in
the 90s. Whatever happened to them?

Scott



Tater Schuld wrote:

>
> remember seeing a 100% ethanol plane at oshkosh, so it cannot be impossible
> to convert.
>
>

[Si]

Tater Schuld wrote:
>
>
> I've been contemplating switching some vehicles over to 100% ethanol, and
> grow my own, to kill off the demand for it at the pump. if the demand is
> high does than mean seed corn is going to skyrocket too?
>
>

Corn is not the most efficient source for ethanol. If I am wearing a
cynical hat I am prone to think that it is just an agri-business
wheeze. They are all set up for handling corn, they have squeezed the
cost end of the business to the bone, the only way left is the old
fashioned grow the demand end. They have practically maxed out the corn
syrup side of things (try finding any food stuff out there that doesn't
have added corn syrup). So what's left? Fuel. Elephant grass yields
more ethanol than corn by some margin and yet 'go green, go yellow' is
the refrain. Not very joined up thinking. IMHO biodiesel is a better
option for a home brewer.



Si

"Bog snorkler extraordinaire"

[clare at snyder.on.ca]

On 25 Apr 2006 22:50:38 -0700, wrote:

>FYI, here in Pennsylvania, where until recently I drove a tank-truck
>delivering fuel, the "branded" SUNOCO is blended 10% etanol in all
>grades. I know of no other retailers selling ethanol-blend unless they
>buy blended specifically, from SUNOCO.
>

Up here in Ontario, what used to be Co-Op , UPI, and at least one
other non-Sunoco supplier used 10% Ethanol.

Shell Premium has NO Ethanol, and according to shell, never will.

>However, several of the convenience stores have placarded their pumps:
>"...may contain ethanol" in anticipation of perhaps buying the blend.
>
>We hauled the ethanol (denatured with addition of 2% gasoline) 9200
>gallons per load, 100 miles from Philadelphia (rail and sea-port
>terminal) to the SUNOCO bulk-plant (pipeline terminal) in
>Mechanicsburg, at the rate oif three or four loads daily. So there is
>some use (demand) for the stuff. Most ethanol arrived by ship.

*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ***

[.Blueskies.]

"Si" > wrote in message oups.com...

>
> Corn is not the most efficient source for ethanol. If I am wearing a
> cynical hat I am prone to think that it is just an agri-business
> wheeze. They are all set up for handling corn, they have squeezed the
> cost end of the business to the bone, the only way left is the old
> fashioned grow the demand end. They have practically maxed out the corn
> syrup side of things (try finding any food stuff out there that doesn't
> have added corn syrup). So what's left? Fuel. Elephant grass yields
> more ethanol than corn by some margin and yet 'go green, go yellow' is
> the refrain. Not very joined up thinking. IMHO biodiesel is a better
> option for a home brewer.
>
>
>
> Si
>
> "Bog snorkler extraordinaire"
>

Here is a link to a very interesting story about American agriculture:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5342514
(I wish there was a transcript available)

[JStricker]

It's also quite a lot of BS.

A McDonald's meal has 2 bushels of corn?? Not. From that, he divines that
it takes 2 gallons of fossil fuel to make a McDonald's meal. More crap.
He's not taking anything into account for the use of the by-products in the
manufacture of things like corn syrup or ethanol.

He also goes on about how evil corn is because it's ruining our eating
habits. That's like blaming the gun for shooting someone instead of the
person pulling the trigger.

He talks about "cheap" fertilizer. In the last two years my anhydrous
ammonia has gone from $170 per ton to $500 per ton. That's not cheap, I'm
sorry to say, and the idea that farmers just dump the fertilizer on willy
nilly is ludicrous, it's simply not cost effective. I pay almost $1,000/
year for nothing other than soil sampling and fertilizer recommendations.

Then he talks about getting off fossil fuels and solar energy. What a
moron. What does he think actually grows the crops? It's all solar
powered. This idiot hasn't spent 30 minutes on a farm in his life.

Not surprising that he's a university researcher. Those that can, do, those
the can't, teach and write scare tactic books.

John Stricker

PS: The most efficient thing to make ethanol from is the crop with the
highest sugar content so that's sugar beets and sugar cane. It CAN be made
from corn and within 10 miles of me there is an Ethanol plant that uses
strictly grain sorghum. His calculations of what the energy return of
Ethanol is completely disregards the value of things like distiller's grain
and other by-products which are high value, high use items.

".Blueskies." > wrote in message
. net...
>
> "Si" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>
>>
>> Corn is not the most efficient source for ethanol. If I am wearing a
>> cynical hat I am prone to think that it is just an agri-business
>> wheeze. They are all set up for handling corn, they have squeezed the
>> cost end of the business to the bone, the only way left is the old
>> fashioned grow the demand end. They have practically maxed out the corn
>> syrup side of things (try finding any food stuff out there that doesn't
>> have added corn syrup). So what's left? Fuel. Elephant grass yields
>> more ethanol than corn by some margin and yet 'go green, go yellow' is
>> the refrain. Not very joined up thinking. IMHO biodiesel is a better
>> option for a home brewer.
>>
>>
>>
>> Si
>>
>> "Bog snorkler extraordinaire"
>>
>
> Here is a link to a very interesting story about American agriculture:
> http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5342514
> (I wish there was a transcript available)
>

[Peter Dohm]

"Si" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Tater Schuld wrote:
> >
> >
> > I've been contemplating switching some vehicles over to 100% ethanol,
and
> > grow my own, to kill off the demand for it at the pump. if the demand is
> > high does than mean seed corn is going to skyrocket too?
> >
> >
>
> Corn is not the most efficient source for ethanol. If I am wearing a
> cynical hat I am prone to think that it is just an agri-business
> wheeze. They are all set up for handling corn, they have squeezed the
> cost end of the business to the bone, the only way left is the old
> fashioned grow the demand end. They have practically maxed out the corn
> syrup side of things (try finding any food stuff out there that doesn't
> have added corn syrup). So what's left? Fuel. Elephant grass yields
> more ethanol than corn by some margin and yet 'go green, go yellow' is
> the refrain. Not very joined up thinking. IMHO biodiesel is a better
> option for a home brewer.
>
>
>
> Si
>
> "Bog snorkler extraordinaire"
>
I agree that adding ethanol (or methanol for that matter) to fuel is little
more than a way to sell the stuff. In fact, the only good sounding argument
that I can ever remember hearing for alcohol as a fuel is that, when used as
100% of the fuel, it supposedly does not require additives to meet a
performance number, a/k/a octane. Supposedly, it you have a high
compression engine, and want to run at high power, you just run it rich.
However, alcohol is hydroscopic and required a lot of energy to produce.
Perhaps, if we have built a couple of nuclear power plants each year for the
past three decades, we would have electric power in need of a market. OTOH,
if we had all that surplus electric capacity, it would probably make more
sense to just run electric trains and busses directly. I won't suggest
anything beyond those, but some niche markets cold make sense.

As a concept, diesel almost makes sense for ground pounding, but I have no
idea what is actually required to home-brew it. If you buy diesel for an
automobile at the pump you will eventually break even, which is better than
the gasoline electric hybrids, but the cars currently offered seem to be
geared purely for advertised fuel economy so that performance can be poor.

Currently, I am not sold on diesel aircraft for the homebuilder; despite the
outstanding work done by Thielert. If you can buy one of theirs, it seems
to make sense. And it obviously assure the availability of compatible fuel
at airports. But if you plan to convert your own, the engines of which I am
aware seem to weigh at least a third more than an equivalent gasoline
engine. I am not convinced they really have to be that heavy, since modern
computer controlled injection systems should be able to limit the peak
pressures, but the automotive diesels (mainly VW) that I know to be
available in the US are a little too heavy to have any advantage.

Peter

[Drew Dalgleish]

On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 17:04:09 -0400, clare at snyder.on.ca wrote:


>
>Up here in Ontario, what used to be Co-Op , UPI, and at least one
>other non-Sunoco supplier used 10% Ethanol.
>
>Shell Premium has NO Ethanol, and according to shell, never will.

Yeah for now but Dalton has promised that we'll all be burning 10% by
2009. Now they need to build more ethanol plants to meet the
legislated need. Most of the corn will come from Michigan cuz it's so
much cheaper there.

[Mark Hickey]

"JStricker" > wrote:

>It's also quite a lot of BS.
>
>A McDonald's meal has 2 bushels of corn?? Not. From that, he divines that
>it takes 2 gallons of fossil fuel to make a McDonald's meal. More crap.

Enjoyed your analysis and your viewpoint from the farmer's
perspective.

With even a grain (pun intended) of common sense, it should be obvious
that McDonalds isn't going to subsidize each and every meal they serve
by charging FAR less for it than the "reported raw materials" above
cost (imagine the cost if you actually include the packaging, labor,
potato and other food product).

It also assumes that farmers are losing a boatload of money on every
bushel of corn they sell. Nice of them to do that for the rest of us,
huh?

Unfortuately, the kind of nonsense you point out is invisible to a
large segment of the population who'll believe anything they read (as
long as it aligns with their other agendas).

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame

[clare at snyder.on.ca]

On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 12:58:04 GMT, (Drew
Dalgleish) wrote:

>On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 17:04:09 -0400, clare at snyder.on.ca wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Up here in Ontario, what used to be Co-Op , UPI, and at least one
>>other non-Sunoco supplier used 10% Ethanol.
>>
>>Shell Premium has NO Ethanol, and according to shell, never will.
>
>Yeah for now but Dalton has promised that we'll all be burning 10% by
>2009. Now they need to build more ethanol plants to meet the
>legislated need. Most of the corn will come from Michigan cuz it's so
>much cheaper there.
Ethanol fuel is a crock anyway, particularly when made from corn, as
so much of the fertilizer required to get a good corn crop is
petroleum based. Ethanol is pretty much a wash when produced from
corn. Gotta use elephant grass, or other non-fertilizer intesive
biomass if ethanol is going to be ANY kind of a solution.
*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ***

[Canal builder]

On 27/4/06 4:55 pm, in article ,
"clare at snyder.on.ca" <clare at snyder.on.ca> wrote:

> On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 12:58:04 GMT, (Drew
> Dalgleish) wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 17:04:09 -0400, clare at snyder.on.ca wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Up here in Ontario, what used to be Co-Op , UPI, and at least one
>>> other non-Sunoco supplier used 10% Ethanol.
>>>
>>> Shell Premium has NO Ethanol, and according to shell, never will.
>>
>> Yeah for now but Dalton has promised that we'll all be burning 10% by
>> 2009. Now they need to build more ethanol plants to meet the
>> legislated need. Most of the corn will come from Michigan cuz it's so
>> much cheaper there.
> Ethanol fuel is a crock anyway, particularly when made from corn, as
> so much of the fertilizer required to get a good corn crop is
> petroleum based. Ethanol is pretty much a wash when produced from
> corn. Gotta use elephant grass, or other non-fertilizer intesive
> biomass if ethanol is going to be ANY kind of a solution.
> *** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ***

Didn't Henry Ford propose running his vehicles on fuel (ethanol presumably)
produced from hemp plants?

[Roger]

On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 12:58:04 GMT, (Drew
Dalgleish) wrote:

>On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 17:04:09 -0400, clare at snyder.on.ca wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Up here in Ontario, what used to be Co-Op , UPI, and at least one
>>other non-Sunoco supplier used 10% Ethanol.
>>
>>Shell Premium has NO Ethanol, and according to shell, never will.
>
>Yeah for now but Dalton has promised that we'll all be burning 10% by
>2009. Now they need to build more ethanol plants to meet the
>legislated need. Most of the corn will come from Michigan cuz it's so
>much cheaper there.

I thought Canada was going to be making the stuff from hemp which is
cheaper to grow and gives more alcohol than corn.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com