Forum Discussion
71 Replies
- yr2017Explorer
mlts22 wrote:
I still remember when "gasahol" was introduced in the US in the late 1970s/early 1980s. It managed to completely destroy the engine on a family member's 1978 Honda Accord
Ha - I used gasohol in both my 1978 Buick Riviera and a 1980 Toyota Corolla for several years - no damage. - down_homeExplorer IIThere are a bunch, including corn farmers trying to convince, it is the greatest thing since sliced bread, blech and force everyone to use Ethanol.
Money is what the hole thing is about. If you can get a law passed to use your ethanol you will make billions.
I don't want it. I know what it has done to some of my engines.
I;m not going to use it unless it is the only thing available, whic is what the Money is trying to make happen. - BCSnobExplorerOverview article:
Ethanol Fuels Ozone Increase
Empirical study unexpectedly finds that switch from gasoline to ethanol in flex-fuel vehicles raises ozone levels
A multiyear analysis of air quality, economics, and consumer behavior found that when fluctuations in the relative prices of fuels between 2009 and 2011 led a large fraction of drivers in São Paulo, Brazil, to switch from ethanol to gasoline in flexible-fuel vehicles, local ozone concentrations fell by 20%. The study, which is the first of its kind to evaluate real-world multivariable data, as opposed to atmospheric modeling predictions, also found that the fuel switch tended to cause an increase in nitric oxide and CO levels (Nat. Geosci. 2014, DOI: 10.1038/ngeo2144). The analysis, which was conducted by economist Alberto Salvo of the National University of Singapore and chemist Franz M. Geiger of Northwestern University, accounts for numerous meteorological variables yet contradicts simulation results obtained with computer models tailored for conditions in São Paulo. Commenting in Nature Geoscience, Sasha Madronich of the National Center for Atmospheric Research notes that this study “should be viewed as a gold standard for the type of analysis needed to evaluate the reliability of atmospheric chemistry models designed to simulate the effects of the transportation sector on air quality.”
original article:
Reduction in local ozone levels in urban São Paulo due to a shift from ethanol to gasoline use
Ethanol-based vehicles are thought to generate less pollution than gasoline-based vehicles, because ethanol emissions contain lower concentrations of mono-nitrogen oxides than those from gasoline emissions. However, the predicted effect of various gasoline/ethanol blends on the concentration of atmospheric pollutants such as ozone varies between model and laboratory studies, including those that seek to simulate the same environmental conditions. Here, we report the consequences of a real-world shift in fuel use in the subtropical megacity of São Paulo, Brazil, brought on by large-scale fluctuations in the price of ethanol relative to gasoline between 2009 and 2011. We use highly spatially and temporally resolved observations of road traffic levels, meteorology and pollutant concentrations, together with a consumer demand model, to show that ambient ozone concentrations fell by about 20% as the share of bi-fuel vehicles burning gasoline rose from 14 to 76%. In contrast, nitric oxide and carbon monoxide concentrations increased. We caution that although gasoline use seems to lower ozone levels in the São Paulo metropolitan area relative to ethanol use, strategies to reduce ozone pollution require knowledge of the local chemistry and consideration of other pollutants, particularly fine particles. - JaxDadExplorer III
Jarlaxle wrote:
Greydog 1 wrote:
At 10% additives we are having engine problems all across the nation. 15% will do no improving on repair works. Corn gives you gas at times, but if you drink gasoline, it will kill you. This proves that corn and gas don't mix well.
Yet again: I have been burning ethanol-blend gas for almost twenty years...zero problems.
My aunt smoked a pack of cigarettes a day from the age of 17 till she died (cancer-free, but of a blood clot breaking loose and getting to her heart) at the age of 93.
I dare say thats not the norm either. - PastorCharlieExplorerMy MH has a "NO 85% ETHANOL" posted on fuel cap. 84% is good to go.
- spoon059Explorer IIIn the DC area the stickers say 15% or less.
- JarlaxleExplorer II
ol Bombero-JC wrote:
Kurbennett wrote:
Ethanol has wrecked havoc with a lot of small engines. 10% blend has been seen to ruin gas tanks and engines on many motorcycles. Most motorcycle manufacturers recommend not using ethanol laden gas at all. Luckily non-ethanol gas stations do exist. Of course it does cost more, but you also see better mpg out of it.
Now as far as use of ethanol gas in RV's and possible consequences I have not seen any. I would not use a 15% blend though. As for rationing and shortages, the current higher costs of gas seem to be from our exporting of oil to other countries, versus a shortage.
Mostly incorrect!
UN-luckily, NON-ethanol gas stations are *VERY* few and *VERY* far between in some states..:(
In the most populous state in the USA (CA) you can count 'em on one hand - for the entire state..:(
UN-fortunately, ethanol is bad news for any gasoline powered engine, especially any engine that is not run frequently..:(
Motorcycles are just one example - RVers: think "generators"!
Antique autos are another.
Old ethanol gas *WILL* clog carb jets..:(
Be sure to add SeaFoam or StaBil to the tanks of *any* gasoline powered engine that is not run often.
Well, YEAH! If storing an engine, I have ALWAYS used stabilizer! - JarlaxleExplorer II
JaxDad wrote:
I've just about given up trying to overcome the government / greenies BS errrr..... I mean brainwashing on this crap.
People (EPA, CARB, etc., etc.) like to Bantu around 'labroratory proof' that there's no real energy loss, but most people don't buy their fuel from a lab-grade source, nor do they drive a 'perfect' vehicle.
The fuel they buy has significant moisture content (which not only has ZERO energy but it degrades the rest of the fuel, with pure gasoline water in the tanks from leaky lids or tanks just settles harmlessly to the bottom, with Ethanol it's absorbed), it fools the fuel management system (too much oxygenates) into thinking the engine is running too lean and enrichenes the mixture, and the rampant abuse in the system (station owners and distributors dumping large quantities of pure Ethanol in to bump up the percentages since it's a huge profit opportunity doing so).
It's not uncommon to have E10 that is actually only 70% gasoline, 80% seems to be about the average.
Just do a little Google'ing and see how many folks there are complaint about the spread between EPA mileage figures and 'real world' figures. That's the same as the difference between what the gov. says you'll get with E10 or E15 and what you actually get.
My Magnum & my first Caprice were dead-on the EPA highway mileage on straight gas; both took about a 1MPG hit (4-5%) on E10. My Dakota also seems to match the EPA rating. - JarlaxleExplorer II
Greydog 1 wrote:
The advantage is 15% ethanol is equal to 15% more damage to internal car parts where ethanol passes thru. This will triple your labor bills at the mechanics shop. The Mechanics will thank you for putting more food on their tables and less on yours.
I have been running ethanol-blend gas in 30+ year old engines (cars, trucks, an ancient riding mower, and an ancient generator) without a problem. If E15 comes around...well, I still have my tackle box of carb tuning parts, not a problem. - JarlaxleExplorer II
Greydog 1 wrote:
At 10% additives we are having engine problems all across the nation. 15% will do no improving on repair works. Corn gives you gas at times, but if you drink gasoline, it will kill you. This proves that corn and gas don't mix well.
Yet again: I have been burning ethanol-blend gas for almost twenty years...zero problems.
About RV Tips & Tricks
Looking for advice before your next adventure? Look no further.25,144 PostsLatest Activity: Jul 01, 2025