Not necessarily hard to ignite, but at cold temps it is hard to vaporize for ignition. Think of it this way... When you fill your lawnmower during the summer, you can literally see vapors coming out of the tank. That is vaporization, and a spark will set it off easily. Alcohols don't vaporize well at cold temps, and a spark is not as likely to set the combustion process in motion. Gasoline will vaporize in the cold, and the spark begins the process. The flame front heats the rest of the charge, and the alcohol will burn.
Automakers Warn Against Using E85 Blend in Regular Cars
- Thread starter mshu7
- Start date
- Status
Not necessarily hard to ignite, but at cold temps it is hard to vaporize for ignition. Think of it this way... When you fill your lawnmower during the summer, you can literally see vapors coming out of the tank. That is vaporization, and a spark will set it off easily. Alcohols don't vaporize well at cold temps, and a spark is not as likely to set the combustion process in motion. Gasoline will vaporize in the cold, and the spark begins the process. The flame front heats the rest of the charge, and the alcohol will burn.
UH NO!!!
10% ethanol would be E10
85% ethanol is E85
Butanol is too expensive
Don't forget that those Supertankers don't run on ethanol either.
I really am surprised in all the negative replies on the E-85. I use E-85 exclusive and feel that it not only makes my Tahoe run better but helps reduce my small part on the Mideast for oil.
To the haters you don't have to use it, in fact it may be jealousy. I sure don't see you put fourth any other ideas.
You can continue to tell me I pay less and get a tinge less in return for mileage, so what? I do know the octane rating is best for my engine and it will keep the fuel system clean.
I'm glad at least some folks are forward thinkers. With some of the opinions in this thread we would still be trying to forge metal with sticks and rocks.
To the haters you don't have to use it, in fact it may be jealousy. I sure don't see you put fourth any other ideas.
You can continue to tell me I pay less and get a tinge less in return for mileage, so what? I do know the octane rating is best for my engine and it will keep the fuel system clean.
I'm glad at least some folks are forward thinkers. With some of the opinions in this thread we would still be trying to forge metal with sticks and rocks.
That is why there so called E85 haters. Plus farmers use more gas harvesting the corn. Than we save by using E85. I like the forward thinking but we are not there yet. We need a better alternative.
I believe once a lot of cars burn it, price will go up- corn shortage! sugar shortage! Bad growing season! Newly discovered alchohal pollutents
Just think of the corn flake shortage as its diverted
I'm sacartic but think about it
Just think of the corn flake shortage as its diverted
I'm sacartic but think about it
I understand that E85 requires engine modifications to use and that Butanol does not. There are some people advocating Butanol. usa today article
Beanoil has it right, and warmer temps are probably one of the reasons Brazil has had so much success with alcohol....I think in the early going they had problems with corrosive issues. Ethanol has a flash point of 14C and Gasoline -45C, and Butanol's is 35C.....
For comparison Diesel Fuel has a flash point of 52C and Kerosene is listed as 43-72C
Petroleum is so efficient because the energy is already in it. Corn needs to sit in the sun absorbing energy, and then we need to extract it out again.
There seems to be a misconception that corn is the best way to create ethanol.
Ethanol can be created from oil producing algaes, switchgrass, any waste plant material #@$%!....even sewage sludge can be used.
Switchgrass will be the next wave, producing up to 25 times the biomass per acre when compared to corn.
Ethanol can be created from oil producing algaes, switchgrass, any waste plant material #@$%!....even sewage sludge can be used.
Switchgrass will be the next wave, producing up to 25 times the biomass per acre when compared to corn.
Their overall demand for energy is very low. When you apply economics of scale to ethanol production, it becomes quite clear that it is not possible to feasibly produce ethanol on a large enough scale to replace consumption of gasoline.
If you go through the following presentation, you will see that it will take almost all of the arable land in the United States to produce enough ethanol to offset 50% of passenger car miles in the United States:
http://www.teslamotors.com/display_data/tedpresentation_final.swf
To elaborate on the idea that the production of ethanol to replace gasoline as a major fuel is not economically feasible, I will refer you to the following page:
http://www.teslamotors.com/blog1/index.php?p=22&js_enabled=0
In particular:
"Let’s consider the specific example of the United States vs. Brazil (production is taken from the Oil & Gas Journal and consumption from the BP Statistical Review, 2002 data). Oil consumption in the US is 27 barrels per person per year (BPY) vs. 4.2 BPY in Brazil, but the US also produces more oil at 11 BPY vs. Brazil at 3.35 BPY. Therefore, Brazil has to close a gap of 0.85 BPY, whereas the US has to close a gap of 16 BPY, resulting in a per person supply/demand imbalance 19 times greater than that of Brazil! Moreover, the US has a population 50% greater than Brazil, but has less arable land and a shorter growing cycle. If the US had the same per person oil usage as Brazil, it would be a major oil exporter. This is why the “Brazilian Miracle” is still limited to Brazil."
It takes more energy to produce a gallon of ethanol than the ethanol contains. If one considers the energy cost of the ethanol refinery and the new tractors required to expand ethanol production and takes an energy credit for the distiller dryed grains produced, the balance is that it takes as much energy to produce the ethanol as it contains. We will notbeable to reduce energy usage through ethanol from corn production.
Carbon dioxide emmissions are almost identical burning either gasoline or ethanol for a constant number of miles driven. As ethanolcontains less energy than gasoline per gallon, more ethenol gallons must be burned to drive the same distance. E85 gets only 72% the mileage as gasoline according to Consumer Reports.
Ethanol from corn will (and has) raise corn prices, and therefore pork/eggs/chicken/beef/soy beans/wheat/ etc/etc will rise in price.
Ethanol from corn is not a renewable source of energy if the fossil fuel needed to drive the process is considered, it does not lower CO2 (but does raise other pollutants), is not economic for the consumer, raises food prices, and in general is a bad idea except for the farmer and Archer Daniels. Also, the brunt of the cost penalty will be born by the individual that makes little money. One can only eat so much, so the impact is far greater on someone making 10,000 per year than someone making 200,000 per year. It is a highly regressive "tax for farm subsidy" program.
Carbon dioxide emmissions are almost identical burning either gasoline or ethanol for a constant number of miles driven. As ethanolcontains less energy than gasoline per gallon, more ethenol gallons must be burned to drive the same distance. E85 gets only 72% the mileage as gasoline according to Consumer Reports.
Ethanol from corn will (and has) raise corn prices, and therefore pork/eggs/chicken/beef/soy beans/wheat/ etc/etc will rise in price.
Ethanol from corn is not a renewable source of energy if the fossil fuel needed to drive the process is considered, it does not lower CO2 (but does raise other pollutants), is not economic for the consumer, raises food prices, and in general is a bad idea except for the farmer and Archer Daniels. Also, the brunt of the cost penalty will be born by the individual that makes little money. One can only eat so much, so the impact is far greater on someone making 10,000 per year than someone making 200,000 per year. It is a highly regressive "tax for farm subsidy" program.
What's the octane rating of butanol? There will be new high compression engines that can use much less ethanol to produce the same work, making it possibly viable without subsidies. Development would go much faster on these, if the money going into ethanol subsidies were put into research.
- Status
