Gasoline may get higher octane -- and price
04-27-2017, 11:55 AM
#21
Drifting
Don't you think that a standardization on 93 octane would reduce costs compared to all the different octanes now being pumped around the country in the pipelines(and stored at the local terminals).
Currently, we have 85, 87, 89 and 91 octane gas pipelined into our local terminal. Then we have 87, 89, 91 and 93 trucked from our local pipeline terminal to our local retailers.
Currently, we have 85, 87, 89 and 91 octane gas pipelined into our local terminal. Then we have 87, 89, 91 and 93 trucked from our local pipeline terminal to our local retailers.
04-27-2017, 11:56 AM
#22
Drifting
A local retailer(Top Tier) was selling 91 ethanol free gasoline at all their stations. Then without notice, they reduced the number of stations selling ethanol free gasoline and some were now selling E10.
The station closest to me changed from ethanol free to E10 without any notice, and I thought I was putting ethanol free gasoline into my 1956 and 1964 Corvettes. Guess what, the E10 screwed up the carbs in both vehicles, that don't get driven very much. Both were gummed up and had to be rebuilt. For years(15+), when I was putting ethanol free gasoline in those two cars, I never had a problem.
On my riding mower, I drain the gas tank and then run it dry before putting it away for the winter(after I change the oil), thus I haven't had a problem running E10 in it.
If the ethanol creates no problems, then why don't you explain to the readers why the pipelines do not ship gas with ethanol added to it at the refinery, but instead, ship the ethanol separately to the local terminals to be added to the tank truck when it is filled for immediate delivery to the retailers.
The station closest to me changed from ethanol free to E10 without any notice, and I thought I was putting ethanol free gasoline into my 1956 and 1964 Corvettes. Guess what, the E10 screwed up the carbs in both vehicles, that don't get driven very much. Both were gummed up and had to be rebuilt. For years(15+), when I was putting ethanol free gasoline in those two cars, I never had a problem.
On my riding mower, I drain the gas tank and then run it dry before putting it away for the winter(after I change the oil), thus I haven't had a problem running E10 in it.
If the ethanol creates no problems, then why don't you explain to the readers why the pipelines do not ship gas with ethanol added to it at the refinery, but instead, ship the ethanol separately to the local terminals to be added to the tank truck when it is filled for immediate delivery to the retailers.
As to the pipeline issue, the problem is that while normally free of liquid water, screw ups sometimes allow water in. If that happens, small amounts of that water will dissolve in the gas, even ethanol free gas. Ethanol makes the problem worse because more water will dissolve in gas that contains ethanol. Ethanol doesn’t make a screw up more likely, and thus the odds your gas will have water are no higher with ethanol. But if it does have water, there will be more of it if the gas has ethanol. Being conservative, the oil industry feared ethanol in the early days, and put pretty severe restrictions on how it should be blended, due to potentially large water-related problems. But in a practical sense, it hasn’t proven to be a big problem. In fact, demo sections of various pipelines are now allowing ethanol, and it wouldn’t surprise me if a few years down the road, the restrictions are lifted.
Remember as you read the above that I don’t like ethanol either. It makes no economic sense, does not reduce pollution, and until or unless cellulosic ethanol becomes truly viable, is only renewable in the eyes of the farm lobby. Thus I think those who oppose it should focus attention on its real shortcomings (bad economics and lack of compensating environmental benefits) rather than theoretical objections which have not proven to be serious issues in actual practice.
04-27-2017, 01:10 PM
#23
Team Owner
Cars and small engines built before about 1990 can have fuel system components (tanks, lines, etc) that are incompatible with ethanol. Certain types of plastic and rubber in such old equipment can partially dissolve, leading to gum downstream of that point. Also, anything with a carburetor set to run ethanol free will run lean on gas containing ethanol. So if you have a mixture adjustment screw, you should open it up a bit for gas containing ethanol. But any cars or small engines less than about 25 years old should be perfectly ok on gas with ethanol.
As to the pipeline issue, the problem is that while normally free of liquid water, screw ups sometimes allow water in. If that happens, small amounts of that water will dissolve in the gas, even ethanol free gas. Ethanol makes the problem worse because more water will dissolve in gas that contains ethanol. Ethanol doesn’t make a screw up more likely, and thus the odds your gas will have water are no higher with ethanol. But if it does have water, there will be more of it if the gas has ethanol. Being conservative, the oil industry feared ethanol in the early days, and put pretty severe restrictions on how it should be blended, due to potentially large water-related problems. But in a practical sense, it hasn’t proven to be a big problem. In fact, demo sections of various pipelines are now allowing ethanol, and it wouldn’t surprise me if a few years down the road, the restrictions are lifted.
Remember as you read the above that I don’t like ethanol either. It makes no economic sense, does not reduce pollution, and until or unless cellulosic ethanol becomes truly viable, is only renewable in the eyes of the farm lobby. Thus I think those who oppose it should focus attention on its real shortcomings (bad economics and lack of compensating environmental benefits) rather than theoretical objections which have not proven to be serious issues in actual practice.
As to the pipeline issue, the problem is that while normally free of liquid water, screw ups sometimes allow water in. If that happens, small amounts of that water will dissolve in the gas, even ethanol free gas. Ethanol makes the problem worse because more water will dissolve in gas that contains ethanol. Ethanol doesn’t make a screw up more likely, and thus the odds your gas will have water are no higher with ethanol. But if it does have water, there will be more of it if the gas has ethanol. Being conservative, the oil industry feared ethanol in the early days, and put pretty severe restrictions on how it should be blended, due to potentially large water-related problems. But in a practical sense, it hasn’t proven to be a big problem. In fact, demo sections of various pipelines are now allowing ethanol, and it wouldn’t surprise me if a few years down the road, the restrictions are lifted.
Remember as you read the above that I don’t like ethanol either. It makes no economic sense, does not reduce pollution, and until or unless cellulosic ethanol becomes truly viable, is only renewable in the eyes of the farm lobby. Thus I think those who oppose it should focus attention on its real shortcomings (bad economics and lack of compensating environmental benefits) rather than theoretical objections which have not proven to be serious issues in actual practice.
I wish that Trump would get rid of the ethanol mandate but at this time it doesn't look to good. I guess he is afraid he might **** off Iowa and then not pick up any support from the greenies(LOL) to offset that loss.
Cruz was the only candidate that mentioned getting rid of ethanol.
At least there are more retailers that are selling ethanol free gasoline every month that goes by.
The best way to get rid of ethanol is for the end user to ask their retailers to start selling ethanol free gasoline. Most can(even in Texas) if they have support from their customers. Even though my DD Mercedes and my Z06 will run okay on E10, I support my local retailers(and those retailers I find on road trips) by buying ethanol free gasoline when ever possible)and I am willing to pay more, as I do. The additional cost isn't putting me in the poorhouse.
The following users liked this post:
fnbrowning (04-27-2017)
04-27-2017, 07:18 PM
#24
Team Owner
If the ethanol creates no problems, then why don't you explain to the readers why the pipelines do not ship gas with ethanol added to it at the refinery, but instead, ship the ethanol separately to the local terminals to be added to the tank truck when it is filled for immediate delivery to the retailers.
