Gawd damned ethanol!

Got questions? We got answers....
User avatar
Julien D
KDXRider.net
KDXRider.net
Posts: 5858
Joined: 07:53 pm Nov 07 2008
Country: USA
Contact:

Post by Julien D »

Yep.

I think one of the biggest problems with ethanol is the way it absorbs moisture. After absorbing some moisture, the ethanol in the fuel can begin to crystallize. That's just bad news all the way around. I found lots of little greenish crystals in the float bowls on my cb750 after it sat for about a year.
User avatar
SS109
KDXRider.net
KDXRider.net
Posts: 5770
Joined: 05:11 am Aug 23 2009
Country: USA
Location: Tucson, AZ, USA
Contact:

Post by SS109 »

Luckily, living in AZ we don't have moisture problems like the majority of the world! :lol:
Youtube Channel: WildAzzRacing
AZ State Parks & Trails OHV Ambassador - Trail Riders of Southern AZ
Current KDX: '98 KDX220
Old KDX: '90 KDX200 -White/Blue
'11 GasGas EC250R
User avatar
zomby woof
Supporting Member I
Supporting Member I
Posts: 295
Joined: 11:42 am Oct 22 2009
Country:
Location: SW Ontario

Post by zomby woof »

>|<>QBB<
Mr. Wibbens wrote:>|<>QBB<
SS109 wrote:I have been using nothing but Chevron premium which contains ethanol and I have had no problems with it. When I broke my hand the KDX sat for over a month with the same fuel and it started on the second kick. I'm really not that worried about ethanol.

I think it is more in peoples heads than anything

I heard nothing but horror stories before all the gas stations here had to start selling it...

And have yet to have any problems

I told a buddy that my truck sat for a year with half a tank of gas, and he told me I need to get rid of that gas somehow, it's just going to cause problems...

:roll:
You are 100% correct. The anti-ethanol hysteria is laughable. What more evidence than the millions and millions, and millions of vehicles that run trouble free everyday on it, year after year?
Ontario, Canada
factoryX
Member
Posts: 352
Joined: 01:33 pm Jan 22 2011
Country:

Post by factoryX »

lol, here you go:

Straight to the Gas Chamber: Is Ethanol a Silent Killer of Automobiles,
Or Merely a Misunderstood Fuel?


“If human beings were without sin, we would still live in an imperfect world. Adam Smith’s notion that by pursuing his own interest a man “frequently promotes that of … society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it” and Karl Marx’s picture of a society in which “the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all” are both mocked by one obvious constraint. The world is finite. This means that when one group of people pursues its own interests, it damages the interests of others.”
-George Monbiot, Feeding Cars, Not People

In the article, “The Great Ethanol Scam” (2009), author Ed Wallace discusses the damage being done by the decision to mandate the use of ethanol in automobiles, trucks, small engines, and boats. The ‘damage’ in question is in the form of dissolved fuel system components initially applying to first the vehicles we drive, the boats that we take pleasure cruises in, and the small engines that we, as a society, utilize to power many forms of outdoor equipment, consisting of lawnmowers, string trimmers, lawn edgers, and millions of other such devices using gasoline-powered, internal combustion engines. The secondary damage initially consists of the expenses incurred from the diminished energy output of ethanol-laced gasoline, in which automobiles use more fuel due to this formula being less efficient, costing drivers more at the pump. The trouble does not stop there; the trouble then spreads to the additional financial hardship created by emergency repairs often needed when ethanol, a form of grain alcohol, dissolves fuel system components (2009) in vehicles and equipment which are not designed to utilize this highly-corrosive substance. And finally, since the Federal Government heavily subsidizes the ethanol industry and corn growers who provide the material required for this process, the end user sees hidden costs in the form of additional taxation which is not collected at the pump, but instead gleaned from taxpayers and business owners. In addition, according to the author, the Environmental Protection Agency has suggested that ethanol-laced fuel is more destructive to the environment, which appears to be anathema to the whole reason behind having an agency whose first mission, as logic might dictate, would be to protect the….environment?

The fascinating part is that I agree with everything that the author has stated….so what is the problem, exactly? To begin with, his research is woefully incomplete; he fails to go into detail about who specifically to talk to about changing, or eliminating entirely this destructive mandate. Furthermore, he neglects to mention what actually happens to this fuel concoction when it sits in a fuel tank for a while, and there appears not to be any effort whatsoever spared into researching the possibility that non-ethanol-blended, original-style unleaded gasoline might still available in many parts of the country.
If ethanol is so destructive to cars, the environment, and the wallets of drivers nationwide, why are we being forced, by government mandate, to use this product? Ethanol-through various companies that have fought to bring it to market-has made three previous attempts to create a viable fuel alternative in the past century. On those same three occasions, it has failed due to lack of acceptance from any interested parties. This is not a metaphorical Don Juan attempting to tilt windmills, with ethanol struggling against imagined foes, a superior product struggling to gain a toehold in a market receptive to such an entity; this inefficient fuel is a no-win scenario that will never succeed on its own strengths and merits….unless someone bends the rules to allow corn-based ethanol to possess an unfair advantage.
Is there truly a scam against the gasoline-consuming public (as implied by the author’s own words) involving the government, along with the ethanol and corn-growers’ lobby? If the product could stand on its own, I would suggest ‘no’. If this fuel blend is as bad as Wallace suggests, and the government does everything it can to promote this ‘cleaner’ fuel, to the extent of subsidizing (transferring money from the taxpayer to a business to keep said business afloat) both the corn and ethanol producers using taxpayer funds, without their knowledge or consent, then it might be a safe bet that there is indeed something wrong with this plan to force drivers to use this unsafe fuel source.
Of primary concern to the author is that there is a serious problem with the fuel systems of gasoline-burning, internal combustion engines (sold in the North American market) being incompatible with ethanol-laced gasoline. Unfortunately, other than a couple of vague suggestions as to what this product does to cars, this article does not nail down specifically what actually happens to this ethanol blend once it is in the car, the exceptions being a mention or two that it dissolves fuel lines and intake manifolds. For example, according to Popular Mechanics (2010), ethanol-blended gasoline (currently at a 90/10 percentage ratio of ten percent ethanol, ninety percent gasoline) is extremely sensitive to water absorption. The author of that article, Mike Allen, demonstrated what happens when even a very small amount of water gets into the fuel; the alcohol immediately separates from the gasoline, and turns into goo towards the bottom of the fuel tank (2010).
What is the end result? The car will not run once the fuel has separated in three levels; the top layer being gasoline, the middle layer ethanol alcohol, and the bottom layer, watery mush….and yet, I do not recall seeing any mention of this from the author of this article.
Concerning the miniscule amount of research performed by the author, as evidenced by the lack of works cited at the end of his article, I present the following boggle. He discussed the mechanical mishap of a particular 2007 Mini (Cooper) suffering from carbon build up that was implied to be directly caused by ethanol in fuel. Considering my personal background as a (former) professional auto mechanic, and having some experience working on several Mini Cooper automobiles, I do vaguely recall a serious problem with carbon buildup in intake manifolds and cylinder heads of 2007 models of this vehicle. I did locate a technical discussion on one website in particular (Northamericanmotoring.com) that noted 2007 Mini Cooper vehicles were the first year models to be equipped with Direct Fuel Injection-the type of fuel delivery apparatus BMW (the builder of Mini Cooper cars) has used since that year, and is thought to be more efficient than older fuel injection systems. This newer design suffers from a defect; since no fuel actually passes through the air intake, this setup allows carbon to build up, consequently entirely blocking off those same air inlet ports into the engine. In other words, this defect has nothing to do with whether or not there is a presence of ethanol in the gasoline (2008).
In addition to the author possibly shirking his duty to the reader, in by discussing technical problems without proper investigation of that topic, he also suffers from a ‘delivery’ problem, in that while he initially may have a fascinating story to tell, Wallace begins with a good hook, but leaves the readers hanging. By implying that the readers of his article were having a fast one pulled on them, it is my opinion that the author was attempting to engage the public in a manner meant to elicit a pathos (emotional) response, hoping to incite outrage with suggesting that they are being scammed. However, the story became less interesting when realization dawned on me that he offered no real solutions to the quandary; there were very few suggestions as to who the potentially-scammed citizens should contact in order to resolve their proposed grievances, short of naming a couple of lobbying groups and mentioning the Environmental Protection Agency. My thoughts are that if you are going to complain about something, it might be more interesting to potential readers if the writer had included potential solutions that they could act upon, or at least take under advisement, there may be a more-emotional connection with a story such as this, implying, to those who might be outraged upon reading this, that someone might be able to do something about it.
There is also a startling lack of suggestions as to what other fuel options might be out there, squandering a wonderful opportunity to inform readers of other gasoline possibilities; the author gave very little scrutiny to whether or not any original-style, non-ethanol-blended unleaded fuel may still be available, which gives the impression that the driving public is simply stuck with the inferior gasoline. An internet site has been created, http://www.pure-gas.org, which is an online database of gas stations that still sell regular unleaded fuel, arranged in a state-and-town format, and was located very quickly through any common website search engine.
The author, Ed Wallace, left a lot of loose ends dangling in his article. He did a great job of hooking the reader into his work, triggering a potential ‘injustice’ reflex that one might feel when someone is being cheated or stolen from, especially considering the source of this potential theft might be individuals at the highest levels of government. It is important to remember that there was really very little opinion or suggestion as to what we are supposed to do about this most worrisome of boggles. In addition, it has been proven that at least one bit of data he suggested might be false (the 2007 Mini Cooper carbon buildup problem), suggesting either sloppy investigative work or lack of knowledge about the subject in which he is writing. Wallace also exerted very little effort in researching possible logical alternatives to using this potentially hazardous fuel.
In conclusion, there is clearly something rotten in Denmark. The author raises great points about how this failed business model, the ethanol industry, should not even be in operation. In a perfect world, where laws are equal for all men, most any other capital venture would have failed if it did not sell enough product, or generate enough interest. Ethanol has failed three times already, and is clearly at the end of its fourth reincarnation, yet due to possibly shady deals, behind closed doors, ethanol lives another day, and may yet be more intrusive into our daily lives, given that according to author Ed Wallace, these same lobbying groups are pushing for a 15% ethanol blend, and most cars and equipment, unless built to use that type of gasoline from the start, they will not run correctly (if they start at all), and in addition, most if not all product warranties will be voided by the manufacturers of the affected vehicles and equipment. The author should have included some mentions of who they should contact, however, it was easier to simply write a primarily-pathos article and walk away, instead of leading the fight against possible corruption.
It is extremely difficult not to be angry about this subject. The author of this paper in question used to own an automotive repair facility, and remains in contact with several repair facilities to this very day; only a few of them are happy that there are more vehicles to repair. Out of the rest I speak to, the majority refuse to talk about it in front of other people, for fear of their losing control of their emotions, as they have been personally affected by this issue as well.
I am tired of being told what to do, what to drive, and what gasoline to use, especially if the mandated fuel in question is not as safe for my vehicle, and particularly more unsafe for the environment around me. I am extremely irritated knowing that elected officials might be complacent in their duties, lining their own pockets in the name of ‘saving the planet’. Enough already.

References.
1. Website: http://pure-gas.org/index.jsp?stateprov=OR Puregas.org, sourced from the internet, September, 2011
2. Allen, M. Can E-15 gasoline really damage your engine? Popular Mechanics, December 21, 2010. Sourced from internet, September, 2011.
3. Wallace, E. The Great Ethanol Scam, Bloomberg Businessweek, May 14, 2009. sourced from internet, September, 2011.
4. Website discussion, North American Motoring.com, technical repair forum, December 2008
Image
User avatar
Mr. Wibbens
KDXRider.net
KDXRider.net
Posts: 4884
Joined: 02:57 am Nov 07 2004
Country:
Location: Playing in the Poison Oak
Contact:

Post by Mr. Wibbens »

tldr
Warning! This member tends to use sarcasm as a regular form of communication. If a post seems offensive, before you panic and fly off the handle, re-read the post and imagine it being said with a sideways grin.
((Bike Profile))
((Pics))
FIVE OUT OF FOUR PEOPLE DONUT UNDERSTAND FRACTIONS
KarlP
Supporting Member III
Supporting Member III
Posts: 1484
Joined: 02:26 pm Jun 29 2005
Country:
Location: Alabama

Post by KarlP »

The fuel lines started leaking on my weedeater. I had to replace them all.

8 years of non-ethanol gas had not hurt them. One year of using that crappy gas and see what happens?

Gawd damned ethanol!
'08 KTM200xc
'99 CR/KDX Hybrid with that RB stuff done to it
KX100 for the boy
User avatar
rbates9
Supporting Member II
Supporting Member II
Posts: 3164
Joined: 06:07 pm Apr 27 2010
Country:
Location: UPSTATE New York

Post by rbates9 »

I haven't started my bike in about six months and when I just tried it I kicked it over slowly once then gave it a good kick and she fired right up. I used the marine stabil and it seemed to work at least for me. :grin:
Post Reply