Ford First to Offer E85 Hybrid

National Ethanol Vehicle Coalition ^ | January 25, 2006 | Michelle Kautz

[T Ruth]

Jefferson City, MO – Ford Motor Company today announced a research project that can help significantly decrease foreign oil imports -- the first E85 compatible hybrid. The flexible-fuel hybrid Escape was unveiled at today’s Washington Auto Show.

“As a leader in both hybrid vehicles and in vehicles capable of operating on ethanol-based fuels, Ford is the ideal company to bring both technologies together for the first time,” says Anne Stevens, executive vice president, Ford Motor Company, and chief operating officer, The Americas.

Ford currently manufactures two additional hybrid vehicles: the gasoline powered Escape and Mercury Mariner. The company expects to introduce more hybrid vehicles in years to come including a Mazda Tribute Hybrid, Ford Fusion, Mercury Milan, Ford Five Hundred, Mercury Montego, Ford Edge and Mercury MKX.

“We are extremely pleased to see Ford take on this endeavor,” said Phil Lampert, Executive Director of the NEVC. “This is a leap forward in the E85 industry and will help the nation even further reduce our dependency on foreign oil as well as reduce smog forming pollutants in the air.”

In model year 2006, Ford offers: the E85 compatible Ford F-150 pick-up truck, which began production in December of 2005, the Ford Crown Victoria, Mercury Grand Marquis and the Lincoln Town Car. The company expects to manufacture 250,000 of E85 compatible vehicles this year.

At this time, there are nearly 600 E85 fueling stations across the United States. For a complete listing along with a listing of all E85 compatible vehicles, visit www.E85Fuel.com.

[Joan Kerrey]

I'm a health nut so I always hold the cheese on my double burgers and practice portion control on my fries and milkshakes.

[JABBERBONK]

The GEO Metro failed beacuse it was a P.O.S. MB/Chrystler builds a little 3 wheel vehicle that gets great MPG's plus the body actually leans into turns, but it cost's $40,000.

[nmh]

How much will this cost?

[JABBERBONK]

Not everyone like myself is a "soccer Mom", some of us , like myself are single, so we don't need an SUV. As far as city cars being "death traps" , those of us who drive professionally, and have BRAINS know the smaller the car one must drive defensively. I'm sure your aware that even the smallest of "eurotrash mini cars" offer superior protection, than that of say....errrr a motorcycle.

[supercat]

Just about any modern car can run at least half E85 in the tank.

How do the performance and efficiency of an E85/87-octane blend compare with those of using straight 91-octane, in engines designed for the latter?

[I see my hands]

"Do you mean that it will self-destruct at the most inopportune times or what?"

No. I mean hybrid cars are a distraction from the course we need to take.

[The KG9 Kid]

[supercat]

"Ethanol yields roughly 26% more energy than it takes to produce it, according to a just-published study by the University of California at Berkeley. That's because corn grows using free sunlight and because farming has gotten very efficient. Gasoline provides only about 84% of the energy required to produce it, the study says."

I suspect the latter figure means that every 100MJ worth of raw energy extracted from the ground, plus a certain amount of labor and expense, will have a net yield of 84MJ worth of gasoline. By contrast, the former figure means that every 100MJ worth of "refined" energy, plus a certain amount of labor and expense, will yield 126MJ worth of gasoline. To determine which type of fuel is more economical, it's necessary to know both the cost of labor and expense, and the relative values of raw and refined energy.

[IronJack]

Did you know that a gallon of E85 can hold in solution over one pint of water which is subject to phase-separation over long-term storage?

Did you know that water does not dissolve in gasoline, so liquid water -- a common contaminant in underground bulk storage tanks -- gets into fuel lines and freezes? Or is introduced into the fuel stream that goes to the cylinders, thus interrupting the power cycle of the engine?

I don't really want to play "My fuel can beat up your fuel." If you don't support ethanol, fine. I'm not going to waste another keystroke trying to convince you. I suspect it will succeed as a energy alternative without you.

[UNGN]

"How do the performance and efficiency of an E85/87-octane blend compare with those of using straight 91-octane, in engines designed for the latter?

You can Add 10 to 15% E85 to 87 octane and have more octane than 91 octane gas, for less money. Your gas mileage will drop 10-15% vs. 91 octane, so the it will likely endup costing MORE + the added hassle of mixing it yourself.

Adding E85 only becomes "economical" when you build a car that requires more than 100 octane. I have a few old turbocharged Buicks that use 116 octane when I race them. 116 Octane gas is around $7.00/gallon. Ethanol is 1/2 this. So for 1/4 mile action, ethanol makes sense.

Because I only need 116 octane for about 12 seconds total x maybe 5 to 10 runs (the rest of the time even 87 octane will do), running a tank full of $7.00/gallon race gas makes even less sense.

This is where enthanol injection comes in. It's a way more efficent use of ethanol. You only use the benifits of ethanol when you need them and don't have the horrible mpg downside of ethanol.

Ethanol, in theory only has 72% of the energy content of gasoline. Note that this is in theory. In reality it is closer to 50%. The reason for the discrepancy is modern engines are designed to run on 87 octane while the octane of Ethanol is much higher. So they use enthanol VERY inefficiently.

Flex fueled vehicles are a cruel joke. In the compromise to run both ethanol and gas, they end up getting horrible mileage on ethanol, which has the effect of turning people OFF of ethanol. Nice going.

[UNGN]

No. I mean hybrid cars are a distraction from the course we need to take.

Actually "flex fueled vehicles" are the distraction.

Hybrid technology is here to stay and is becoming inexpensive. GM is putting electric motors in their SUV transmissions next year, that will result in 25% better city fuel economy with reduced emissions and even better performance than the all gas equivalent.

Firefly batteries have shrunk the size of a cheap battery pack in less than 1/2. 1/2 the size means 1/2 the "toxic" chemicals. Recuperative electric motors save where and tear on brakes and everything is being packaged so tightly, there is almost no downside (except for added complexity...but then none of us are exactly driving '55 chevies around, are we?.)

Flex fuel on the other hand is a joke. Without government subsidies, noone would use ethanol in a car degigned for 87 octane, unless he was a moonshiner.

[bygolly]

I think everything in life is governed by "The Universal Law of Pessimism", that being

"Anything that is good for you is bad for you"!

[supercat]

You can Add 10 to 15% E85 to 87 octane and have more octane than 91 octane gas, for less money. Your gas mileage will drop 10-15% vs. 91 octane, so the it will likely endup costing MORE + the added hassle of mixing it yourself.

Around here, E-85 is about $0.30 cheaper than 87 octane, and about $0.50 cheaper than 91 octane. So if a 15% E85 mixture would work with only a 10%-15% fuel efficiency loss versus 91 octane gasoline, that would seem a net win (if I had a car that required 91 octane, that is, and if I didn't mind depriving other tax payers of $0.50 for each gallon of E-85 I buy).

[Rate_Determining_Step]

Ya, good point. Although I applaud the E85 efforts and anything they can learn will help, I don't think it's a do-able solution. I AM for keeping the balls-to-the-wall in the development of some sort of alternative.

For us "hot rodders", think about it. I'd gladly drive a hybrid/E85/fusion/whatever knowing that good 'ol Texas can easily supply the "good stuff" for Sunday drives in the turbo gas car.

Sending those SOBs back to stone age for good is high on my list of priorities! Go alternatives!

[Enduring Freedom]

If ethanol has the potential to displace Middle East oil imports in America, even if we must process ethanol refinery by nuclear energy, it will be worth it.

Your life may depend on it.

But any winning energy idea must:

1. Allow cheap conversion of existing automotive engines;
2. Never let drivers get stranded without fuel stations close by;
3. Have reasonable cost, mileage and performance equivalence to gasoline;
4. Permit the infrastructure of new fuel stations to grow over time.

New flex-fuel engines, a cheap conversion to existing gasoline engines, are available RIGHT NOW.

Flex-fuel engines ALREADY CAN alternate between gasoline and E85 fuel at the flick of a switch.

Welcome to the future.

And say goodbye, Mohammad.

[Fledermaus]

I priced a few hybrids over regular cars and most are between $6-8K more.

At 12,000 miles a year and IF you get 15 mpg more with a hyrbid AND gas is at a high of $3 a gallon it would take between 13-15 years to recoup the cost in fuel savings. Much longer at a lower per gallon price.

And you'll probably have to replace the batteries at least once during that time if you even bother to keep the car that long since after then years you'd be over 120,000 miles.

[gleeaikin]

A "blood for oil" line may be naive, but I would much rather not be buying fuel that may be helping to finance Osama bin Laden. Also without all that oil money there wouldn't be so much being spent on madrassas and exporting radical Islam all over the world. So just remember, every time you fill up an oversized vanity vehicle with gasoline you are supporting these activities.