Is EAA Working on an STC for Ethanol-laced MoGas?

If there is one thing that EAA could do to truly benefit General
Aviation, it would be to help develop STCs for the use of the
increasingly popular (and, in some states, mandated) ethanol-gasolines.


Does anyone know if this is in the works?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

At least one airplane is STC'd for E100, and reportedly the LyCon top
ends actually live far longer with this fuel.

Jay Honeck schrieb:

If there is one thing that EAA could do to truly benefit General
Aviation, it would be to help develop STCs for the use of the
increasingly popular (and, in some states, mandated) ethanol-gasolines.


Does anyone know if this is in the works?

I'm not sure how marketable this would be, due to the large amount of
potential replacement componets. Starting with tank sealant and
continuing on to most of the flexible components through to the carb.

Don't get me wrong, I think it would be great to have. I just think
the cost of revamping a fuel system might scare most folks away.

My plane has an autofuel STC that I can't use anymore because of
alcohol and I don't know if I'd go the expense.

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

Bret Ludwig wrote:
At least one airplane is STC'd for E100, and reportedly the LyCon top
ends actually live far longer with this fuel.

Need to read up on the ag planes flying in South American on it...

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
oups.com...
If there is one thing that EAA could do to truly benefit General
Aviation, it would be to help develop STCs for the use of the
increasingly popular (and, in some states, mandated) ethanol-gasolines.


Does anyone know if this is in the works?

Didya call EAA?

--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

There was an airplane campaigned for a couple of years around the USA
burning alcohol, in the not too distant past (old pilot with old
memory, but can't remember what I had for breakfast)... I think it was
AOPA (?)... Perhaps someone without ol AL-whuts-hiz-names disease can
pull it up...
My memory is that the program was declared officially dead and no
further interest in alcohol fuels for aircraft due to the usual
suspects (FAA regs, cost of STC's for new fuel components, liability,
etc.)... Seems to me it was a C-150... A quick Google didn't turn it
up, so I leave it for the group... But I remember the pictures of it in
the flying mags...

The other issue that ETOH enthusiasts seem to never see is that it
takes more petroleum BTU's to produce a gallon of ethanol than you get
back when when you burn the ethanol in an engine... So it is a
lose-lose situation...

The ohter point is that the oil companies love alcohol... You replace
10% of each $2++ retail gallon of gas with government subsidized ETOH
that costs them 25 cents a gallon in industrial quantities... Do the
math, what is not to love?

denny

At least one airplane is STC'd for E100, and reportedly the LyCon top
ends actually live far longer with this fuel.
************************************************** **************8

Just an aside::: IC engines live the longest on Propane... Just ask
any factory that converted it's gas powered fork trucks to propane...
So much for the , "ya gotta burn at least 25% 100LL to protect the
valves" crowd...

Another interesting aside is that I installed a 10KW, propane powered,
220V AC generator with automatic transfer switching, because of our
frequent power outages here in the boonies... I can also run the engine
on natural gas with no changes, but the power output drops to 7KW if I
do... No natural gas lines in the middle of nowhere Michigan, so not
an issue for me, but an interesting fact I thought...

denny

I'm not sure how marketable this would be, due to the large amount of
potential replacement componets. Starting with tank sealant and
continuing on to most of the flexible components through to the carb.

Don't get me wrong, I think it would be great to have. I just think
the cost of revamping a fuel system might scare most folks away.

I believe someone here (Jim Weir?) said the total cost of parts to replace
all the rubber in contact with fuel is less than $100.

Perhaps the fuel tanks would have to be sloshed with something ethanol
resistant? Would that even be an issue to planes that don't use rubber tank
liners?

My plane has an autofuel STC that I can't use anymore because of
alcohol and I don't know if I'd go the expense.

That sucks. I would fly a LOT less if I had to buy avgas.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

The other issue that ETOH enthusiasts seem to never see is that it
takes more petroleum BTU's to produce a gallon of ethanol than you get
back when when you burn the ethanol in an engine... So it is a
lose-lose situation...

That's what is SO frustrating. Right now our Iowa Legislature is
considering mandating ethanol in all gas. It is SO dumb, yet -- especially
here in corn country -- it holds an almost unstoppable attraction for many.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:_91hf.574516$_o.318563@attbi_s71...
The other issue that ETOH enthusiasts seem to never see is that it
takes more petroleum BTU's to produce a gallon of ethanol than you
get back when when you burn the ethanol in an engine... So it is a
lose-lose situation...

That's what is SO frustrating. Right now our Iowa Legislature is
considering mandating ethanol in all gas. It is SO dumb, yet --
especially here in corn country -- it holds an almost unstoppable
attraction for many.

I thought the idea behind ethanol was not to make more fuel, but to be a
replacement for MTBE to reduce pollution. I seem to remember reading that
it wasn't very effective in that regard, as compared to "normal" gas, but
was done as "pork" to the corn producing states.