Pending change in Ethanol/fuel limits

Discussion in 'Performance & Fuel' started by tbplus10, Jun 3, 2013.

  1. tbplus10

    tbplus10 Epic Member Staff Member 5+ Years 5000 Posts Platinum Contributor

    The EPA pushed by the Agriculture industry is lobbying for higher Ethanol limits in pump gasoline with proposed changes to take affect later this summer.

    As always theres multi sides to the story:
    Fuel producers/suppliers argue the agriculture industy is attempting to boost sagging crop sales/profits and the added expense will be passed on to consumers. If approved the result will be to finally force per gallon fuel prices above the $5.00 mark, permanently.
    Resulting in another blow to an already troubled economy and forcing crop whole sellers to leverage remaining supplys at higher prices forcing food suppliers and ethanol suppliers to compete for the same product, at you guessed it, higher prices to be passed on to consumers.

    Auto mfgrs have stated their opinion on the issue by simply stating Ethanol use in engjnes promotes/creates increased corrosion in engines, this corrosion issue is not covered under vehicle mfgr warranties and increased coverage on the mfgrs part is not a negotiable option. Additionally Ethanol has also been proven to reduce fuel mileage and increased use will affect CAFE standards negatively, if passed some favored model vehicles may no longer be produced as without major reengjneering they would never pass existing standards. Reengineering would be so prohibitively expensive the mfgrs would be forced to forgo the product or possibly face financial issues attempting to develop product.

    Ag industy has stated they, and they alone with the production of Ethanol have reduced the U.S. dependency on foreign oil from 65% to 41% and prevented untod levels of polution from being developed. The proposal their backing would further reduce polution and decrease dependency by at least another 15 to 20%. While allowing the farming industry to flourish and develop new markets and increased crop yield that would eventually decrease overall operating costs. ( no statement on how/whether consumers would benefit on this savings in their pocket book).
  2. dobey

    dobey Epic Member 5+ Years 500 Posts

    Why is this post in Perf/Fuel? What does it have to do with GM trucks? Is it just a rant disguised as a non-rant?

    All three paragraphs there are mostly total BS though. They're just a bunch of trite remarks to shift and avert blame and responsibility.
  3. SurrealOne

    SurrealOne Former Member ROTM Winner 1000 Posts

    Probably because it's about fuel. You know, that stuff that makes GM trucks go...
  4. dobey

    dobey Epic Member 5+ Years 500 Posts

    But what about it? Nothing useful was posted. The EPA has been trying to get 15% mix approved and pushed to stations across the country for years. In fact, there's already a thread on it, which was even made sticky (though it probably shouldn't have been).

    Sorry if I'd like to get actual factual information that's relevant every once in a while. But I'm tired of all the ranting about E15 gas, and all the non-information floating around about it. The political blame-shifting is getting quite tiresome.

    There are some simple facts, though:

    a) It won't push gas prices to $5.00. In fact, it's more likely to lower them. Subsidies do wonders for things like that.

    b) It's probably not going to destroy your car. E10 didn't, and E15 won't. Don't go running E85 in a car not designed for it though. That probably will cause you problems.

    c) The manufacturers are just playing hardball. They can easily solve the CAFE related issues, and any reliability concerns about "corrosion" and such. There goal isn't to protect the consumer. It's to protect their profits. They use cheaper parts in the US for most vehicles, because it's cheaper. They may produce/sell the same vehicles in other countries, such as Brazil, where Ethanol mixtures range up to 25% in the gasoline.
  5. SurrealOne

    SurrealOne Former Member ROTM Winner 1000 Posts

    Heh, that's not what you asked, initially. :) (You're also better informed than most people on ethanol fuel, it seems.) You're absolutely right about profit protection, by the way.

    Personally, I'm curious as to the source of the info so that I can see where the 5/gal slant came from. Got a link @tbplus10?
  6. dobey

    dobey Epic Member 5+ Years 500 Posts

    Exactly. I don't see a point to the thread, from the OP.
  7. phoebeisis

    phoebeisis Epic Member 5+ Years 1000 Posts

    OK so they want to go ABOVE 10% ??
    My 1998 Suburban is supposed to be OK at 10% but not OK at over 10%
    so I don't favor the boost.

    Now the AG folks-can't possibly be claiming THEY dropped our dependence on foreign oil by those HUGE amounts?

    By memory I "THINK" we used to use~ 20,000,000 barrels per day-and about 13,000,000 barrels (65%) was imported.

    Now more like 19,000,000 and maybe 8,000,000 imported-close to 41%
    But that 5,000,000 barrels per day drop has very very little to do with ethanol
    Increased production decreased use(more efficient vehicles and poor economy)

    Ethanol is OK as a octane booster-and oxygenator-but we don't need over 10% for that
    certainly not older vehicles like mine

    Yeah lets NOT go above 10%-
    Besides corn ethanol not a really efficient way to produce ethanol
    I understand that the "sugar' is converted to ethanol-but the rest(oils and proteins) isn't wasted-it is animal feed and humans eat corn oil-so no waste

    10% is plenty high enough-ethanol is a good safe additive(beats MTBE) but it does "attract" water-and it works fine at 10%-why go higher??
    Do we really want to beat up that soil to grow more corn-to burn as fuel??
    There is no free lunch-guessing water isn't a problem in corn country-not irrigated right??-so pumping down the reservoir isn't a concern-but overusing the soil-??
    If it deep reservoir water that would be another negative-but I don't think that is the case in corn country?? Maybe someone can clarify that??

    10% is just fine-leave it at 10%
  8. dsfloyd

    dsfloyd Epic Member 5+ Years ROTM Winner 1000 Posts

    My wifes brand new car specifically states not to use over 10% ethanol. Ethanol gets worse mileage than ethanol free gas. Oh and to subsidies, who do you think pays for subsidies? The govt? Where do they get the money for subsidies? They have to take it from someone first.
  9. ahmitchell1

    ahmitchell1 Rockstar 4 Years ROTM Winner 1000 Posts

    Im been doing a lot of research into e85 as I am going to be switching my cobra to run on it. The only thing I can say on ethanol is it takes more of it to burn causing poor gas mileage. But for me it is less of a failure rate on the motor. Other than my cobra I want nothing to do with ethanol it's ruins my 95 sea doo xp
  10. phoebeisis

    phoebeisis Epic Member 5+ Years 1000 Posts

    I think the point of the thread is pre 2000 vehicles weren't required to be designed to withstand 15% ethanol.
    So if you have a pre 2000 vehicle-you should be concerned about any mandate that puts ethanol above 10%
    And yes no question BIG AG is pushing the EPA because they want to make more $$.

    Now the $5/gallon is an exaggeration I think(from ethanol-we could be there is we have a ME dust up-a war in the Middle East will raise our cost because the world market dictates what we pay-if oil goes up in price-we will pay more)

    In any case it saves oil-but it isn't why we are importing much less oil-it is important but
    1) increased production ,
    3)poor economy are the real whys.
    Pure guess is ethanol saves about 1-3% of our oil-saves 7% of the gasoline
    maybe 20% of our oil is converted into gasoline .07x.2=.015 or 1.5% pure guess but ballpark I think-certainly not a huge FACTOR-not like efficiency gains-maybe 10% increase in mpg since 2000-increased production-HUGE-
    and poor economy

    Stay at 10%-ethanol is good-but 10% is high enough!! My Suburban wasn't designed for 15%

Share This Page

Newest Gallery Photos