ethanol vs reg gasoline?

Question

I have a avalanche truck which I am able to use Ethanol in. I was so excited with the high gas prices. What a relief. NOT REALLY!!! It is a lot nicer to fill my tank for about 20 bucks less, BUT I get the worst Mileage when I use it. I would rather pay for the expensive fuel, and get better mileage. I know it is better for the environment....but I cant fill up 2 to my 1 time just for that. Any suggestions?

Answer 1

The latest study from the U.S. Dept of Energy from 2006 proves that ethanol yields 77% more energy than it takes to produce. In addition several ethanol plants in the midwest are now being run on wind power and they are burning cow manure to generate the electricity for the plant. CornPlus in Winnebago, MN is 1 such plant. 45% of the electricty to the plant comes from wind, which both increases the net energy yield of ethanol and also adds black ink to their bottom line. They saved $500,000 last year alone in reduced natural gas expenses. They are also less vulnerable to spikes in natural gas prices. More ethanol plants are likely to going to follow suit for no other reason than saving money. In addition, Panda Ethanol and E3 systems in NE are two additional plants which burn biomass and cow manure to accomodate their plants power needs. Zero fossil fuels are used at these plants to produce ethanol. So not only is the energy yield hugely positive but there is no pollution or emissions to produce the ethanol. Many ethanol plants are going to wind energy, eliminating fossil fuel usage in production and lowering the price of ethanol. Right now ethanol only displaces only about 4% of our fuel supply. But plants are being constructed all over and by 2020 ethanol plants should be able to displace about 25% of our fuel supply. Consumers drive the demand. If people use ethanol they create demand for it and more plants and fueling stations will pop-up. It's up to us to choose clean burning, renewable, American-made ethanol over foreign oil in our cars. Ethanol reduces the trade deficit and recycles carbon, unlike oil which spews tons of trapped carbon from beneath the earth's surface into the air.

Answer 2

Let's see 1. How efficient is ethanol in comparison to gasoline? Ethanol is a gasoline additive, not replacing gasoline. So i am not sure if you can compare the two. 2. Will ethanol have any lasting effects on our environment or is it a better choice? Adding Ethanol, 10% ratio in gasoline when dispensed from a gas station, the only effect on environment is we are using Corn instead of all Gasoline. Car exhaust is still the same Carbon components that were their before Ethanol was added. 3. What is the ratio of the cost of ethanol and regular gas prices (actual prices). I am not sure about the prices, but in DC area, 10% Ethanol is added to the gasoline. 4. What are the negative aspects to using ethanol? Only Negative Aspect is with growing Ethanol demand, the Price of Corn will go up. 5. Is it ready for widespread use? It is being used widespread alreay as fuel additive.

Answer 3

From an environmental point of view Corn ethanol does release less toxins into the air when burnt but your catalyst should take car of most of them and it may or may not reduce CO2 emissions (that is actually debatable). Ethanol from Sugar Cane along with Biodiesel do actually reduce CO2 emissions but you shouldn't even consider putting Biodiesel in a petrol engine and sugar cane ethanol is mainly used in Brazil so you probably aren't putting any of that in your engine. The starvation issue is also an important one and a good reason not to bother with biofuels (synthetic fuels are probably the way to go in the future) because to feed everyone on this planet we're going to need everything we can producing food and that means we need all the land that is used to grow edible food growing food not fuel (and growing food at higher productivity than conventional farms get, thus genetic engineering).

As for the higher fuel consumption, that is because ethanol has a lower energy content than petrol, though you shouldn't be filling up twice as often.

Note: The product that Sinnary mentions doesn't work, see http://www.fuelsaving.info/ffi.htm... for why, no matter how many questions it gets spammed to (I'd say the person with the Sinnary ID is an MLM distributor trying to drum up some business).

Answer 4

I agree with the first answer. Ethanol production is from non-organic farms that deplete topsoil and contaminate water and air with chemical pesticides, etc. The energy it takes to produce ethanol is also wasteful.

Veggie oil is more sustainable if from recycled veggie oil sources. Both non-recycled and recycled veggie oil don't directly contribute to carbon emissions, but non-recycled veggie oil, like ethanol, indirectly contributes to pollution and carbon emissions in unsustainable agriculture to produce the fuel, and also may use GMO crops. The burning of all veggie oils does however still pollute the air with unhealthy particulates.

To convert cars or trucks to veggie oil, you need a model with a diesel engine, like certain VW's and Mercedes.

Electric and plug-in hybrids are part of the answer, especially if powered from wind or solar sources. They don't put a burden on the already troubled state of agriculture and are quiet and clean.

Then there's driving less, biking, walking, and public trans when and if you can.

Answer 5

I have been reading up on alternative fuels and from what I have learned bio-diesel seems like a better way to go.

Flex fuel cars can use ethanol with up to 15% alcohol that still leaves 85% fossil fuel. Bio diesel can be 100% bio.

The problem is that North American cars are mostly gas engines and we don't have much biodiesel production so we're forced to use fossil fuels.

Answer 6

Ethanol not only costs more to create, but causes terrible mileage. I don't know how congress bought into the whole ethanol mess.

Now it's causing the price of food to go up, so we're worse off now than before.

Answer 7

I've done research on fueling vehicles, even studied bio-diesel a bit. My husband owns a trucking business and when gas prices skyrocketed, we had to downsize.

I then found a product and we've been using it for about 8 months now. We buy it wholesale so we also can retail the product from our own website. Between my husband's 3 trucks and our 2 family vehicles, we save about $300/month on fuel and reduce emissions from our vehicles by 75%. So, I feel really good about the product. You can read more about it on my husband's website.

We've been pleasantly pleased with it and have introduced the product to several people who are also happy.

Sinnary

Answer 8

you buy an avalanche then worry about the mileage. if you want to drive that kind of vehicle then you should just suck it up and pay for the expensive fuel!

Answer 9

There is one solution which is almost never addressed, and that is the way we build our communities. Most suburban sprawl is very inefficient and consumes huge amounts of energy because you have to drive EVERYWHERE! Even the typical shopping area, made up of a scattering of stores isolated ina sea of parking lots, is not a pedestrian environment at all, you usually have to get in your car to drive to the next store which should be within walking distance but isnt for some idiotic reason. In addition, the housing subdivisions with only a single entrance and no through streets contribute to huge traffic jams where you sit in your car and burn fuel without getting anywhere. The planning for efficiency and livability is non existant in most places, and most architects are completely clueless on how to create walking environments in our newer communities. Driving more efficient cars is only treating a sympton. Making it so we DONT have to drive most places is a real solution.

Answer 10

It takes 2 to 3 gal. of ethanol to go the same distance as 1 gal. of gasoline. It also costs more to produce.
Why be "nice" to the 'environment', when it doesn't give a crap what you do? You should have lived 50 years ago when REAL air pollution really was around. It STILL wasn't as bad as the 'environmental cases' said it was back then.