 Sherman Harris, owner of Snappy's Gas & Grocery in Vancouver, Wash., offers gas with no ethanol at his 76 station. (Photo by Doug Beghtel) |
|
Posted on 05/27/2008 9:03:13 AM PDT by Incorrigible
By GAIL KINSEY HILL
Sherman Harris, owner of Snappy's Gas & Grocery in Vancouver, Wash., offers gas with no ethanol at his 76 station. (Photo by Doug Beghtel) |
|
PORTLAND, Ore. — When ethanol began flowing into Oregon fuel tanks early this year, its costly little secret was scarcely mentioned: It packs one-third less explosive energy than gasoline and so reduces vehicle mileage on the road.
Oregon requires a 10 percent blend with gasoline, known as E10, which cuts mileage by 3 percent, according to official estimates. That costs you an additional $73 a year at the fuel pump, based on today's prices for regular gasoline.
But many Oregonians don't believe the 3 percent figure and maintain the drop is 10 percent or more, raising out-of-pocket costs much higher. It's enough to throw into question the real cost of cleaner air from ethanol use and reduced dependence on fossil fuels.
When Oregon lawmakers enthusiastically passed the alternative fuels bill in 2007, they barely mentioned ethanol's lower energy content. Instead, they emphasized E10's benefits: cleaner air and a healthier economy.
Now, record-high gas prices have thrown the mileage gap into sharp relief. Tapped-out consumers are scrutinizing every penny they have to shell out at the pump and track any discernable upticks. Drivers are finding that their mileage has dropped far more than 3 percent.
"It's just not fair to anyone who drives a car," said Ron Spuhler, a retiree who lives in Gresham, Ore., and now gets 21.5 miles per gallon in his 1999 Buick instead of the previous ethanol-free readings of 24 mpg.
That's a drop of 10 percent and an extra $7 every time he fills the tank.
Plenty of factors influence gas mileage, so it's hard to carve out the effects of ethanol alone. Government, academic and industry experts point to a scientific principal to back up claims of slight reductions: ethanol contains about two-thirds the energy content of gasoline, gallon for gallon.
That means a gallon of pure, corn-based ethanol would reduce mileage by 30 percent and a 10 percent blend — as Oregon now requires — by about 3 percent. Gasoline can vary a bit, batch to batch, so a drop of 2 percent to 4 percent is a safe estimate, these experts say.
"Energy content is the critical issue," said Don Stevens, a senior program manager with the U.S. Department of Energy.
Comprehensive studies that rely on actual road tests for mileage comparisons are few, but they generally support the science-based data. A study by the American Coalition for Ethanol, a trade group promoting ethanol's development, tested three vehicles and came up with an average reduction of 1.5 percent.
If ethanol isn't to blame for the larger mileage gap, then, what is? Stop-and-go driving, speeds exceeding 60 miles per hour, underinflated tires, faulty oxygen sensors and clogged fuel filters can affect gas mileage, sometimes significantly, government energy analysts said.
"Some individuals may well believe their mileage is dropping by 10, 20 percent," Stevens said. "But the difference is from some other factor, not ethanol."
Mark Kendall, a senior energy analyst with the Oregon Department of Energy, agreed, saying painfully high gas prices may be pushing consumers toward faulty conclusions.
"They're looking for the devil," he said.
But E85, which contains 85 percent ethanol and is used in flexible-fuel vehicles, is a different story. It can pull down mileage by more than 20 percent, according to the U.S. Department of Energy.
Spuhler, like so many Oregonians, is unimpressed with the government's account.
He insists the truth comes out when the rubber meets the road. Decades as a truck driver taught him the ups and downs of gas mileage, he said.
Besides, he said, his Buick has a computerized mileage read-out and "it doesn't lie."
For years, gas stations in the greater Portland area have pumped E10 in the winter months to meet federal clean air requirements. "I noticed it every time," Spuhler said.
Spuhler said he has complained to state and federal officials but "it's like talking to a brick wall."
James Bong, who lives in Milwaukie, Ore., and drives a 1994 Ford pickup to work in Oregon City, has channeled his frustration into trips across the Columbia River into Washington state, where he fills up on ethanol-free gasoline.
Sherman Harris owns the 76 station in Vancouver, Wash., that Bong visits. He said an "amazing number" of Oregon drivers seek him out.
"They say they're noticing a huge difference," Harris said of the Oregon customers. "If they're driving from Oregon, across the bridge, they should know what they're talking about."
Washington stations must pump at least E2 — a blend of 2 percent ethanol — by Dec. 1 of this year, with increases to E10 if certain conditions are met. Many already have made the switch.
Harris' station is one of the few that still uses no ethanol at all.
Bong said his truck gets 13.9 miles per gallon with Harris' gas but just 10 mpg with E10. That's a wallet-pounding difference of 28 percent.
"I'll do anything to shave a cost," he said.
Bong rejects officials' arguments that poor maintenance or inconsistent driving behavior is to blame. He said he takes good care of both his vehicles — he also owns a four-wheel-drive pickup — and has compared mileage over like terrain.
"They can say what they want, but those of us who use cars and observe what's going on, we notice a big difference," Bong said.
State officials say motorists shouldn't lose sight of the big picture: that ethanol burns cleaner than gasoline — fewer smog-causing pollutants — and reduces the country's dependence on foreign oil.
Another plus, they say, is that ethanol is cheaper than gasoline. In the Pacific Northwest, pure ethanol has been selling for $2.09 a gallon, compared with no-ethanol gasoline at $3.25 a gallon. E10 blends, then, dampen prices by almost 12 cents a gallon.
If ethanol's contribution to the country's overall fuel supply is taken into account, the savings are larger — between 29 and 40 cents a gallon — say researchers at Iowa State University. Ethanol currently accounts for about 6 percent of U.S. fuel supplies. If it were pulled from the mix, demand for gasoline would spike and so would prices, these researchers concluded.
That's of little comfort to consumers watching pump prices as they climb toward $4 a gallon. When a customer from Oregon drove into Harris' station one day last week to ask for a fill-up, he pointed to a big barrel in the back of his pickup. He wanted that filled too.
(Gail Kinsey Hill is a staff writer for The Oregonian of Portland, Ore., and can be contacted at gailhill(at)news.oregonian.com)
Not for commercial use. For educational and discussion purposes only.
Cars with turbos could take advantage of the additional octane by cranking down the waste gate to increase the boost.
And cosponsored by the Deptartment of Energy.
10 percent of gasoline is Ethanol.
Lower miles per gallon with Ethanol.
Government gets TAXES on the Ethanol, for every gallon of the mixture that is sold.
Good deal for the government.
Bad deal for the ordinary person.
It was cosponsored by the DOE.
And it’s also more credible than the article.
That’s even worse.
Those taxes are offset by the blender tax credit.
Serves 'em right for buying into such a stupid energy "solution". It takes more energy to produce ethano than we get out of it. Kind of like making a dime that costs fifty cents to make...
No Surprise: E85 Is a Bummer in Fuel Economy
We did a comparison test of two fuels, regular gasoline (87 octane) and E85 (100 to 105 octane). Our test vehicle was a flex-fuel 2007 Chevrolet Tahoe 4WD LT powered by a 5.3-liter V-8 hooked to a four-speed automatic transmission.
We tested acceleration using both fuels and our standard procedures, then we measured fuel economy at steady speeds of 30, 50, and 70 mph around a 2.5-mile oval test track, three runs at each speed that were averaged to produce the numbers you see in the accompanying charts. The fuel-economy results were calculated using the vehicle’s onboard computer.
We began the test with the Tahoe running on E85 fuel and later drove the SUV until its tank was as empty as we dared, and in that way we were able to flush the tank of almost all the ethanol. Then we refilled the tank with regular gasoline and repeated our procedures. All testing was done in two-wheel-drive mode. The results are shown here.
Differences in acceleration times were insignificant (although GM says E85 improves horsepower by as much as three percent). On the downside, the fuel economy on E85 was diminished more than 30 percent in two of the three tests, about what we expected. The EPA’s numbers suggest that fuel economy worsens by 28 percent on E85 compared with regular gas. On any Tahoe equipped with a 5.3-liter V-8, the E85 flex-fuel feature is a no-cost option, but running E85 reduces the driving range from roughly 390 miles a tank to about 290.
Serves 'em right for buying into such a stupid energy "solution". It takes more energy to produce ethano than we get out of it. Kind of like making a dime that costs fifty cents to make...
Anybody know what E10 is selling for compared to unleaded in Oregon? Just like to know much much more the citizenry is getting screwed in addition to their decrease in mileage.
I hard some NY Congressman tell Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman (ie. Dilbert) that in upper NY they are buying E85 for all of their public vehicles and they were paying $1.73 a gallon. I would have thrown something at my TV if it werent such a brilliant Mitsubishi 73 inch 1080p which makes even C-SPAN compelling to watch (and it makes the newsbabes on Fox Biz Channel look even better).
If I could buy E85 for $1.73, even I would be stockpiling it. But the last time I was in Missouri and filled up my rental car, the E85 was the same price as 93 octane unleaded.
Agree with the 'does or does not lie" part, but;
My fifty year old speedometer is ten percent off;
But, if 65 is really 58.5 then 55 is really 49.5 - still ten percent.
Hard for me to believe that a computerized mileage read out, even if not accurate, would not also be fairly proportional across the board.
Lower is still lower - conclusion is not at risk.
Here is the full report of the study.
I just called a customer to inform him that he needs a $150.00 carburetor ruined by setting for several months withwater and sour gasoline in the carburetor; since the main body of the carb is made of plastiv and is now all gummed up and corrosion has formed on the ramain white metal, a rebuild is out of the question.
Some of the water found in the bowl is due to phase separation, some to condensation and the remainder due to being abandoned outsida when it failed to run.
Alcohol is good to get drunk on and for specially built race car engines but damaging as auto fuel for the common car.
If we had to start buying fuel by the pound instead of the gallon we would better appreciate the difference.
We’ve had 10% ethanol in our gas for decades.
I still get 36 mpg in my Corolla.
I’ve made no claims that E85 gets better mileage. I’m talking about studies done on E20-E40.
Jack the car up, set the throttle at 2,000 RPM and let it burn one gallon of each against a stop watch while powering a 1,000W boom box and get back to me after you’ve tested all 15 blends.
Read the label more closely; the red bottle is propanol, the yllow bottle is methanol - both can absorb an additional 10-20% water depending on the raw product’s being previously exposed to the air.
That article deals with all sorts of issues that differ from the article of the thread. We’re talking strictly about mileage here. I’m making the case to counter the article that ethanol in all situations reduces fuel economy. Studies have show that in some situations it doesn’t.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.