I have been trying to locate a laboratory grade emissions study report listing ANY AND ALL EMISSIONS as given off by the use of 100% gasoline versus various blending percentages of ethanol into gasoline. My searches have been fruitless. All I wish to know is the TYPE of emissions of combustion in quantities of 5 ppm or greater.Various government reports steer an investigator down blind alleys, diversions, vague untraceable reference links, and unfortunately, bald hyperbole.I am merely a forensic engineer. I need raw data to assimilate the total perspective of an issue. Not bits of a whole that add up to less than the sum if its parts.Combustion of alcohol creates unique emissions. In combination with various hydrocarbons and esters, poly-ureas and sulfurs, the potential to end up with nightmarish frankenemissions is formidable.Can any forum participant point me in the correct direction in which a comprehensive ANALYSIS may be read and studied to determine the effects of hydrocarbon ethanol combustion? Not merely the rote CO, CO2, NOX, litany, but analysis of total combustions emissions?You can make your own conclusions as to what I am "Driving At"Exempt, the point of crude oil conservation. This year the USA begins the export of USA light sweet fracturing crude to China.

I'm with you Mex! I don't have any answers, but I'm tired of having this ethanol******shoved down our fuel tanks. If you just look at the easily observed results, miles per gallon, it doesn't work out to be have any benefit. Your thoughts of other emissions, and the lack of available data, just gets me going again.

From all of the research I've done, I can expect fuel efficiency (MPG) for my Flex-Fuel Impala to decrease by at least the percentage of alcohol above the about 10% I can find around here now. To me, that means I'll still be burning the same amount of gasoline and produce the same amount of emissions from it. But additionally, I'll be producing more emissions from burning the additional alcohol, not to mention taking the corn from someone's or some farm animal's consumption.

The O.P. probably won't get much independent data here, but some straight talk about first hand results from those forced to burn corn oil in their gas tanks.We can still buy 100%gasoline in the mid-south for the time being. I pay a .25 to .40 per gallon premium to buy unleaded fuel without ethanol. Its in great demand because ethanol tainted fuel has proven to be inefficient, destructive to rubber and plastic fuel system components and now you can buy fuel additives exclusively designed to extract moisture srom ethanol laced fuel.Until we elect officials with the stones to reverse the ludicrous EPA mandates such as ethanol usage and elimination of coal as a primary source for power we get what we deserve.

The powerful farm lobby will be hard to overcome with the money they distribute to those congress members who are dependant on their money.

So ethanol benefits the farmers that grow corn not the environment. And to top it off it actually takes more energy to create ethanol than is even in it. Overall throughout the creation and consumption process it actually releases more emissions into the environment than if just gasoline were created and used. I think the corn is best used to feed people not cars. If I were to tell some starving person in a 3rd world country we were feeding corn to our cars instead of hungry people they'd probably consider us idiots. (well more than they might already)Don't get me wrong our fossil fuels are not an unlimited supply and corn at least theoretically can be just grown and grown to a basically endless supply. Just don't lie to me and say it's good for the environment. Renewable Yes, Eco-Friendly NO.Day Light Savings is the same way in that we think it is for something, but really it is for something else entirely. It wasn't invented for the farmers or to save on heating bills. It was invented to help retailers by having you out shopping and buying more often.

Ethanol Gasoline Emissions Study I SMELL A RAT | Good Sam Community

MM49
Explorer
Mar 16, 2014
MEXICOWANDERER wrote:
Rockhillmanor, please come ride with me when I come to the EUA and you can help financially and with the reduction of fuel economy in my car when it drops from 28 to 24 mpg, and the engine stalls repeatedly after starting. This is a lot like buying "Hamburger" then finding out when it tastes awful that a substantial portion of the beef is pork fat, and ground bones and hooves.

Lord help the poor RV'er who suffers paying an extra hundred dollars or so on an extended trip for "fuel".

Mexico is purchasing 0.00 PPM azufre (sulfur) diesel from Japan and pumping it out of tankers moored offshore at Rosarito Beach, Baja California. The zero diesel is sadly only distributed in Baja California and not in Baja California Sur.

Anyone out there wanna take a guess what the sulfur count is in USA gasoline?

Leave the sulfur in, spike gasoline with alcohol and then call it "ecologically sound". Man oh man...

ON EDIT (I Tried But Failed To Resist Inserting This)

Wanna know what kind of CON JOB you folks are facing? You know about ULSD, 15 PPM, right? Now follow the bouncing ball to the link below and IMAGINE the RATIO of gasoline gallons to diesel burned daily.

And at least as far as my contributions are concerned, this has to end. I had my say and that is that... Happy Reading...

https://www.mustangeng.com/aboutmustang/publications/publications/impact.pdf
My guess is that it is to run the gererators at the big hotel in Rosarito Beach.
MM49
atreis
Explorer
Mar 16, 2014
I'd guess that Matt's posting is about work done quite a while ago (he mentions catalytic converters not being required at the time), and the manufacturers' tuning specification for the engines was based on the assumption that one was burning unblended fuel - thus not likely to produce the best emissions profile when burning blended fuel. Nowadays manufacturers assume blended fuel and build and tune the engines appropriately.
Lowsuv
Explorer
Mar 15, 2014
If this is a vote ADD me to the Ethanol detractors .

15 % ethanol adds to corrosion and rubber deterioration especially in engines that are run infrequently .
I almost always run 100 % gas in my boat .
My cardlock operator has offered NON ETHANOL PREMIUM for a decade or more and it is a 10-15% premium over 85 /15 .
I only buy 85 /15 on the water or in a place where I have no choice .
I added a large filter for water removal in the boat .
85/15 causes condensation in boat fuel tanks.
The science is there .
Another good reason to own a diesel pickup .
wa8yxm
Explorer III
Mar 15, 2014
Back when the only outboard choice was 2-stroke.. E-10 did not exist. E-1 or E-2 perhaps (in the winter time in the northern states if you bought Standard, My Advice Sir, Get De-Icer) but E-5,10 or 15, no way.

And I can not believe if E-15 is as bad as Mercury says, E-10 is ok.
randallb
Explorer
Mar 15, 2014
As far back as I can remember, this includes the days when 2 strokes were the only OB choice, all the OB manufacturers recommended a fuel additive. 2 stroke, 4 stroke, E-0, E-10 fuel all had an additive recommendation buried in the owner's manual. Nothing has ever really changed in fuel system maintenance recommendations. My new Mercury 4 stroke manual and a tag on the engine recommended Sta-Bil. Go figure. It makes me wonder who produces Merc's additive for them. The answer to that rhetorical is whoever will make it cheapest.
Randy
wa8yxm
Explorer III
Mar 14, 2014
SaltiDawg wrote:

Not to confuse the issue with facts, but

Mercury Outboards - E10 is an acceptable fuel for use in the marine industry

Seemingly lots of politically based or agenda driven unsubstantiated material here.

Interesting link, Though the original study I referenced but did not link to (And which is mentioned in your link) contained actual research information, Findings and such Proving that E-15 (And you will note I did state E-15) Damaged the engines.. This link contains nothing of the sort, IN fact it contains absolutly NO information which pretains to this study.. Just a totally unsupported statement that E-10 is acceptable.. And some information that would apply to E-1 or E-2 which, I already stated, might be good in some cases.

No, your link is meaningless in the context of this discussion. No supporting information.
NinerBikes
Explorer
Mar 14, 2014
Ethanol is an oxygenator in fuel, in gasoline. That means it helps oxidize everything it comes in contact with. To oxidize is to burn, to corrode, and to chemically react with what ever it comes in contact with. Sometimes that chemical contact is good, when it comes to the fuel actually burning, doing work, and moving you down the road. The rest of the time, that chemical contact is bad, very, very bad, for everything else in your fuel system. That it's an oxidizer makes it very, very unstable and prone to want to chemically react with everything it comes in contact with until it itself is burned and consumed.
down_home
Explorer II
Mar 14, 2014
The little black car gets about 18mpg, driven typically.
The ethanol blend kicks it down to about 15, near as I figure, according to the display. I never have 100 ethanol, in the tank so hard to pin it down exactly.
It makes the car stumble, if you are cruising and nail it. I don't like that atall. Ethanol burns hotter and that won't do valves etc any good.
bigfootford
Nomad II
Mar 14, 2014
Snake Oil?

Just search about it and see...

E85 eval from Consumer Reports

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/2011/01/the-great-ethanol-debate/index.htm

23% reduction in town driving

28% reduction Hwy.

Overall average 28% reduction!

E10

Not as big of a loss but most folks report 5-10%, some even more.

OH, our beloved EPA say's 2-3% for E10... And they told us no mileage decrease with MTBE.. Believe them or your pocket book!

Nope, not Snake Oil.

Jim
dieseltruckdriv
Explorer II
Mar 14, 2014
SaltiDawg wrote:
Denny & Jami wrote:
You can say anything you want but you won't change my mind on 10 % corn gas, I've been using it for years in all my play and work trucks(now just play trucks)with no problems. I also use it in my generators, lawn mowers and outboard motor, the last time I had any problems with a generator was with the varnish regular gas left behind. I've also left in our 01 Alero for just short of 2 years with 10% in it, it started right up and ran fine.

Denny
.

Denny,

My experience also. (Re no issues.)

Add me to this group.

I have been using ethanol based gasoline for over 25 years, because I used to be a supporter of it. I am not anymore, but my issues are with the tax break it is given, and using a food source (livestock, not people, get serious) as fuel. Let it live or die on its own, on an equal tax basis.

Yes, if I have a choice, I will now choose straight gas products, but I sure don't worry if only ethanol is available.

I get a kick out of threads like these. Methanol was VERY hard on rubber components. Too many people think ethanol is as bad. It isn't. If the engine is used regularly, you will not have a problem. If the engine sits with no use, you will have problems. Yes I have seen a decrease in fuel mileage as people have said, but I have never noticed a 10% decrease. That is snake oil talk. :)