anyone seen this?
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/AP-sou...95536.html?x=0

Could be announced today.

 

it's only approved for 07 and newer cars. so there will probably be an e15 pump and a regular pump. it'll probably be similar to how some stations have e85 pumps now for flex fuel cars.

 

Will this effect performance in anyway?

 

that reads as if it will be a additional option for fuel if the station wants to carry it. so dont put it into any car, fuel economy will be less and most likely it will cost a little less. what it will do just like the 10% now is have a effect on water in the system and its effect on rubber etc. it is your best bet to add marine formula stabil into the tank and keep her filled up. it is not so much the ethanol in the car but what it does to other parts in the car that hurts

 

Any car built within the last 15 years or so will be fine. That's when they started putting 10% ethanol in gas. Car manufacturers switched to ethanol friendly gaskets, hoses, etc. Before that, ethanol could dissolve some rubber parts in engines.

It's higher octane, but you won't notice a difference in performance. You'll get slightly less mpg. But ethanol is cheaper than gasoline, so it evens out.

 

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/US-Sai...&asset=&ccode=

 

The problem is that the use of ethanol, which markedly reduces fuel mileage, butts up in direct contrast to the upcoming CAFE laws in 2015, which mandate INCREASED fuel mileage, not less. E85 vehicles and pure-alcohol (E100) vehicles, like many of those in Brazil, suffer the greatest mileage-drop, but increasing the ethanol content from E10 to E15 will also have a slight but noticeable effect (ethanol generally has about 40-50% less BTU energy per gallon than conventional gasoline, vastly decreasing mileage and requring much larger fuel tanks for the same cruising range).

Besides that obvious legal problem, another potential one arises at the pumps....how do the authorities plan to separate the refilling of E10 (for older, pre-2007 cars), from the new E15 fuel for those newer than 2007? You can't change the size/shape of the fuel-filler nozzle at the pumps, like you did back in the 1970's, for leaded/low-lead and unleaded fuel, because the size/shape of the gas-filler-pipes on new cars didn't change back in 2007 like they did in 1975 with caltaytic-converters and unleaded fuel........this new E15 requirement obviously wasn't anticipated back in 2007. With the way that 2007-2011 vehicles are designed, it will be very easy to put E10 into them, or to put E15 into older, pre-2007 cars......which might (?) cause fuel-system damage in those older models (and maybe even newer ones as well). You could (?) separate the E10 from the E15 by using differently-marked gas pumps....but that still would allow cross-mixing the fuels in older-vs.-newer cars, because the filler-pipes are the same width/shape. Another possibility, of course, is doing away with E10 altogether (which, I suspect, is the real intention down the line), but that would be unacceptable for the millions of engines already out there designed to run on E10, not E15.

Unfortunately, this is the kind of stuff that happens when legislators and bureaucrats start making up regulations without thinking first.

 

and you know they'll be above 15% mixes here and there....

 

THIs fuel they state is only recommened for cars 2007 and up not the past 15 years and even at that the long term effects are not known .i have a 2008 and i am not using it

 

United Nations Special Rapportuer Jean Ziegler on biofuels: Biofuels is a "crime against humanity".

IMHO, we cannot ignore that there are cons as well to producing and using biofuels (with the food-for-fuel issue being the most alarming). So unless there are better innovations, R&D, technology, improvements, reduction and/or elimination of impact on food resources, then I believe that there should be caution with regards to adherence of biofuels........and not just go gung-ho and use and worship it like it's our ultimate savior from crude oil.

Btw, I'm not against biofuels in any way. I appreciate the introduction of biofuels and it gives us at least more choices as opposed to only being forced to live with 100% crude oil. Unfortunately, as mentioned, there are some cons and risks with its usage. Hence, there is a need to take and approach these with open mind and with caution and look into alleviate any cons and risks first.

Unfortunately, with the pro-biofuel lobbies being very strong, it's really hard to exercise some caution and achieve balanced and equitable perspective on this.

 

This legislation is not about alternative fuels or preserving the environment. It's about funneling even more cash into Archer Daniels Midland. According to Common Cause, ADM contributes millions in "soft money" to political candidates of all stripes. They are obviously funding this legislation, that if passed, will not only increase the cost of gasoline and potentially damage our automobiles, it will also complete with the food on our tables as corn prices soar. It's already happened in Mexico where traditional corn tortillas have doubled in price in the past two years.

 

I'm not for ethanol what so ever.

Thankfully most people in the Northeast seem to agree as well because there's only one E85 pump in the entire Boston area.

 

I hope this fails and fails good, this goes against all the greenies in Washington who constantly scream we need to consume less fuel. Go ahead, add more ethanol, watch gas prices rise, watch food costs rise, watch people travel less and spend less because more of their money will go towards necessities which will cost more than before. The people pushing for that legislation should be hung and dipped in a vat of boiling corn oil.

 

and in unrelated news, corn prices continue to go up.

when you do stupid things like make corn compete as both a fuel and food, you create huge imbalances in our own food market. If corn is overplanted then we dont have room for other crops we might need. What if we have a bad harvest in one of these crops? We wont have the crop space to even adapt. One of the most horrible ideas possible.

Brazil actually has a viable ethanol system...based on sugarcane. Sugarcane ethanol production has 3x the the yield of corn ethanol.

 

They approved it for 2007 and newer for now. They're holding off on older cars until they've done longer studies. But they started using ethanol friendly materials in cars about 15 years ago.