Pardon my ignorance, I have never been west of Pennsylvania. Those landlocked states scare me. But if the fuel was all it is hyped up to be, the country would be switching over much quicker. Switching costs between the fuel types are not prohibitive (replacing a station's midgrade with E85 would work nicely) and there are are many benefits to gain from the switch. If Bush really intended to fight this country's "addiction" - the governement would dump $40B and convert EVERY gas station in the US to E85. That would send a strong message and the demand would skyrocket. Unfortunately for us, spending that cash rebuilding a foregn infrastructure is more important. Obviously the administration has reservations about this fuel or they would have jumped on it - and the entire mid-West would vote Republican for years to come.

They already received something like $7B in 15 years, plus ~0.10$/gallon tax credit. Works out to about $0.45-0.50 of each E85 gallon subsidized by your taxes.

I hope so, and I also hope that if it is a proven technology - it is entirely backed by the gov't. The alleged benfits far outweight the limited expense. However for now, the White House supports the initiative half-a**ed, so how can the public be expected to act differently. Actions speak louder then words.

 

In a given engine- let's use a typical 9.5:1 V6 engine- you will lose both power and mileage by switching from regular 87 octane to E85 (which is 105 octane, IIRC). The E85 has less total energy content, and a given engine will not be able to extract as much energy, timing adjustments or no.

Now, if you build the engine to take advantage of E85's octane, the efficiency curve ratchets up quite a bit. Let's say you build a 12:1 motor, tune it for E85, and you're likely to see a reasonable increase in fuel efficiency over the 9.5:1 motor. Compression ratio makes a big difference in combustion efficiency. It's been a key contributor to the slightly increasing fuel mileage numbers we've seen in the past few years. 11:1 motors are popping up in all sorts of "ordinary" vehicles.

There's a study floating around somewhere, where they did just this, and proved the modest improvements.

I don't know why everyone isn't including Flex Fuel programs in their new vehicles. What does it take- two fuel/spark maps, and some Viton in place of silicone? Big whoop.

I'm not totally on board with Ethanol production, but I'll take it over sending you whippersnappers to the sandbox to protect my gas bill.

 

It's called a budget. Trust me, if the current administration could stretch the money and put us further into debt (as real or imagined it may be), they would. But to allow democracy to fail in the Middle East is not really an option, no matter how you look at it. But to keep this away from a political discussion, let's get back to corn, and how much of it there is in the Midwest.

 

Well from everything I've read people get a boost by putting E85 in? Must be because the computer can get more aggressive with the timing?

 

Dont think Corn is the only crop you can make Ethanol from. Sugar cane and sugar beets also can be used to produce ethanol. Matter of fact you could probably get it from just about any crop. I know Brazil uses Sugar Cane in their ethanol production and it has helped them reduce their oil dependancy to about only 15%.

 

There used to be a lot of oil refineries across the river from St. Louis. Most of them have closed down, but back in the 80's when they were running full speed, it stank. Baad. Must be the nature of the beast.

 

I haveto drive through Wood River on the way to work. They have Conoco-Phillips refinery. That place really Reaks. it also has imporve. It still gags me when the winds shift while I have my windows down.

 

They need to improve cold starts with "100%" ethanol so that we can drink our fuel if we get thirsty

 

Who are "people?" And, generally speaking, the computer doesn't get more aggressive (we're talking non flex-fuel vehicles here). The computer doesn't advance from the timing curve- it merely pulls back if the knock sensor says so. So, unless the engine is is constant knock retard, there isn't much to be gained.

EDIT- Here's some really old info. http://www.ilcorn.org/Ethanol/85__Et...__ethanol.html

It does illustrate that Flex Fuel vehicles are not a new thing.

 

There is soooooo much corn sitting around right now it's pitifull!!! In fact in my home town there is still a mound of it from 2 years ago all covered up and ready to go.

I do believe that this is the way to go but I will say one thing, corn priced suck right now and with all of the corn sitting I still thing the majority around here will be planting Soy beans this year even if it requires more work because of crop rotation... it's just where the money is right now...

 

I was talking Flex Fuel vehicles. But in LS1's that recommend premium they have two spark tables and if it senses knock immediately (87) it will run on the milder one. If it doesn't sense knock (92) it will stay in the more aggressive curve which will produce more power.

All I was saying is it's possible Flex Fuel vehicles spark curve for E85 is more aggressive then the standard Gas curve and therefore = more power.

"More People" was a farmer who has a Tahoe I believe that is Flex Fuel. He mentioned it had more "Umph" with the E85... Of coarse maybe it's in his head, heh.

 

I suppose this is a matter of semantics, but given that the LS1 recommends premium, the "high octane" spark table is the reference, and the retard table is the cripple.

In any case, until engines are built mechanically to optimize usage of E85 (meaning really high compression ratios, basically), then I don't expect to see any gains from its use, power or fuel economy-wise. Perhaps we're on the verge of that now, though, with CRs approaching 11:1 for "everyday vehicles."

I wonder if the hybrids would run better on E85. The Prius runs 13:1 CR (albeit with weird intake valve timing to approximate the Atkinson cycle, IIRC). Perhaps they could introduce a second VVT table to raise DCR for efficiency, along with more timing. The tech is in place.

Then again, maybe more DCR isn't right for hybrid efficiency... hmm...

My head hurts.

 

Yeah, I agree if we do make the switch over to E85, it seems only logical that we would increase compression ratio's to utilize the higher octane in the E85.

Anyhow, I think we need to concentrate on getting the price below gasoline first, heh.

 

From what I understand, we don't have enough corn fields to produce enough ethanol to meet our current oil demand, by far. At least as long as we decide that we also need to grow food.

Ethanol from switch grasses and what not helps, and it should also be more efficient, since it doesn't need fertilizers, etc.

 

Watch for the emergence of "Big Corn" to fight that change.