Problems with ethanol
How about a fuel tank that rusts out?
Every now and then I’m accused of being alarmist over the increasing use of ethanol-laced fuel. Well, I’m not alone. Try this story from the New York Times, by TUDOR VAN HAMPTON. The emphasis (sentences in bold) is mine.
IT was not such an extraordinary wish, really. All Sam Hokin wanted to do was fill his motorcycle with gasoline.
The problem was, he wanted just gasoline in the tank, not a blend spiked with ethanol. Though ethanol proponents say that vehicles like Mr.
Hokin’s BMW K75, a 1991 model, will tolerate the brew known as gasohol pumped at most filling stations, he insists on finding alcohol-free fuel.
Mr. Hokin, a physics teacher and Web site developer, is not alone.
Many owners of boats, snowmobiles and garden tractors, and users of yard tools like string trimmers and chainsaws, say they would prefer buying gasoline that contains no ethanol. Online forums and car-club newsletters teem with complaints of poor performance and breakdowns attributed to gasohol.
Restorers of vintage cars point to problems caused by the decay of older rubber components like seals, gaskets and flexible fuel lines, which can deteriorate when exposed to ethanol-blend fuels. Some replacement parts are available in modern materials that resist alcohol damage, but not all are.
“It’s really a problem, and unfortunately, there is nothing you can do about it,” said Keith Flickinger, curator of the Nicola Bulgari collection in Allentown, Pa. “Not a lot of people are making high-tech stuff for the antique cars.”
There is no simple remedy for this situation, either. If anything, the pressure to develop the market for renewable fuels is making 100 percent gasoline more of a challenge to find.
Some 70 percent of the gasoline sold in the United States contains ethanol, according to the American Coalition for Ethanol, most of it at a concentration of 10 percent, known as E10.
The shift toward alcohol-dosed gas began after the oil shocks of the 1970s and accelerated in the 1990s with a federal mandate that fuels contain a minimum level of oxygen, a measure intended to reduce carbon monoxide emissions. Alcohol blends helped to meet that requirement, and as a side benefit raised the gasoline’s octane rating — a potential performance advantage.
In January, the Environmental Protection Agency approved gasoline-ethanol blends up to 15 percent ethanol, called E15, in cars, light trucks and sport utilities built after 2000.
The E15 waiver raised a decades-old cap of 10 percent on ethanol blends for general use. Even at that higher federal limit, the ability of fuel producers to meet Congressional mandates calling for much higher volumes of renewable fuels is not assured. The 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act requires producers to increase renewable fuel production eightfold — to 36 billion gallons by 2022, from 4 billion in 2006 — with 21 billion gallons coming from advanced biofuels like cellulosic ethanol.
“The 10 percent fuel blend was essentially a wall,” said Chris Thorne, a spokesman for Growth Energy, an ethanol industry group. In 2009, Growth Energy filed a petition with the E.P.A. to raise the ethanol blend cap to 15 percent for all vehicles, regardless of vintage.
In reviewing the petition, the E.P.A. collected vehicle test data and sifted through more than 78,000 public comments.
Ethanol supporters argued that the E.P.A. should approve E15 across the board. “There is a mountain of data behind this,” Mr. Thorne said. “We think E15 should perform in all vehicles.”
Still, many consumers would rather not have any alcohol in their gasoline. Their reasons include reductions in fuel economy — a gallon of ethanol contains about one-third less energy than a gallon of gasoline — and alcohol’s affinity for moisture, which can cause a multitude of engine problems.
The frustration of searching for alcohol-free gas for his BMW motorcycle led Mr. Hokin, who lives in Madison, Wis., to an increasingly popular solution: he started a Web site, pure-gas.org.
But in his quest to help other hobbyists around the country find 100 percent gas, Mr. Hokin encountered something he did not expect — a barrage of political debates on his site.
“What I didn’t want it to become is an anti-ethanol gathering place,” Mr. Hokin said. “The reason I made the site is so I could go tour on my motorcycle and get pure gas.”
It could be some time before regulatory hurdles, lawsuits and technical matters are resolved and E15 arrives at filling stations. But heated discussions on Mr. Hokin’s Web site provide an indication of how emotional the ethanol issue can be.
Even auto racing series have taken a stand. IndyCar, organizer of the championship for Indianapolis 500 cars, and the American Le Mans Series for endurance racing were early adopters of ethanol blends, approving the use of concentrations up to 100 percent ethanol.
Since the beginning of the 2011 season, Nascar’s top three national racing series have been using a Sunoco blend of E15 rated at 104 octane. Nascar has reported a small horsepower improvement — less than 1 percent — and a slight reduction in fuel economy.
The race-sanctioning group acknowledges that the switch in fuels was driven by factors other than on-track performance.
“Any replacement to the percentage of carbon fuels is going to help lessen the dependence on foreign oil,” said John Darby, managing director of competition at Nascar. “We could let the debates go on forever or try to be more proactive. We wanted to be ahead of the game, to do something.”
The decision made by the E.P.A. in January expanded an earlier waiver, announced in October, that covered vehicles 2007 and newer. The broadened ruling covers vehicles back to 2001, reflecting the E.P.A.’s stance that E15 fuel would not harm the emissions equipment on those vehicles, but it declined to allow the higher gasohol blend for vehicles from the 2000 model year and earlier. The agency also is not allowing E15 for heavy-duty vehicles, motorcycles, snowmobiles, boats and lawnmowers of any model year.
“In our judgment, 2001 and newer cars have more ethanol-tolerant fuel systems, evaporative emissions controls, internal engine components and catalysts,” an E.P.A. spokeswoman, Cathy Milbourn, wrote in an e-mail.
Running higher ethanol blends is especially a problem for catalytic converters, which are susceptible to premature failure resulting from higher exhaust temperatures. Ethanol’s higher oxygen content, compared with gasoline, tends to raise combustion temperatures. That can increase the formation of smog-forming gases, mainly nitrogen oxides, which catalysts are designed to clean up.
Vehicles made before 2001 “may have been designed for only limited exposure to E10 and consequently may have the potential for increased materials degradation with the use of E15,” said the E.P.A. in its original waiver decision last fall.
When used in lawnmowers, leafblowers and other equipment not designed to run on gasohol, the extra heat and added emissions are a safety issue, according to groups opposing the E15 waiver.
“All of us are O.K. with ethanol, all of us are O.K. with designing new products,” said Kris Kiser, spokesman for the Outdoor Power Equipment Institute. “We don’t want anybody hurt. That’s our beef.”
The power equipment group, along with automakers and boatbuilders, is challenging the waiver in a lawsuit filed Dec. 20 in federal appellate court.
The E.P.A. is writing a pump-labeling rule to warn drivers against putting E15 in vehicles not covered under the waiver. Regulators expect to issue a final rule in the spring, Ms. Milbourn said.
In addition to emission controls, fuel systems are at risk with increased ethanol levels in cars not designed to withstand the corrosive effects of alcohol-based fuels. Especially in older vehicles using carburetors and flexible fuel lines, ethanol poses particular challenges to those hoping to keep vintage cars on the road.
As E10 has worked its way into the nation’s fuel supply, old-car restorers have taken to rebuilding carburetors, whenever possible, with larger jets to let more gasoline into the engine.
With standard jets, the usual problem is drivability, Larry Claypool, a mechanic and restorer in Frankfort, Ill., said. “The cars have hesitation or surging — symptoms of running lean.”
That is not a problem on later models. "In the newer cars that have electronic fuel injection and oxygen sensors, a sensor reads the exhaust and tells the computer to change the mixture,” said Rod Dahlgren, a classic car collector and restorer in Napa, Calif. “A carburetor can’t do that.”
Changing to larger carburetor jets is one way that racing teams are achieving higher horsepower figures with E15, Mr. Darby, the Nascar official, said. “The auto manufacturers — to meet their fuel-economy standards — with their onboard fuel injectors will lean out the mixture,” Mr. Darby said. “As it relates to a racing engine that is mechanically tuned, the teams will richen the fuel that the engine sees a little bit.”
Condensation in the gas tank is another problem in older cars, especially ones that are driven infrequently. In cars with vented gas caps, moisture can readily enter the fuel tank and contaminate the supply.
Because ethanol, like vodka and other grain alcohols, mixes with water, it can separate from gasoline in the tank, causing the engine to stall, or worse, increase corrosion.
“I just got off the phone with a guy in Texas who is looking for a new gas tank for his ’58 Cadillac,” Mr. Dahlgren said. “The car is sitting in the garage, and all of a sudden, it starts to leak. It’s not a good scenario.”
In an effort to combat corrosion and fuel degradation, some restorers will fill up with 100 percent gasoline before storing cars for long stretches.
Mr. Flickinger, the Bulgari curator, goes a step further, occasionally filling the collection’s cars with 115-octane racing fuel. Though it may not be legal for cars driven on public roads, it keeps the engines clean and improves performance.
“Everything comes to life,” he said. “It’s like giving it something good to eat.”
Mr. Dahlgren, the California collector, is concerned about owners who prefer to drive, rather than just display, their vintage machines.
“More and more cars have been relegated to the garage because we don’t want to damage them with the fuels out there,” he said. “It’s really a shame, especially when you consider how few of them are left. We’re trying to preserve history.”






More

Comments
Tomorrow's Avgas back to top
New 100-Octane Fuel Additive Shows Promise
In the nearly three decades that the GA industry has been searching for an unleaded replacement for 100LL, one recurring question: Isn't there an additive that will provide the octane? Ed Kollin, a petrochemist and consultant to Aircraft Specialties Lubricants, told us this week that there very well may be. After a months-long intensive research project, Kollin said Friday that he has developed an additive that shows promise as a direct replacement for the octane-boosting properties of tetraethyl lead.
He said initial trials indicate that when the additive is used with about a gram of lead in a gallon of gasoline -- half the maximum amount typically used in 100LL -- the motor octane value was a measured 110, far above typical FBO avgas. Kollin said when the additive was used in an unleaded aviation alkylate basestock, it achieved a motor octane value of at least 101. Because Kollin has not filed patents, he declined to offer any detail on the composition of the additive, but explained that it's a custom molecule whose production cost should be comparable to lead, which is generally seen at costing between 5 and 10 cents per gallon of avgas.
Kollin has done some initial stability and aging tests, but no full-scale engine tests. He said the next phase of testing will involve running a small engine to determine the additive's deposit formation characteristics.
"This is very encouraging," Kollin told us. "This is not a highly expensive molecule to produce. If nothing else comes of this for aviation, we will produce an automotive octane booster than you'll see on the shelves at your local NAPA."
Kollin developed an anti-wear and anti-corrosion aviation oil additive called CamGuard, which ASL also markets, in addition to automotive and marine versions.
Biofuel Subsidies in the United States: 2007 Update
GENEVA, Switzerland, October 2007: The biofuels industry is witnessing unprecedented growth in the United States, driving agricultural commodities prices to record levels and sparking a host of environmental and economic concerns. This expansion is far from imputable wholly to market forces; rather, federal, state and municipal jurisdictions have been instrumental in driving up both the production and consumption of biofuels through sizeable subsidies and other incentives. A new report by the Global Subsidies Initiative (GSI) and Earth Track, “Biofuels - At What Cost? Government Support for Ethanol and Biodiesel in the United States - 2007 Update”, revises an earlier report issued October 2006 and details the extent of current government support to biofuels in the United States. The report also analyzes the potential impact of forthcoming legislation, namely the Energy and Farm Bills, which are poised to expand government support even further.
Under existing policies, the biofuels industry will, in aggregate, benefit from support worth over $ 92 billion within the 2006 - 2012 time frame.
The Global Subsidies Initiative is concerned that many of the policies currently in place are ineffective in achieving greater energy security and lower greenhouse gas emissions, the objectives which have officially been used to justify increasing subsidy levels.
In light of the report’s findings, the GSI recommends that U.S. federal and state governments:
• desist from increasing mandatory consumption levels for biofuels and instead adopt a neutral policy position favoring all options to reduce reliance on petroleum in the transport sector;
• take into account the environmental effects of biofuels production and distribution cycles in the design of policies that affect biofuels;
• establish a transparent evaluation process to assess the cost-effectiveness of support policies at all levels of government in attaining the declared objectives behind U.S. biofuels policy.
“ref: http://www.globalsubsidies.org/en/research/biofuel-subsidies-united-states-2007-update)”
Me again, the Cons from an environmental prospective focuses on the lack of good farming land to sustain the worlds population, and because the Governments are prepared to subsidize the growing of ‘fuel grain’, it is more profitable than “food grain” for the farmer to grow. As a result huge tracts of old growth rain forest (the very thing we are trying to save) is being cleared all over the world to make way for fields of biofuel grains.
Me I use either 95 or 98 Ron in my 2006 Carbie model Vstar 1100, as I believe it is a cleaner burning fuel an as a result reduces engine wear and increases service intervals or at least
content, which results in a vehicle needing more (sometimes by as much as 30%!) to operate in the same manner as a dense fuel, such as the premium fuels. However, back to my 2 cents worth about emissions... For example. Sulphur is one of the dangerous gases
that emits out of an exhaust, of which E10 unleaded emits 150ppm (parts per million) of sulphur (very dirty I might add), as does your normal 91 unleaded (150ppm) and your premium unleaded fuels emit 50ppm (or less). Much better for us and for those that care
about the environment. In general, most modern motorcycles have the technology to change its settings for the different octane. Hope this sheds some light on the situation?
to greenify the nations transport, ethanol is not THE answer. Bring on Hydrogen.