"May Contain up to 10% Ethanol"

Over the last few months, all the gas stations in my area have quit selling
pure gas-- just the adulterated stuff. You can't find 100% petrol any more.

As the percentage of alcohol in my tank ('07 Accord V6 EX-L sedan)
increased, my mileage decreased-- consistently 10%-12% less than it used to
be on the same 400 mile round trip I make on the interstate 2-3 times a
month. Used to get in the low 30's-- now get in high 20's....

Is this the great "fool the public" scam or what-- paying for adulterated
fuel that doesn't give you full value??

 

the bit i like is actually paying /more/ for the privilege of this lower
energy/lower mileage gasoline!

 

Don't worry Obama is going to change all that. Or at least that's what I
thought I heard him say in a commercial. And we all know that politicians
always tell the truth.

 

I don't know where you live, but the addition of ethanol may be a government
mandate. It is also possible the price of the fuel is lower than it would
have been for 100% gasoline (but I don't know how you would tell, since the
price of gasoline fluctuates on a daily basis). I am surprised you are
claiming a 10%+ reduction in fuel economy. A small reduction is usual.
Theoretically ethanol has about 85% of the energy in gasoline. So a 90%
gasoline/10% ethanol blend should have about 98.5% as much energy as 100%
gasoline. Assuming your car is operating properly, the fuel economy should
only go down by at most 3%. Older, carbureted cars, can have real problems
with 10% ethanol fuels, but modern fuel injected cars as new as your should
handle it easily with a minimal effect on fuel economy. In some cases the
reduction is even less that would be predicted by the reduction in energy
content because the ethanol tainted fuel sometimes has a higher octane
rating than 100% regular gasoline, which allows the engines PCM to advance
the timing and partially compensate for the lower energy content by
increasing the engine's efficiency slightly.

At any rate, the fuel is what it is. It is not "adulterated." If the
addition of ethanol is mandated by the government, you can't blame the fuel
dealers. If it isn't, then you need to shop around for 100% gasoline
(whatever that is - since gasoline itself is a blend of numerous compounds).

I suspect if you keep careful records, you will find you mileage has not
decreased by 10%. As for the price, unless you can find 100% gasoline in
your area, how do you know that they aren't charging less for the E10 than
for 100% gasoline?

Ed

 

No one ever tried to market the 10% Ethanol fuel as better than pure
petrol. It's only because of the federal tax credit that it's being used
as an octane enhancer (other than in states where it's being used as an
alternative to MTBE).

 

Middle America and Southern Democrats are not going to vote for a
black guy.

 

They vote for black guys all the time. The Dixiecrats aren't voting for
Obama, but they didn't vote for a white Catholic North easterner either.

It'll all come down to Ohio and Florida again. Obama probably needs one
of them to win, while McCain needs both. However this time there are a
lot more formerly red states as toss-ups than in the past, so it's
conceivable that Obama could win without Ohio and Florida.

As of now, without toss-up states, and Ohio and Florida going to McCain,
Obama is barely ahead at 273-265.

"http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/?map=10"

With toss up states it's Obama 228, McCain 174, and 136 toss up.

"http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/?map=5"

Obama should have chosen a Jewish Cuban woman from Florida as his
running mate. Maybe McCain will do just that.

Hopefully people will begin to get mad at what the Republicans are doing
to the U.S..

 

Obama is going to fix that too? We will be lucky to have cars if tha
jack-ass gets elected.
Scot

-
Message posted using http://www.talkaboutautos.com/group/alt.autos.honda
More information at http://www.talkaboutautos.com/faq.htm

 

that's not true. when ethanol mix first came out, the oilco propaganda
was all about "higher octane", which is technically true, but highly
misleading since octane != energy content.

it's not being used for that - it's being used to lower energy content,
and thus decrease mileage, all while being subsidized to do so courtesy
of the tax payer. you can bet your sweet a$$ the oilco's would be up in
arms if ethanol was somehow to their disadvantage.

 

I am convinced unhappily that after the last few years of our economy being
looted by both Dems and Reps, bankers, real estate speculators, oil cos, oil
speculators, various mobsters (domestic and international), lunatic
terrorists and the military/industrial complex, that our prospects as free
citizens are not so good right now. We have voted for and elected crooks and
morons since 1968. Ron Paul is my Congressman so I'm hoping we'll be OK for
a time, while the rest of of the USA circles the drain. There is a good
chance that we Texans are just as naive as the rest of the flock. Bless us
all.............

 

That there's an mileage hit is incidental to everything else surrounding
ethanol.

As a general rule, refiners and retailers refused to use ethanol until
it was forced on them, and until the government made ethanol cheaper for
the oil companies to buy by taking money out of your pocket to give to
them.

It was forced on the refiners originally by environmental lobby group
pressure, and very lately, by the farm lobby and by companies that
benefit from the consequences of government regulations (think ADM). Now
it's national security that's also supposed to be a reason for ethanol
mandates.

The refiners and retailers can't use TEL, MMT or MTBE anymore. There's
not much left after that, at least not at an acceptable price.

Ethanol is extremely expensive both as an additive and a fuel, in
addition to the storage problems its corrosiveness causes. With
considerable price pressure having driven most of the margin out of
motor fuels, refiners and retailers usually wait until everybody is
pushed into the same boat, so they all face the same costs.

TEL and MMT have little effect on the energy content of gasoline because
they're added in such small amounts. MTBE and ethanol, on the other
hand, are added in very large amounts, displacing gasoline in the mix.
Add to that the fact that ethanol is partially oxidized to begin with,
and you lose lots of usable energy.

 

Congress and the then President passed the law ultimately
requiring a certain amount of ethanol in some parts of the
U.S., all in an effort to reduce air pollution, which it
does. One can blame only one's own choices in voting.

Those unhappy with having to buy an ethanol blend of
gasoline need to read reports of how awful the air was in
certain parts of the country prior to the Clean Air Act.

 

Yes, that's how lobby groups act; they get laws and regulations passed,
thereby using the power of the state to effect their desired changes.

I always liked H. L. Mencken's famous quote, "Democracy is the theory that
the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."

The thing is, all three monitored pollutants were already drastically
reduced (~90%) well before ethanol became common.

Oxygenates (as MTBE) were originally intended to lower carbon monoxide
emissions, and were first added in Colorado in the '70s or '80s. Ethanol is
just another oxygenate, and a damned difficult one at that.

MTBE was at first mandated, then prohibited on the basis of groundwater
contamination. Since just about all underground tanks are (by law) now
double-hulled, have very elaborate leak detection systems, and are now non-
metallic, maybe it's time to phase MTBE back in. The corn lobby and ADM
won't be happy, but just watch food prices fall.

 

You see lobbyists making laws. I see members of Congress,
the President, and those who elect them doing so.

We disagree.

 

So i skipped all the politics, and to answer the question.

My friends civic use to get 400+ miles to teh tank its first few weeks
and it slowly went down as it wore in. after a year he was doing mid
300s and it stayed there ever since. that might be ur case too, or
maybe not.

 

Hopefully people will begin to get mad at what the Republicans are doing

Begin? They're not upset yet? If they voted for this moron, they got what
they asked for.
If McCain wins and gets his way we may get all we want for $6-7 per gallon.

 

After they have been paid off by lobbyists.



He's right except in a very few pollution prone cities.

So the politicos just throw out the baby(s) with the bath water and make
us all pay...

JT

 

Uh, if it was a new car, the mileage should go up as the car "wears in."

JT

(Who's turdbox '83 Civic goes over 400 miles in mixed driving on a 10.6
gallon tank)

 

<giggle>

I can promise you if O'bammy 'n gang get in, insane Al Gore 'n company
will have firm footholds in the new admin and higher gas prices will be
a certainty.

After all, it is the dems that have fiercely resisted new oil
exploration, nuclear plants etc.

Yep, youse got you doo doo together awright...

 

Yep. If there's a governmental tit to suck on, the lobbyists will be right
in there like little piglets attacking a sow. ADM didn't get all the spoils
they did by sitting on their hands.

Even pollution-prone cities experienced significant reductions in monitored
pollutants prior to ethanol. Computerized fuel injection, oxygen sensors
and 3-way cats did all that.

OBD-II and ethanol have created only very small gains compared to the major
advances already achieved by 1991.

And remember that gasoline-powered automobiles are only one source of
pollution. Other major sources with at least as great an effect on
pollutant levels (if not greater) are coal and oil fired electricity
generating plants and diesel engines.