Barney Gaylord wrote:
> Before you get too excited about switching to alcohol fuel, keep in
> mind that alcohol has about one half the energy content of gasoline,
> so you neeed to use twice as much of it for the same power production
> and travel distance. When 90/10 gasohol gives 5% less fuel economy
> you might not notice. But when 85/15 fuel gives 42.5% less economy,
> and you need 74% more of it, you will notice. Your 27 mpg MG would
> suddenly be getting 15.5 mpg running on E85. A 15 mpg sport utility
> might go down to about 8.6 mpg on E85..
>
>
I'm not sure how current your numbers are, I looked into a Tahoe (which
is FFV) last year. It gets about 2 mpg worse mpg on E85 then on straight
gas. So, you do burn more, but you make up the savings at the pump. Do
do l lose a little range. (with a 30 gallon tank though, it doesn't
matter for commuting.) http://www.e85fuel.com has a good FAQ that is
worth reading if you are interested in alternate fuels.
Other articles I have read attribute the reduced MPG to the vehicles not
being designed for strictly for the higher octane fuels. The FFVs still
have to be able to run on lower octane gas (85 here in Colorado.) They
say that you get better MPG on an engine built for a slower burning 110
octane e85 fuel.
> If a substantial portion of motor fuel use was switched to E85 it
> would recuce the world demand for oil, somewhat. If successful this
> might bring the price of gasoline back to $2/gallon in the U.S. Then
> you would have to be able to buy alcohol for $1/gallon at a time when
> there would be increasing demand for it. Good luck there.
>
>
But who gets the pay check?
> A wholesale switch to E85 in North America has to have a greater
> cause than the price of fuel. Reduction of reliance on foreign
> supply of oil may be a driving factor. Increase of total world fuel
> supply could help a little. Reduction of polution would likely be
> near nil, as modern cars are phenominally clean already, and you
> would be burning twice as much alcohol as gasoline for the amount you
> are substituting.
>
Some of the other thoughts on this are that the C02 released from e85 is
consumed in growing the next crop of fuel. The CO2 released from fossil
fuels had been trapped for thousands of years and is being re-introduced
with no plans for consumption.
The problems I see with it are mostly with making it generally
available. There are ~12 stations in CO, none near me. I have also read
that the gas separates out if you try to pipe it, so it has to be
trucked. I don't have a car new enough to be an FFV, if I did, I would
consider the drive to the pump to support it.
--
Andrew
|