Using gas with 10% ethanol

[josesantos]

I have a 2001 honda accord. Wanted to know if it was ok to use gas with 10%ethanol and would there be any long term damaging effects if I did that. I asked a dealership in my area and they said it would not be a problem. However, want to know expert opinions of the people in this group.

Thanks.

 

[Kevin McMurtrie]

I have a 2001 honda accord. Wanted to know if it was ok to use gas with 10%ethanol and would there be any long term damaging effects if I did that. I asked a dealership in my area and they said it would not be a problem. However, want to know expert opinions of the people in this group.

Thanks.

It depends on what the fuel system components are made of. Check the manual. Ethanol blended gas is common so it's probably OK. There are no long term problems using ethanol blends as long as your fuel system is compatible. Generally the milage will drop slightly and the engine will produce less soot with Ethanol blends.

If your manual says Ethanol is OK, don't assume that other alcohols are. The heavier alcohols can be very destructive to organic solids.

 

[QDurham]

There are

no long term problems using ethanol blends as long as your fuel system is compatible. Generally the milage will drop slightly and the engine will produce less soot with Ethanol blends.

All true. However it may be useful to note that Archer Daniels Midland owns about 80% of us corn -- from which alcohol distilled. Further, it takes the heat from about 1.5 gallons of alcohol to distill 1 gallon of alcohol. 50% net loss. And guess where this energy comes from. Electricity. Which comes almost exclusively from burning coal, natural gas, oil -- whatever fossil fuels are locally available. High school chemistry

Quent

 

[Bebop]

I have a 2001 honda accord. Wanted to know if it was ok to use gas with 10%ethanol and would there be any long term damaging effects if I did that. I asked a dealership in my area and they said it would not be a problem. However, want to know expert opinions of the people in this group.

Thanks.

Is not an opton in some cities. All have 10% ethanol.

 

['Curly Q. Links']

I have a 2001 honda accord. Wanted to know if it was ok to use gas with 10%ethanol and would there be any long term damaging effects if I did that. I asked a dealership in my area and they said it would not be a problem. However, want to know expert opinions of the people in this group.

Thanks.

Jose,

It doesn't really matter what the 'experts' in this group say, really. Your owner's manual is the only source for this answer, 'cuz if you obey it's instructions, and something still goes wrong, Honda will have to make it good. If you obey the advice of an Internet 'expert', and damage your engine, who will testify for you in court.

There's some really amazing advice dispensed around here. Some of it is WAY worse than some of the advice you get from your dealership. Stick around and join is in a good laugh.

Just read your manual.

'Curly'

 

[Milleron]

All true. However it may be useful to note that Archer Daniels Midland owns about 80% of us corn -- from which alcohol distilled. Further, it takes the heat from about 1.5 gallons of alcohol to distill 1 gallon of alcohol. 50% net loss. And guess where this energy comes from. Electricity. Which comes almost exclusively from burning coal, natural gas, oil -- whatever fossil fuels are locally available.

Probably coal, maybe gas. Even if ethanol's production requires more energy input than is output, it could still be economical relative to gasoline produced from the distillation of expensive crude. I think there's more to the equation than you have represented.

Ron

 

[QDurham]

Ron wrote in part:> Even if ethanol's production requires more

energy input than is output, it could still be economical relative to gasoline produced from the distillation of expensive crude.

I wonder how refining crude would require more energy than one gets out -- as does alcohol. How many BTUs in to get how many BTUs out. First Law of Thermodynamics --( OK, maybe 2nd or 3rd.)

Quent

 

[George Macdonald]

Probably coal, maybe gas. Even if ethanol's production requires more energy input than is output, it could still be economical relative to gasoline produced from the distillation of expensive crude. I think there's more to the equation than you have represented.

The only "more" to the equation is Mr. Daschle's pork barrel. Ethanol from biomass as a vehicle fuel is non-viable by any measure - the scale is all wrong. In fact the cheapest way to produce ethanol is from ethylene, IOW steam cracking of virgin naphtha which has been distilled from crude petroleum... but then that would not fit the ummm, proposed "green" model.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

 

[Ken (archive)]

Honda will make it good IF the damage becomes evident during the warranty period. Honda's are supposed to last a long time so most years of ownership are AFTER the coverage ends. Who would be able to link the damage to ethanol? What are the chances they will offer a free repair on a 7 year old car?

 

[Milleron]

Ron wrote in part:> Even if ethanol's production requires more

I wonder how refining crude would require more energy than one gets out -- as does alcohol. How many BTUs in to get how many BTUs out. First Law of Thermodynamics --( OK, maybe 2nd or 3rd.)

Quent

Who said that "refining crude would require more energy than one gets out?" And this situation has nothing to do with any of the Laws of Thermodynamics. Energy in vs. energy out is not the principle in question. It's the total cost of producing the final volume of fuel that drives the economic process. If it costs more to produce a gallon of ethanol that it's worth, do you believe that an enlightened manufacturer would continue to produce it?
Ron

 

[George Macdonald]

Who said that "refining crude would require more energy than one gets out?" And this situation has nothing to do with any of the Laws of Thermodynamics. Energy in vs. energy out is not the principle in question. It's the total cost of producing the final volume of fuel that drives the economic process.

Doh? It's kinda simple: if the energy in is more than the energy out the process is not viable.

If it costs more to produce a gallon of ethanol
that it's worth, do you believe that an enlightened manufacturer would continue to produce it?

If he's being subsidized by your tax $$ - YES!!

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

 

[Kevin McMurtrie]

Doh? It's kinda simple: if the energy in is more than the energy out the process is not viable.

If he's being subsidized by your tax $$ - YES!!

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

Ethanol blended gasolines need less anti-pollution processing and additives than pure petroleum gasolines. That can be the cost benefit in areas with strict emissions regulations. MTBE can be extremely expensive when you take into account the environmental damaged caused by leaking tanks.

 

[George Macdonald]

Ethanol blended gasolines need less anti-pollution processing and additives than pure petroleum gasolines.

Moot IMO. Even so, it would still be cheaper to produce the ethanol from petroleum distillates.

That can be the cost benefit
in areas with strict emissions regulations. MTBE can be extremely expensive when you take into account the environmental damaged caused by leaking tanks.

Oxygenated fuels are a bureaucratic red herring IMO - totally unnecessary with today's engine technology - and amount to little more than govt. tampering for its own sake. Obviously in countries which do not have an excess of useable, fermentable biomass, they cannot even be considered. Alcohol as a blending agent also has some serious storage problems which incur extra, less well known, costs.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

 

[Milleron]

snip

Doh? It's kinda simple: if the energy in is more than the energy out the process is not viable.

Although this logic may apply quite well to the ethanol question, I'm not sure it's valid as a generalization. Just because a fuel requires more energy to produce than it, in turn, can produce does not necessarily mean that it's economically nonviable. If a critical process required a special fuel for which there was no substitute, it would not matter if production of that fuel were "endothermic." The process would still be viable. By the way, the proper spelling of Homer Simpson's favorite exclamation is "D'oh." ;-) (http://www.snpp.com/guides/dohs.html)

If he's being subsidized by your tax $$ - YES!!

Point taken. I'd like to learn more about this. Thanks for the info.

Rgds, George Macdonald

Ron