So if your mpg goes down slightly how does that mean that we will use less oil. To me it seems that if the mpg goes down, the sooner you need to buy more gas, which would kind of defeat the purpose of switching to the E10 fuel. The true way to cut down on our dependence on oil would be to convert over to using 100% ethanol fuel or going biodiesel by using used cooking oil from all these restaurants. Now there's an industry in it's infancy. Imagine getting paid by these businesses to pick up their used oil then filter out any particles and turn around and sell that oil to consumers for their cars.

 

That is exactly the point that I was hinting at. All that it means is that this Ethanol is only a temp. fix at best. It doesn't really change much..yes it lowers the total gas consumption a bit....but the total usage per person depending on applications will go up. Saving 10% of gas dependency per trip...but using one and a quarter tank more to get the same amount of work done...does not solve the issues. Perhaps in the overall picture it helps...but that doesnt translate to savings to each tax paying person.

We need a compete renewable source of energy...this like I said is a small step in a different direction...but we need to change the source...not the method of combustion.

Granted I see your point. Just that in a world of rising costs in day to day living...at this point everything counts. Dependency in oil will not be solved in the next few years. It will be maybe 5-10 years (just throwing out numbers) before anything can be moved away from petroleum dependency. And with lower energy returns...we will be going to the pump more often. So we pay more to use a mixture...then we pay more because we need to fill more often due to an lower energy return rating...and we pay more because we are in Hawaii versus on the mainland (Hawaii vs. mainland average costs)...thats the point. In the overall costs to survive day to day....it is hard to look at the picture 50-100 years down the road. I am lumping all the costs in general together.

The government wanted everyone to switch over to ethanol to lower the dependency....but there were a lot of other costs involved. Was it a good idea to move everything now versus getting the refineries built and running first versus having to import all the ethanol currently....not too sure.

Cant really determine if all the decisions were "good" since hindsight is always 20/20. Just that we have to fill more gas to go the same distances and/or perform the same amount of work and how does this lower our dependency on petroleum if we are consuming more of it now? It would be interesting to see a report from the gas stations to see if the traffic through the stations has actually increased or held stable.

Also as the country increases its usage in Ethanol.....what happens then? What is ethanol made from......corn and wheat correct. Okay then...someone needs to grow all that corn and wheat. Whos going to be doing that? Even though we have the most abundant lands and fertile soil to do that...are we going to? Hawaii should shift back into farming and grow corn and wheat to supply our refineries with the raw goods. Lower our raw supply cost and increase jobs to a "dead" industry.

LOL...just wanted everyone to think and converse over political decisions. Playing Devils Avocate......heh heh heh.

 

I was watching the Pacific Business news with Howard Dicas one day and he was talking to this man who has been trying to build an ethanol plant here on Oahu for the last 9 years or so and has finally got everything just about ready to start building down by Barbers Point ending of this year or beginning of 07. He said the big hold up was with the State. He said that their source will be a sugar derivative that will be grown here in the islands. The crop should yield 2 times annually versus sugar cane which was about 1 crop every 2 years.

 

Let me clarify my point about using less oil, you will be using less petroleum, not overall "gasoline." You will have to buy more gasoline, but less of it will be made from petroleum. Lets say for example that you buy 20 gallons of regular gas and get 20mpg on it, so you can travel 400 miles. So over 5 tanks you buy 100 gallons of pure gas, and get 2000 miles. If you use e-10, which is 10% ethanol, and your mpg drops 5% and you get 19mpg instead of 20mpg. To travel that 2000 miles, it would require 105.26 gallons of E-10, but that is only 90% petroleum based, so its 94.7 gallons of petroleum, and 10.5 gallons ethanol, which is a renewable resource. So you would save 5 gallons of petroleum for every 100 gallons of gasoline you were to use, or 5% roughly. If the entire nation had to convert to E-10, then we could save 5% of our national gasoline dependance on other countries, and that is assuming a 5% loss in efficiency, which is likely much lower. Ethanol only has 1 oxygen bond per two carbon bonds, so the loss in energy is the on the magniture of 30% at worse, and at a blend of only 10%, then leads to an energy loss of only 2-3%.
While your idea of switching to pure ethanol is a good one, it wouldn't work on most engines, and would require modifications, but is perfectly feasable. Biodiesel is another option, but using old oil is hardly economical, used oil only makes up a small fraction of oil needed, and it would be better to use new oil produced from oil crops such as rapeseed etc. Another option which I am currently performing research on is producing oil from algae, which in theory should be able to yield 30 times the oil per acre of the current rapeseed production. Biodiesel also requires the use of diesel engines, which are hardly the performance engines that many are used to here in the US, so its not perfectly feasible. I would say at least half the cars in the US could be fitted with diesel engines, and wouldn't suffer huge performance losses, such as all trucks, and commuter cars where hp and performance are not as much of a factor.
The real issue lies in the people, and their willingness to change there way of thinking regarding oil. ITS GOING TO RUN OUT SOON! We need to think of ways to slow down our rate of usage while we develop new methods of power for vehicles, and something as easy as switching to a 10% methanol blend should be considered. As a chemical engineer, our field is faced with this very issue, and is an area that is being persued quite intensely due to the sudden surge in price of petroleum. Its not going down any time soon, because people are unwilling to change their ways. The oil producers are going to continue selling their product at these rates because people are still willing to pay them.

 

Let me also adress a few of your points, I know I may be coming off as an argumentative person, but really I am trying to clear up some of the misconeptions that are associated with it.
At worse, you can have a 10% loss in mpg or hp, because if you were to add 10% of a non combustable material to gas with no energy value, then your mpg would drop 10% roughly. Now ethanol has at worse 60-70% of the energy value of gasoline, so at that mix, only 3-4% loss in mpg or hp is seen, or 1-2mpg at worse. So you have to fill more often, yes, but e-10 is cheaper than regular gas, so it balances out, and that isn't even taking into the account that demand for oil will go down if the entire nation switched to e-10. So switching to e-10 may have some short term cost associated, but in the long run will save everyone money, and save more fossil fuels.

The point is you don't pay more for a mixture, you pay less, it is relatively cheap to make ethanol, compare to the cost of petroleum so it costs less. Its already happening all over the nation, just not at all the pumps yet. Many people don't even know they are already using a blend, because the difference is very slight, and most people who say they notice a significant difference are probably suffereing from imagined differences, much like when the butt dyno tells you that new parts made your car faster, when its only a fraction, maybe 1-2 hp at best.

See my example above, you will be using less non renewable petroleum on E-10 than on pure petroluem based gasoline. It doesn't matter if you are using more "gas" because 10% of it is renewable ethanol, which WE produce, not some foreign country. Ethanol can be produced from corn in the midwest, or sugar cane in hawaii, like it is in brazil. We WILL lower overall petroleum consumption by switching, the only reason not to is the people's reluctance due to fears of higher consumption higher costs etc. But you have to consider that the cost will eventually be cheaper, and that isn't even factoring in the billions we spend securing our dependence on foreign oil in the middle east which is hidden within our tax dollars. A good question is if we had found a way to switch to ethanol 10 years ago would we be fighting in Iraq now? One of the reasons we are there is oil, it can't be denied, and is costing you alot more than you think.
Producing ethanol is hardly an issue, we have a surplus of corn produced, and even more can be produced if we indeed switch to ethanol blending. Farmers are selling for below cost just to recuperate some of their money, there are plenty of people in this nation that would be willing to grow ethanol producing products.

 

hmmm...if we drive and average of 15,000 miles a year and get about 20mpg..

15,000miles / 20MPG = 750gallons of gas needed.

However on E10 we lose between 1-2 MPG, so average at 1.5 MPG lost? So now that same 15,000 miles takes:
15,000miles / 18.5 MPG = 811 gallons

The amount of gasoline consumed while using E10 would be:

811gallons * 90%gas content = 730 gallons

A total savings of 20 gallons of gasoline while running E10. Bad news is that you'll need to buy 61 more gallons of this E10 gas...

The amount of extra

 

It's a conspiracy.

 

Besides getting myself schooled in a chemistry lesson..... Nah no worries...this is an open forum. Nothing personal nor bad humor is flying around so, this is not at all arguementative. Overall topic bottom line to me is that we are paying a lot of money just to survive day to day. Rising gas costs are just one more issue to deal with. And this is the said conversation pertaining to those day to day issues.

.....is the disclaimer okay??? Can I banter now???....

Bottom line that I was trying to convey....is with the mixture and the idea of a cheaper gas...well it has not happened as of yet. Hawaii prices are still at 3.49 per gallon for premium and roughly 3.39 for plus. These were the same prices that we have had prior to the mix. If the gas is supposedly cheaper in all aspects, then the price should have come down a bit. Now if that is a part of the price saving gas cap law....then well time will tell.

Perhaps in the overall petroleum usage to make gas.....yes the blend will save consumption. Though to the individual consumer...the savings are not yet felt. Go to the pumps more often, gas prices are still high. Even in the mainland the prices are roughly within 10-20 cents of ours...which I still would think to be expensive considering.

Ethanol is a step in a direction like I said....just that it is not yet the solution. I have no grips about having to use ethanol...just that, darnnit we have to fill up at the pumps a little more often. The "savings" associated with the blend have not yet been realized by the residents...yet the profits to the stations and/or refineries sure have. Assuming that the costs in refining and importing the gas is indeed less expensive versus a full 100% petroleum tank. There is an energy loss and 2 MPG does add up pretty fast as you start adding it up. Going to the pump might be a neccessary "evil" now because of it...but why do we still have to pay the same amount per gallon as traditional fuels?

However, if all the surplus cash is going to fund a kick butt rail system...then sure, I can justify that. If the extra funding goes to pay for better roads and repair...I can agree to that. If the extra money goes to pay for school funds etc...then okay, that can be rationalized. However, if the oil companies are reporting record profits (as they are now)..then I have a gripe. If the cost of gas goes up because of an increase in cost per barrel, then the overall profits to the gas companies, should be on par with that...not going up.

So...from the eco point...yeah this mix is a little better. Lowers petroleum dependency and comsumption...but now needs land and other natural resources to produce. From an economic point...err well the gas companies are still making money...and consumers need to go a little more often to get gas...cool deal. Hopefully the over effect of driving down the oil dependency and thus reducing the overall cost per barrel of oil is accomplished. But...unless you change the entire design and fuel to an engine, we are at a stand still. Modifications yes...but still almost a status quo.

Its a conspiracy I tell you.....

Got to watch more Jetsons episodes and figure out how do they get their "cars" to work...and fold like that. Parking spaces solved.

 

It's collusion.

 

Everyone is making good points, and I am not saying anyone is wrong in thinking about their day to day costs. The point I am trying to make in the long run, its cheaper because lets say gas costs $3.49 right now, and everyone still keeps using as much gas as they would anyways, then the oil producing countries will continue increasing prices because demand is still as high as ever. If we each saved 20 gallons per year it would be a reduction of ~3% in consumption per car. So the decrease in demand will in turn decrease gas prices because demand is down. Its hard to make this point because it is based up the assumption that prices will increase, which they will, and that prices will decrease when demand decreases. These amounts are hard to predict, but it should happen. If we continue the way we are going, prices will go up. The only way to decrease prices is to decrease demand for a product, so an alternative must be had to decrease demand, since people are unwilling to decrease their gas consumption. Its why the prices for gas in the midwest are cheaper than the rest of the nation, they have alot of competion by ethanol blends, which are up to 30 cents cheaper per gallon. Decrease demand, price goes down, its as simple as that. Hope everyone understands what I am trying to say, not trying to step on any toes or anything, its just as a chemical engineer, I see this problem everyday, and really want to see some sort of resolution to the problem.

 

LOL......

Sorry I just have to laugh. I thought so...that we were discussing chemical bonds and isotopes with a chemical engineer. I was waiting for that proof.

Not to worry..you are not stepping on anyones toes...and if you did a little, such a minor thing.

Granted, you are looking at this from a larger economies of scale and cost demand analysis versus the day to day perspective. With the mention of the cost of the Iraq war and other oil factors...it sounds like you have had a different take on this topic from the get go. A larger and perhaps more profound point of view versus the rest of us.

Understandably you are running the simulation from a future tense point of view in regards to the demand versus cost angle. Its just too bad that there is not any immediate compensation to the end users because of the increase in going to the gas stations due to the inherent nature of the lower energy efficiency in the mix.

Hopefully the US can think of something that will allow us to begin exporting again and shift the money market a little. Versus being the largest consumers of oil and only allowing other nations to gain income at the expense of all of us.

 

*ZzzzzzzZZZZzzzzzz*
it's an illusion

i get less mpg with this juice.

 

Sen Jen for State Senate!!!!!!!

 

Shell V-power Runs 10% Ethanol In There 91 Octane.

 

No matter what I still have my alternate means of transportation on my motorcycle. I just hope we don't go beyond E10 anytime soon since Yamaha says not to run the bike on gas with higher than E10. Just need to ride it more to work I guess.