Vanagon EuroVan
Previous messageNext messagePrevious in topicNext in topicPrevious by same authorNext by same authorPrevious page (January 2008, week 4)Back to main VANAGON pageJoin or leave VANAGON (or change settings)ReplyPost a new messageSearchProportional fontNon-proportional font
Date:         Fri, 25 Jan 2008 23:52:12 -0500
Reply-To:     Jim Akiba <syncrolist@BOSTIG.COM>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Jim Akiba <syncrolist@BOSTIG.COM>
Subject:      Re: Dollar a gallon ethanol production?
Comments: To: sam mccarthy <sfcompost@yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To:  <328678.39902.qm@web35812.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Sam, the benefits are easier to obtain than you think, and the downside doesn't have to be nearly as bad as you think.

If you ran ethanol in a carb'd v8, and just re-jetted, much of what you said is right. You would see a massive decrease in mileage... but that's the car's fault.. not the fuel's. It's engine management and engine itself are both primitive enough to make it hard to change the equation without mechanical modification. Without mechanical modification, there will almost always be a decrease in mileage going to ethanol from gasoline, but it can be minimized to enough of a degree to make it well worth running instead. The ethanol tune for the zetec we use is 14% less mpg, which is substantially better than 40%, and better than the gas-e85 price spread of 16.8%(http://e85prices.com/) The spark timing can be advanced, at the same time that combustion is made leaner. Usually you'll knock and hole a piston or break a ringland.. but because of the higher effective octane as you point out, but additionally the charge cooling effects of the ethanol, you can go further in practice than you can on paper. That is unless you want to use enough paper to do all of the required calculations beyond comparing energy density(100% ethanol itself isn't even 40% less than gasoline), to come up with the actual decrease in mpg in the specific case for your engine and engine management, some have much more potential to take advantage of than others. With forced induction it becomes a complete no brainer.. it's so much better to run than gasoline, it makes the whole setup so much dramatically more knock resistant it's amazing. If you direct inject as low as 10% of the total fuel consumption (obviously hardware changes needed) ethanol post valve closing, you can make it even more effective, and the fuel reaches more like 130-140+ equivalent octane. At that point the efficiency of the engine can exceed diesel, and be just shy of current hybrid levels, still using gasoline as 90% of it's fuel. The funny part there is that in MA we're already running 10% ethanol in all the fuel.. but you can't take advantage of it...on top of that irony.. since you also can't buy e85 here at a pump, when I went over to speak with Dr. Cohn and Dr. Bromberg at MIT(they are the ones behind the post valve closing direct ethanol injection research going on there) they were impressed/interested that I had e85 in the shop and was working with it already because they couldn't find a place to buy any themselves and have it delivered for any sane amount of money like I lucked out in finding...

Even port injected water-methanol can save you big. Injecting water-methanol(in the form of windshield wiper fluid which is usually 30%) you can easily run forced induction setups on low octane fuel.. which is a big money saver.

If you're talking strictly miles per tank, yeah there is always a hit with e85... but it isn't as bad as you think, and single digits are possible, but if you're talking miles per dollar.. then some areas are already there, and it's getting better, not worse. Transport is still a problem as you point out, which is one of the reasons it's so scarce. Localization of fuel supplies isn't a bad thing if it can be done efficiently... which is currently where the whole thing falls on it's face. But it's coming. Hopefully the wait won't be too long.

I'm starting to become a fanboy just to defend into objectivity something that may or may not pan out... too much risk, no payoff. I'm out ha I do support the general idea and lot's of the work going on with it very strongly though.

Jim Akiba

On 1/25/08, sam mccarthy <sfcompost@yahoo.com> wrote: > There is the problem of the alcohol corroding certain metals( the pipe) and rubber ( maybe seals) that i have read about which poses major hurdles for distribution. > Plus.... due to the lower energy content of the alcohol, you have to give the engine more of it(larger jets in the carburetor, or different injector timing) versus gasoline. This equates to lower miles per gallon, think your van has a short range now??? try 40% less. I think thats the figure. Some of the loss in energy content can be recovered by modifying the engine to take advantage of the higher octane (104) versus say premium (91 or 92). Can you say "pull the engine, send to - insert favorite re-builder - order up high compression modifications, and alcohol resistant injection system. > I was hot to use alcohol at one time, but the fact that when its made from corn, the costs, including the pesticides and fertilizers used to grow it, ruin the economics changed my mind. If you're driving a chevy with a V8 and simple carburetor its not too difficult or expensive. Honestly, I can't see many folks running stock vanagons on ethanol. Maybe someone building Subaru engines will put one together designed for alcohol. Until then, i will have to use biodiesel in my soon-to-be TDI van. Biodiesel can be used with no modifications. And it can be made from the millions of barrels of waste vegetable oil we already have. I really can't wait for someone to come up with cheap, incredible batteries so we can quit the whole infernal combustion fixation. > Imagine an engine in your car thats as reliable as your blender. When was the last time you had your blender tuned up??? > Imagine no cooling system to flush and maintain, no engine oil to change, almost no toxic fluids to keep from leaking out. > I can't wait!!! > Sam M. > Automatic digest processor <LISTSERV@GERRY.VANAGON.COM> wrote: > > > > > Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 13:25:29 -0600 > From: Jim Felder > Subject: Re: Dollar a gallon ethanol production? > > I read last year the the distribution is that alcohol can't be run through > existing pipelines... the molecules are too small and they leak. Ethanol has > to be trucked from the point of manufacture to wherever it is mixed with the > gas, a big energy cost right there. > Jim > > It's > > kinda amusing how the article suggests that there's no infrastructure > > for ethanol distribution.... Can it really be that hard to adapt the > > infrastructure already in place to distribute gasoline, with that big > > a cost differential?? > > > > Happy Trails, > > > > Greg Potts > > 1973/74/77/79 Westfakia "Bob The Tomato > > www.pottsfamily.ca > > www.busesofthecorn.com > > > > ------------------------------ >


Back to: Top of message | Previous page | Main VANAGON page

Please note - During the past 17 years of operation, several gigabytes of Vanagon mail messages have been archived. Searching the entire collection will take up to five minutes to complete. Please be patient!


Return to the archives @ gerry.vanagon.com


The vanagon mailing list archives are copyright (c) 1994-2011, and may not be reproduced without the express written permission of the list administrators. Posting messages to this mailing list grants a license to the mailing list administrators to reproduce the message in a compilation, either printed or electronic. All compilations will be not-for-profit, with any excess proceeds going to the Vanagon mailing list.

Any profits from list compilations go exclusively towards the management and operation of the Vanagon mailing list and vanagon mailing list web site.