Subaru Ascent Forum banner
1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
275 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
In light of news that the President of the USA is directing the EPA to allow 15% Corn Ethanol in gasoline... you might be wondering if that is OK for our precious Ascent. According to the manual, the answer is yes. Unfortunately, this is known to reduce the efficiency of your gasoline, but at least it is helping the environment?
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
More than you ever wanted to know about the effect of ethanol (10% and 100%), methanol (10% and 100%), and pure gasoline on engines:
(Yes, I post a lot from EE, because I fell into a deep youtube hole a few months ago.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eroi50 and dbpotts

·
Registered
Joined
·
932 Posts
More ethanol used in a gallon of gasoline reduces the amount of gasoline required. Therefore less dependence on foreign gasoline.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
646 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,136 Posts
More ethanol used in a gallon of gasoline reduces the amount of gasoline required. Therefore less dependence on foreign gasoline.
Not sure that is a valid argument because mileage suffers with ethanol, so in reality more fuel/ethanol will be used. I would be all for eliminating ethanol production for gasoline. In the long haul 15% ethanol will harm the engine of the Ascent!

"Monte Shaw, executive director of the Iowa Renewable Fuels Association, said Trump deserved credit for getting year-round E15 when other administrations did not. The important thing for us is to increase demand," he said.

They will increase demand by not offering any other options. As usual the consumer will be damaged, but the special interests will be sustained.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,406 Posts
The car is classified as PZEV, but I wonder if the tests were conducted based on non-ethanol, E-10, or E-15 fuels. That's something to nailed down before getting into the political topic of environmental pollution.

I don't like ethanol, period!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
597 Posts
Expect another slight drop in MPG without any decrease in fuel price. I don't think this will really harm the engine over the long term as long as they stick to 15%.

In the long run this could affect food prices as right now we have too much corn in the USA and this could convince more people to plant corn to turn into Ethanol thus reducing other crops for food.

After spending a lot of time looking into this I don't feel like Ethanol is the solution to our fuel consumption as the amount of land needed to create the amount of fuel we need will be a problem eventually.

The bigger problem will be economic as those with older cars start having issues (poor and working poor) and also have to spend more on fuel. This takes away from the economy as a whole as people have less money to spend on goods and services. Yes it will help farmers but this is just another subsidy that the larger corporate farmers will enjoy while the smaller farmers will again receive trimmings and hope to get by.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
160 Posts
More ethanol used in a gallon of gasoline reduces the amount of gasoline required. Therefore less dependence on foreign gasoline.
Things that people forget about ethanol
1: We are turning a food source into fuel. I don't believe that this is a great habit to get into. If we were able to use a bi-product of food production not so bad.
2: It takes a PILE of water to produce ethanol. Again, something that humans and animals need to survive. There are already fights over water, why consume something as valuable to us as water to make a fuel.
3: How are the plants powered. I believe it takes more power to produce a gallon of ethanol than it does to produce/refine a gallon of fuel (this I am not 100% certain on).
4: Ethanol ATTRACTS WATER! - This is why is should not be used in marine vehicles and if not burned fast enough can cause issues with motors.

I believe that from an environmental standpoint, we need to have more comparable research. For example, and a bit off topic, a recent Danish study found that plastic (the correct plastic compound) has less impact on the environment than a paper or cotton bag. See article below
https://nordic.businessinsider.com/...r-the-environment-than-organic-cotton-bags--/

I don't believe this study however touches on the impact if comparable items are not properly disposed of. There are so many environment things that are put out on theory that when studied, really don't have as much, or possibly a long term negative impact on the environment. I believe that Ethanol need a better evaluation over all, all things considered, to determine its impact.

So many of these things turn out to be a "follow the money" situation. For years, our tax dollars were subsidizing the petrol companies around $0.50 per blended gallon to mix in Ethanol. They didn't want it, since it was a competitive product. So, why was Ethanol cheaper at the pumps, tax dollar subsidization. And, because it was made with corn, these dollars were bundled in with the Farm Bills, just as many of the welfare programs are.

Sorry....Rant over.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
561 Posts
Biggest gripe I have is i'm now having to rebuild my carbs in my dirt bikes, ATV's and snowmobiles every couple years due to this stuff. Currently where i live ethanol free is hard to come by, but in northern WI and MI where powersports is more popular is fairy easy to find and you'd be doing yourself a disservice if you didn't use it.

And it increased the cost of cheese, probably the 2nd biggest gripe:) ....

In 2007, the global price of corn doubled as a result of an explosion in ethanol production in the U.S. Because corn is the most common animal feed and has many other uses in the food industry, the price of milk, cheese, eggs, meat, corn-based sweeteners and cereals increased as well. World grain reserves dwindled to less than two months, the lowest level in over 30 years.

Additional unintended effects from the increase in ethanol production include the dramatic rise in land rents, the increase in natural gas and chemicals used for fertilizers, over-pumping of aquifers like the Ogallala that serve many mid-western states, clear-cutting forests to plant fuel crops, and the revival of destructive practices such as edge tillage. Edge tillage is planting right up to the edge of the field thereby removing protective bordering lands and increasing soil erosion, chemical runoff and other problems. It took us 40 years to end edge tillage in this country, and overnight ethanol brought it back with a vengeance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
646 Posts
The bigger problem will be economic as those with older cars start having issues (poor and working poor) and also have to spend more on fuel. This takes away from the economy as a whole as people have less money to spend on goods and services. Yes it will help farmers but this is just another subsidy that the larger corporate farmers will enjoy while the smaller farmers will again receive trimmings and hope to get by.
This is the thing that escapes lots of Republicans, plenty of Independents, and many Democrats.
Henry Ford understood this very well. He didn't push for 2 day weekends, 40 hour work week, and living wages because he was a "Hippy Liberal Snowflake Lover". He knew he needed a strong working/middle class with the money and time to buy the things he was making. Get more money into the hands of the people that buy things instead of saving, even if it comes from your pockets, and you will end up with more money anyways. /semi-political rant
 
  • Like
Reactions: MAGNUMB

·
Registered
Joined
·
932 Posts
Already on a significant decline as we get better at getting it out of the ground.
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=pet&s=mttntus2&f=a
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=MCRFPUS1&f=M

I'm all for a better energy source but ethanol from plants (mainly corn) is not it.
I agree with you. I was just stating one of the reasons on why this could be policy, not my personal opinion on the matter.

Personally speaking, I think it's foolish to take food and turn it into fuel when we have enough fuel already and we have people starving in this country (and world.)

Not sure that is a valid argument because mileage suffers with ethanol, so in reality more fuel/ethanol will be used. I would be all for eliminating ethanol production for gasoline. In the long haul 15% ethanol will harm the engine of the Ascent!
Yes, it does suffer. There's not as much energy in a volume of ethanol compared to the identical volume of gasoline. But, I don't know the exact amount of energy off the top of my head, and I'd just be speculating numbers.

From a website called pure-gas.org:

Why does pure gas give me better mileage?
Pure gas gives better mileage than E10, and much better than E85, simply because gasoline has higher free energy than ethanol. The free energy of gasoline is 34.2 MJ per liter. The free energy of ethanol is 24.0 MJ per liter. That means E10 (10% ethanol) has a free energy of 33.2 MJ per liter, and E85 (85% ethanol) has a free energy of 25.6 MJ per liter. As a result, your mileage is reduced by 3% with E10 over pure gas, and 25% with E85 over pure gas, all else being equal. Mileage will be reduced even more if your engine doesn't run as well on E10, which is often the case with older vehicles.
So, there you go. Your mileage will be reduced by 25% with E85 compared to ethanol-free gas. But, I suppose the idea (potentially) would be that you could take 100 liters of ethanol-free fuel and turn it into 115 liters of E15 fuel to sell?

Things that people forget about ethanol
1: We are turning a food source into fuel. I don't believe that this is a great habit to get into. If we were able to use a bi-product of food production not so bad.
2: It takes a PILE of water to produce ethanol. Again, something that humans and animals need to survive. There are already fights over water, why consume something as valuable to us as water to make a fuel.
3: How are the plants powered. I believe it takes more power to produce a gallon of ethanol than it does to produce/refine a gallon of fuel (this I am not 100% certain on).
4: Ethanol ATTRACTS WATER! - This is why is should not be used in marine vehicles and if not burned fast enough can cause issues with motors.
Agreed on all points. Also, your number 2 point describes much of the cattle industry. I remember taking a climatology course in college that touched upon how much water it took to raise cattle (cows, bison, etc.) from birth to slaughter, compared to other animals and eventually plants. I think half of my class became vegetarian by the end of the class - from the environmental standpoint, not an ethical/animal rights' standpoint.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
171 Posts
Things that people forget about ethanol
1: We are turning a food source into fuel. I don't believe that this is a great habit to get into. If we were able to use a bi-product of food production not so bad.
2: It takes a PILE of water to produce ethanol. Again, something that humans and animals need to survive. There are already fights over water, why consume something as valuable to us as water to make a fuel.
3: How are the plants powered. I believe it takes more power to produce a gallon of ethanol than it does to produce/refine a gallon of fuel (this I am not 100% certain on).
4: Ethanol ATTRACTS WATER! - This is why is should not be used in marine vehicles and if not burned fast enough can cause issues with motors.

I believe that from an environmental standpoint, we need to have more comparable research. For example, and a bit off topic, a recent Danish study found that plastic (the correct plastic compound) has less impact on the environment than a paper or cotton bag. See article below
https://nordic.businessinsider.com/...r-the-environment-than-organic-cotton-bags--/

I don't believe this study however touches on the impact if comparable items are not properly disposed of. There are so many environment things that are put out on theory that when studied, really don't have as much, or possibly a long term negative impact on the environment. I believe that Ethanol need a better evaluation over all, all things considered, to determine its impact.

So many of these things turn out to be a "follow the money" situation. For years, our tax dollars were subsidizing the petrol companies around $0.50 per blended gallon to mix in Ethanol. They didn't want it, since it was a competitive product. So, why was Ethanol cheaper at the pumps, tax dollar subsidization. And, because it was made with corn, these dollars were bundled in with the Farm Bills, just as many of the welfare programs are.

Sorry....Rant over.
Not to reignite your rant..... the one major influence in the continued use of ethanol is the huge investment interests by a substantial number of members in congress. And trump, just last week, pushed for increased ethanol content in fuel.

The original premis of blending ethanol in gas was to reduce our dependency on oil and reduce emissions. Neither was achieved given it causes engines to run less efficiently resulting in no reduction in pollutants and it reduces fuel efficiency causing higher use. Ethanol is a multi billion dollar ruse. Then there's the state and regional mandates for fuel formulation that further reduce fuel economy causing countless complaints of "I don't get the mpg's you (insert your favorite auto brand) said I will get..." as an aside but related, when first introduced, ethanol severely fouled motorcycle and small engine carburetors to a point whereby motorcycle manufacturers changed to fuel injection. The consequence has been billions in expenses shouldered by consumers because of an in ineffective mandate.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
913 Posts
We've had E15 in AZ since I moved here 22 years ago. There may be a few speciality shops where you can get pure gasoline, but not at any normal gas station.

Yeah, it's definitely a drag being forced to use/have it.

Crazy isn't it that so many people are starving in the world, but here in the US we're using farmland to make our cars go!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
More than you ever wanted to know about the effect of ethanol (10% and 100%), methanol (10% and 100%), and pure gasoline on engines:
(Yes, I post a lot from EE, because I fell into a deep youtube hole a few months ago.)
Very informative for sure, however, I was interested in the longevity of the Ascent 2.4 Turbo engine using either 100% Gasoline vs 90/10 Ethanol. While the environment is important to me, my immediate interest is what's best for this particular engine. The video was based on another engine, probably normally aspirated, and used broad specs including E85 fuel.

The specs of our engine, beginning its boosted power band at 2000 RPM places it in its own category. For this reason, I was wondering if any studies have been made regarding 100% vs 90/10% on the 2.4 Turbo for longevity only?
 

·
Registered
2020 Ascent Touring
Joined
·
1,108 Posts
So it doesn't help the environment, doesn't help your fuel efficiency, doesn't help your engine, then what is it helping?
We're not allowed to discuss politics, global warming etc around here.

Keeping it simple, ethanol in gas is bad for the engine. When my state started the 10% ethanol in around 2006, the cars i had at the time lost 5-7mpg. Any savings are purely mythical.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,698 Posts
We've had E15 in AZ since I moved here 22 years ago. There may be a few speciality shops where you can get pure gasoline, but not at any normal gas station.

Yeah, it's definitely a drag being forced to use/have it.

Crazy isn't it that so many people are starving in the world, but here in the US we're using farmland to make our cars go!
There are a few in Denver that have the special pumps set aside. $$$Colorado Ethanol Free Gas Stations
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
55 Posts
In terms of power, ethanol is great for forced injection engines with the appropriate fuel upgrades made. If only the CVT could take an E85 tune! Example below, same hardware with only difference being E85:


Rectangle Slope Font Line Plot
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top