RON430

Ethanol E85 fuel loses cost-benefit test to diesel

By James R. Healey, USA TODAY
Anything's better than ethanol blend E85, even ordinary gasoline, a new cost-benefit analysis of alternative fuels by researcher John Graham at the Pardee Rand Graduate School finds.

Diesels scored highest, surprising even the researchers. "We were kind of expecting that hybrids would outperform diesels when we went into the study. It's close, but the advanced diesel" provides better performance and fuel economy for the price, he says.

Compared to gasoline, a driver could spend as much as $1,600 more on fuel over a vehicle's life burning E85, a mix of 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline, Graham calculates, while a diesel could save as much as $2,300.

Diesels are just creeping back into the USA as automakers introduce clean-burning models that meet new pollution rules.

The study, which Graham plans to discuss today at a National Academy of Sciences roundtable in Washington, undercuts E85 at a time Detroit automakers are lobbying Congress for ethanol-supportive legislation and fuel-economy credits for building E85-compatible vehicles.

General Motors (GM) and Ford Motor, (F) both pro-ethanol, are among companies that support the Rand school. "They aren't crazy about the results," Graham says.

The study also comes just as ethanol organizations are ramping up promotion of so-called intermediate blends of ethanol fuel, such as E20 — 20% ethanol and 80% gasoline — that they say could safely be used in conventional vehicles. Automakers currently limit regular vehicles to E10 blends, saying heavier concentrations of ethanol could damage fuel systems.

"Do we jump from E10 to E85? That's not a logical leap. That's why we're looking at these intermediate blends," says Brian Jennings, executive vice president at the American Coalition for Ethanol.

Graham's team calculated the individual and societal costs and benefits of conventional gasoline vehicles, gasoline-electric hybrids, high-tech diesels and flex-fuel vehicles burning E85 full time. Conclusion: Unless gasoline prices, averaging $3.10 a gallon now, rise above $4 and average $3.50 or more the next few years, or ethanol prices drop a lot, diesel's the best overall solution; E85's the worst.

Ethanol has less than 70% of the energy of gasoline, so more ethanol in the blend means fewer miles per gallon. Adjusted for lower energy content, E85 averaged about $3.25, AAA reported Thursday.

Drawbacks outweigh the high marks ethanol gets for adding almost nothing to the cost of a vehicle modified to burn E85 and for energy independence, Graham's team concluded. Ethanol is made from grain, mainly corn.

Graham, dean at school in Santa Monica, Calif., earlier worked at the U.S. Office of Management and Budget and founded the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis.

RON430

Quite a few stories in the Wall Street Journal in the last few weeks about how the worst bet on energy this year was on Ethanol. There is some legislation in DC that would force more ethanol usage. Might have a tough time passing this year.

SLegacy99

Ethanol is stupid.

Not too crazy about diesel right now. Regular is $3.10 here. Diesel is $3.69. Last time I checked, a Prius was $1000 cheaper than a Jetta TDI. And bigger.

RON430

I tried to go to the Rand site and get a better version of the story but didn't have much luck, might be the internet. I was curious where the hybrids finished in this. Obviously the assumptions going forward are a big part. Out her in Cali, the difference between premium and diesel isn't as big as yours. Maybe ten cents a gallon and diesel has actually been cheaper than premium at times. Hard to say what they based their study on without reading the actual report.

JessePS

rofl hope it doesn't get pass. honestly more money should be in bio-diesel or fuel cell stuff and not on E85. If I remember correctly. It is even worst for the environment.

RON430

While personally I feel that a good energy policy is needed, I have to agree with you here. Gov needs to be careful to get in the way of markets. "Green" is being so abused lately that it had become meaningless. More indepth studies about what ethanol production means to the rest of the ecology and things like water usage are not flattering. If ethanol in any proportion is a viable economic solution, let the market decide. There is a fine line between government's role in providing us with energy and buggering the whole thing up with subsidies for technologies that aren't viable. Just a waste of our money.

Bean

iTrader: (1)

Ethanol is most certainly not green and the decreased gas mileage offset any perceived cost-benefit over gas or diesel. I do like the idea of big turbo Supras and other vehicles running E85 and being able to run insane boost levels on the gas

Biodiesel should be pushed hardcore; a city waste program would be nice; it would help with a major amount of polluters (large trucks).

Fuel-celled vehicles should be pushed and researched as the tech for the future; finding an easy source of hydrogen is still in the works though.

In the mean time, gas and diesel hybrids should be getting released

RON430

The article hinted at looking at a lot of other things than just mileage for the cost benefit analysis. Let's be honest, one of the hardest things to do, even for car nuts, is to really figure out what propulsion/vehicle is the best choice to reduce fuel costs. It is a lot easier to just go for performance. But once you start to figure out the entire operating costs, life gets complicated. I think we are going to see premiums for increased mileage slowly whittle down, it is hard to justify a higher MPG vehicle if you pay more for the option than you will save in gas. The high tech diesels and diesel hybrids are just another option for us consumers. Choice is good.

Lexmex

Ethanol would never get used in Mexico where I live (and where corn had its birthplace in southern Mexico) as tortilla prices (our staple food here) would jump and the people would raise a huge ruckus.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

I don't care if it's green, blue, or red, but if it lowers our dependence on foreign oil I'm all for it.

mmarshall

I'm with bit on this one........and like RON430 said, you have to look at just more than just straight cost per mile benefit numbers.

I've always been a fan of both diesel (especially the new low-sulfur diesel fuels) AND ethanol. Diesel fuel, in general, beats gas-electric hybrids like the Prius and Civic because it offers roughly comparable mileage with a MUCH less complex drivetrain......and without the environmental questions of disposing of used battery packs. It also avoids the hazards of having the big battery pack right over the rear fuel tank. In an severe rear-end impact, the LAST you want is sparks from a damaged battery pack right next to a ruptured fuel tank...it would be get out the marshmallows for sure.

Ethanol, of course, doesn't offer much in the way of mileage (only 50-60%, on the average, of what gasoline offers) so you have to have roughly twice as large a tank to get the same cruising range, but it offers many other advantages to compansate. It burns extremely clean, so much so that its blue flame is nearly invisible, and with no smoke...you could have an engine fire and not realize it. But, of course, it keeps the inside of the engine, fuel system, and spark plugs clean enough to eat off of. It asborbs moisture like a sponge, so you usually don't get gas-line freeze-up or water/ice building up in the fuel tank. It also has a lower vapor pressure than gas, and is less likely to catch fire in an accident. it has extremely high octane for good engine performance without spark pinging. And the ultra-clean burning characteristics make it easy for cars to meet emission requirements with little or no anti-pollution hardware on the engine or exhaust system.

And Indy/F1 racing seems to agree.....decades ago, after the diastrous fiery crash at the 1964 Indy 500 (I saw it as a young kid), that type of racing changed from gasoline to alcohol and fuel-bladders instread of metal tanks, and has stayed with alcohol ever since.

doug_999

I think this is one of the reasons our gov wants to push E85 so much. Of course I'm sure the farm lobbyists have absolutely nothing to do with it as well