Latest E-15 Battle

[Trent]

Maybe that cornier corn gas will not happen.

Major lobbies going toe-to-toe in the ongoing ethanol-mandate battle

posted at 9:01 pm on January 30, 2013 by Erika Johnsen

Last week, a federal appeals court informed the Environmental Protection Agency that, no actually, the EPA may not punish oil companies for failing to comply with the Renewable Fuel Standard, which mandates that they blend a certain amount of advanced cellulosic biofuels into their product — seeing as how those cellulosic biofuels aren’t actually available in the required amounts. As in, they do not exist yet. (…Yes, sadly, this is real life.) Unfortunately, the court’s ruling did not do away with the wildly enthusiastic and unrealistic mandate altogether, it merely took the teeth out of its enforcement for 2012.

The EPA has been shamelessly throwing bones like this to the well-monied, rent-seeking ethanol/agribusiness lobby for years now, the ‘unintended’ (more like, neglected) consequences be damned — and the oil industry, automaking industry, et al are doing some battle, via the WSJ:

Auto makers and oil companies stepped up their campaign against gasoline blended with extra ethanol, releasing a study Tuesday that said the fuel could cause cars to break down on the road.

Ethanol makers, who are facing growing political headwinds, said the study was flawed and that the problems it identifies might be tied to car components, not the fuel. …

A study by the Coordinating Research Council—a group backed by Ford Motor Co., Honda Motor Co. and Toyota Motor Corp., among others—said testing showed E15 could cause erratic fuel-gauge readings and check-engine alerts. The tests involved fuel pumps and gas-tank sensors used in five popular models, including the 2004 Ford Ranger and 2007 Nissan Altima, the council said. …

Growth Energy, a pro-ethanol group, said oil companies and auto makers had a political agenda and were cherry-picking data. “Today’s study is no surprise,” said Tom Buis, the group’s chief executive. “Oil companies are desperate to prevent the use of higher blends of renewable fuels.” …

A political agenda? Cherry-picking data? Really? Of course everyone involved here has a political agenda, because the federal government is so hugely metastasized and self-involved in selecting marketplace winners and losers, that all kinds of companies are incentivized to divert some of their resources from truly growth-boosting productivity to political lobbying. But did anyone ever stop to think that the federal government should just back the heck off and let consumers in the free market drive price-efficient innovation and competition? But no, the ethanol lobby cannot allow that, because they know they cannot win that contest — ethanol is not cost-effective, it drives up food prices, and even real environmentalists don’t like it.

 

[Gorilla]

well said

 

[msocko3]

I'd love to see corn free gas, long and short of it is ethanol is corrosive to a good many fuel system components.

 

[GARYD]

Wake up Americans!!!
First OBAMACARE is forced down our throats and now E15. What's next bright orange dayglo riding jackets???
They won't go with my lime green pants.

Big business on one side and the government on the other - we haven't got a chance. We need to stick together, UJM's, Italian, German, English and American stand together - stop bashing each other and join the AMA, ABATE or some other MRO and fight this crap.
We have a voice if we ALL stick together. ThumbUp
At least on the E15 subject we are not alone in the fight.

The corn growers lobby say there's not that much of a problem, but if there's just a minute thread of a problem OF ANY KIND, E15 should be dropped.

 

[Trent]

It is a little bit (just a little bit) comforting that some pretty big companies are fighting this crap. The way the EPA works and the way certain items bypass congress and are casually signed into law by you know who, that might not do us any good though.

I remember when I first put 10% corn gas in my brand new 95' T-Bird. Had no choice when living in Washington. It had no acceleration, sputtered, would almost die at stop lights. Had to take it back to the dealer and they had to recalibrate the computer so it would run on corn. Cannot imagine what 15% E15 would do to a motorcycle motor.

 

[americanbadass]

I can't see this E-15 moving forward, to many drawbacks. I see them squashing it! Thats all I'm gonna say ,because I want to maintain my politcally correct dynamic (Zook is mentoring me to be more sensitive).poof

 

[Trent]

Hmmm...americanbadass is such a sensitive name for an eager young grasshopper. Somehow, I just dont see this working. Ha ha!!

 

[bikerbillone]

We can only hope the politicians don't push another fiasco on us.

 

[Big_Steve]

FYI ethanol free gas around the country by state/city. Frequently updated:

Ethanol-free gas stations in the U.S. and Canada

 

[Trent]

There is a guy here in Ideeeho that owns 3 or 4 Phillips 66 gas staions. Him and his buddies are all muscle car restoration nuts, and he only has corn free gas at his stations so they can all use it in their Goat's, Stangs, Firebirds, and whetever. Only problem is, last summer he couldnt get premium corn free anymore. So now all he has is 87 octane, corn free. I have not tried the 87 in my TG. For the last year, I have only used Chevron 90 to 91 no matter where I am in the country... Bike runs really well on it. I could tell a difference in the quietness of the motor after the first several tanks. I think that the techroline they have in there helps smooth things out. Plus, no matter where I go, I can always find a Chevron cuz they are like dog poop. They are everywhere.
Texaco also has techroline.

 

[oahe]

I hope you people realize that there are two separate issues which are here combined into one. First, ethanol is a fuel much like any other. It has it's positives and negatives but at the final analysis it will burn just fine in a properly designed and constructed engine. Yet you continue to blame the fuel. Second, Congress was overly optimistic when they set the cellulosic and E-15 fuel standards as they were hoping to force the industry to provide the fuel at an earlier date. Well, it didn't happen but eventually it will and cellulosic ethanol will be available. Renewable fuels are in our future and we'd better get used to it. More importantly we need to force the engine manufacturers to build engines able to burn the fuel available instead of complaining!

 

[GARYD]

Good luck with that.
Remember them trying for years to force metrics down our throats. I'm still using inches and feet at work.
The only way it'll work is to completely eliminate E10 at the same time they institute E15. And when engines start failing, I wouldn't want to be in the corn industry executive or lobbyist.

Why do we have to get use to it when there is more oil then we'll ever need for the forseable future.
Right, let's put a gun to the car mfg's heads and force them to make something nobody wants.
This is America, it's our god given right to complain.

I think we need to FORCE you to use E10 and like it.

 

[bikerbillone]

Like your thought process, and good point.

 

[Trent]

Ethanol has caused significant damage to the economy and is subsidized by our tax dollars becuse it costs more to manufacture it than it is sold for. It has caused a shortage of corn in some areas, raising the price of feed corn and making it unavailable for livestock feed, causing farmers to pay higher prices and stop buying it for feed. It is pig food!!! I will not roll over without complaining about it. Maybe in the future, manufactures of motors will make them adapt, but what about the motors we have now? I am too old to get used to it, and not happy about the direction the epa is taking this country.

 

[msocko3]

I hope you people realize that there are two separate issues which are here combined into one. First, ethanol is a fuel much like any other. It has it's positives and negatives but at the final analysis it will burn just fine in a properly designed and constructed engine. Yet you continue to blame the fuel. Second, Congress was overly optimistic when they set the cellulosic and E-15 fuel standards as they were hoping to force the industry to provide the fuel at an earlier date. Well, it didn't happen but eventually it will and cellulosic ethanol will be available. Renewable fuels are in our future and we'd better get used to it. More importantly we need to force the engine manufacturers to build engines able to burn the fuel available instead of complaining!

I do blame the fuel, the problem is a lot deeper than just building cars to use it. You also have to get people to be willing to spend the extra money on a new car due to the design for higher ethanol content, you also have to consider the millions of older cars running the streets who will be stuck with high repair bills when they start running this wonder fuel.

Another consideration is the reduction in fuel mileage due to the lower BTU content of the ethanol. How many people who own flex fuel vehicles fuel up at E85 pumps on a regular basis? I know some who I've talked to did it a few times for the novelty which soon wore off from the piss poor fuel mileage. The lower price per gallon was eaten up by the drastic reduction in fuel mileage.

How much ethanol do you think would be produced if Uncle Sugar would stop subsidizing the production of it?

 

[jtilmon]

Trent, thank you for help us to understand what's taking place with our gasoline in this country.

 

[Trent]

Well, I am certainly no expert concerning this,,I just read some stuff and try to comprehend it as best as a walnut sized brain can soak it in. Then post it for you guys to point out what I dont understand!

 

[bikerbillone]

Trent, there are many of us in your camp. Hang in.

 

[oahe]

I do blame the fuel, the problem is a lot deeper than just building cars to use it. You also have to get people to be willing to spend the extra money on a new car due to the design for higher ethanol content, you also have to consider the millions of older cars running the streets who will be stuck with high repair bills when they start running this wonder fuel.

Another consideration is the reduction in fuel mileage due to the lower BTU content of the ethanol. How many people who own flex fuel vehicles fuel up at E85 pumps on a regular basis? I know some who I've talked to did it a few times for the novelty which soon wore off from the piss poor fuel mileage. The lower price per gallon was eaten up by the drastic reduction in fuel mileage.

How much ethanol do you think would be produced if Uncle Sugar would stop subsidizing the production of it?

What subsidy? The ethanol subsidy has expired and need not be renewed. Regarding engine damage, we have been using ethanol in all of our vehicles for 25+ years without any problems. Many others tell me the same.

 

[bikerbillone]

Lots of cons, a few pros......No way I'm using E15, if it comes on the market, if I can avoid it. It's just another dumb political move to screw the American citizen, in my opinion. Everybody has one. I don't even like using E10, but there doesn't seem to be a choice when politicians get there greedy fingers into regulation.,

 

[msocko3]

What subsidy? The ethanol subsidy has expired and need not be renewed. Regarding engine damage, we have been using ethanol in all of our vehicles for 25+ years without any problems. Many others tell me the same.

So your going to tell me the farmers are growing corn because the market is that strong? Or the ethanol producers are not being helped out in some way shape or form.

I've dealt with Methanol which isn't worlds different than Ethanol, I know from experience what it does to fuel systems and engines.

I used to crew chief and tune this, we spent a great deal of time making sure the fuel system was flushed at the end of the day and the blower rotors were lubricated. Amazing how corrosive that stuff can be in high doses.

 

[oahe]

So your going to tell me the farmers are growing corn because the market is that strong? Or the ethanol producers are not being helped out in some way shape or form.

I'd say nearly $8/bushel is pretty good. With the new drought tolerant corn & soy bean varieties farmers around here are planting just about all available land.

 

[msocko3]

I'd say nearly $8/bushel is pretty good. With the new drought tolerant corn & soy bean varieties farmers around here are planting just about all available land.

Now if the government would end the mandate to produce ethanol as fuel the price would come down to level in which livestock producers could tolerate. People need food in their stomaches vs corn in their gasoline.

 

[Bikerbozo]

A thought occurs to me (must be a blue moon). If the gov't says to fill up from single hose pumps at least 4 gallons to get past whatever was last pumped, I also take that to mean every time I use one hose pump, I am probably not getting the higher octane I expected.
What I am wondering is, should I maybe be adding octane boost when I fill up from that kind of pump?

 

[oahe]

Now if the government would end the mandate to produce ethanol as fuel the price would come down to level in which livestock producers could tolerate. People need food in their stomaches vs corn in their gasoline.

Afraid not. The export market is what drives corn prices not ethanol. As a matter of fact less than 12% of corn produced is used to make ethanol and of course the ethanol process itself uses only a fraction of the feed value. Distillers cake is sold as cattle feed.

 

[Trent]

A thought occurs to me (must be a blue moon). If the gov't says to fill up from single hose pumps at least 4 gallons to get past whatever was last pumped, I also take that to mean every time I use one hose pump, I am probably not getting the higher octane I expected.
What I am wondering is, should I maybe be adding octane boost when I fill up from that kind of pump?

Ya know,,That is a really good point Bozo. When you consider that the fuel has to be pumped thru how many feet of pipe and hose from where the tanks are buried, I gotta believe that when we put 5 gallons of gas in our bike tanks, most of it has to be whatever was being pumped by the prior vehicle at that pump.

Crap!!! That is not a good thing!! Thankfully they use a seperate hose and pipe system for diesel. Man, you would need to add octane boost on every tank. Can someone tell us we are wrong thinking this??? I Hope...!!

 

[msocko3]

Ya know,,That is a really good point Bozo. When you consider that the fuel has to be pumped thru how many feet of pipe and hose from where the tanks are buried, I gotta believe that when we put 5 gallons of gas in our bike tanks, most of it has to be whatever was being pumped by the prior vehicle at that pump.

Crap!!! That is not a good thing!! Thankfully they use a seperate hose and pipe system for diesel. Man, you would need to add octane boost on every tank. Can someone tell us we are wrong thinking this??? I Hope...!!

The amount is small, not enough to worry about. If 4 gallons of 87 octane was to find its way into the tank of my 120" equipped 06 Ultra I'd know it. I found out how much that engine despises 87 octane last year when I had a head in butt moment and pumped just a touch over 4 gallons of 87 octane in it. I couldn't fix it with octane booster, I ended up draining the tank and putting fresh 93 octane in.

 

[GARYD]

Msocko3, That's what you get for going ligher horse power.

My 2012 TG and all my other past Harleys lived just great on 87. I'm old and don't need speed anymore. Just cheaper gas. LOL

 

[Ozarkryder]

Msocko3, That's what you get for going ligher horse power.

My 2012 TG and all my other past Harleys lived just great on 87. I'm old and don't need speed anymore. Just cheaper gas. LOL

Heh,heh.... My 1990 FLHS was bored, stroked,carbed and free flow exhausted. It loved the Hi-test, didn't much like the mid-grade and hated 87.
Here in the twisties on fthe Ozarks, I never did use or really need all the extra oomph, and just ran speed limit or a bit on the slab. Did the HD engine re-manufacturing a ew years ago and returned to stock. Runs just as good, I ride just as fast and I can use 87octane even in the 100° heat we have had here. Even with that, I can tell the difference between gas and E-10, not so much in the performance, but in the mpg - about 3 - 5% less with 10% alchol gas.

 

[Bill Reber]

I hope you people realize that there are two separate issues which are here combined into one. First, ethanol is a fuel much like any other. It has it's positives and negatives but at the final analysis it will burn just fine in a properly designed and constructed engine. Yet you continue to blame the fuel. Second, Congress was overly optimistic when they set the cellulosic and E-15 fuel standards as they were hoping to force the industry to provide the fuel at an earlier date. Well, it didn't happen but eventually it will and cellulosic ethanol will be available. Renewable fuels are in our future and we'd better get used to it. More importantly we need to force the engine manufacturers to build engines able to burn the fuel available instead of complaining!

Yep good luck with that , my milage is less with E-10 ! I can purchase fuel ethanol free fuel 89 oct. and both my late model cars and my wing run much better and I buy less fuel per mile .