whemme wrote:
Well the misinformation never ends. I agree that ethanol is hydroscopic but in order for it to absorb any significant water it would have to be exposed to the outside atmosphere in order to absorb it. 10% ethanol gas is stored in under found tanks with limited exposure to moisture. Also if it were possible for the ethanol to absorb enough water to reduce the mpg range of the fuel by 30%, since the fuel only contained 10% ethanol to begin with, mathematically the only energy remaining to propel the vehicle is coming from the gas and no energy coming from the ethanol content.
And finally if the water laden fuel actually is reducing the mileage by 30%, it will affect all vehicles using it equally not just fuel hungry motorhomes.
Your answer is predicated on ‘buying the party line’, not facts.
Sure IF there’s only 10 ethanol the amount of water is limited, but if the fuel has been spiked, the water content goes up too.
The water is a very real thing, some studies have shown that up to 50% of underground storage tanks leak. The below regional study found 20% of stations had water-laden tanks.
The problem is two-fold, higher ethanol rates means more absorption and leaking tanks mean an endless supply of water.
Report on leaking gas station underground tanks.Very few people even track their mileage let alone test it on both types of fuel, with and without ethanol.
