Ethanol-free gas availability

[John Mc]

Heard a couple of items which don't bode well for availability of good fuel for chainsaws:

Rumor here in Vermont: We're still able to find ethanol-free gas at some gas stations and marinas here in Vermont. This gas all seems to be coming out of Canada. The gas-station gossip is that the ethanol-free gas will no longer be available sometime in the future, as Canada goes to ethanol gas.

Article I read recently about ethanol gas nation-wide in the US: The federal government mandated that the fuel companies make and use a specific amount of ethanol as fuel. The amount was specified in gallons, not as a percent of fuel sold. The industry responded by building (over-building, actually) capacity to produce ethanol. With higher gas prices, and the economic melt-down, gasoline usage is down substantially. The USA is close to the limits of ethanol consumption as long as the concentration of ethanol in gas is limited to 10%. Unfortunately, that level of consumption is significantly short of what has been mandated. Therefore, the push is on (strongly supported by the ethanol industry) to raise the ethanol concentration in gasoline to 15% or more.

I don't know how far along either of these pushes are, or even if they are more than just rumors at this point. If true, it's going to be a real pain in the neck.

[Gary_C]

Article I read recently about ethanol gas nation-wide in the US: The federal government mandated that the fuel companies make and use a specific amount of ethanol as fuel. The amount was specified in gallons, not as a percent of fuel sold. The industry responded by building (over-building, actually) capacity to produce ethanol. With higher gas prices, and the economic melt-down, gasoline usage is down substantially. The USA is close to the limits of ethanol consumption as long as the concentration of ethanol in gas is limited to 10%. Unfortunately, that level of consumption is significantly short of what has been mandated. Therefore, the push is on (strongly supported by the ethanol industry) to raise the ethanol concentration in gasoline to 15% or more.

Your article needs some fact checking. The federal government did not mandate that the fuel companies make ethanol and they don't. The feds did mandate the use of an "oxygenate" in the gasoline and the fuel companies responded with "MTBE" which showed up in drinking water and has since been abandoned. Ethanol is now the only oxygenate used.

The ethanol industry was built by farmers that were frustrated because the very high quality corn they were producing was worth more for fuel than for feed for animals. The government then did enact legislation adding a subsidity for ethanol because it was home grown and was a renewable energy source. It was then that the large corporations jumped on the ethanol bandwagon and flooded the market with excess capacity.

But that is a simplified version of history as it is far more complicated than that. There are inbalances in the market place because most of the ethanol plants are in the upper midwest and the largest gasoline consumption is on both coasts. And ethanol cannot be transported in the existing pipelines. So transportation is an issue today as much as excess capacity. And yes there is a push to allow up to 15 per cent ethanol in gasoline.

And despite the bad publicity, ethanol is the one bright spot in the push for more homegrown and green renewable energy. But even with higher levels of ethanol blended in the gas, we are still a very long way from energy independence and freeing us from fossil fuels.

[Rocky_J]

And despite the bad publicity, ethanol is the one bright spot in the push for more homegrown and green renewable energy. But even with higher levels of ethanol blended in the gas, we are still a very long way from energy independence and freeing us from fossil fuels.

Ethanol is an energy negative. Without huge government subsidies it would not be viable as a fuel additive. Anybody touting ethanol as any sort of 'energy independence' answer is uninformed and/or biased. Ethanol takes more energy to make than it produces, it doesn't produce anywhere near the energy of the gasoline it is diluting and it plays havoc on rubber fuel lines, carburetor diaphragms and other fuel system parts. It is highly corrosive, it is not stable and it attracts moisture. It is a very expensive boondoggle perpetuated by people who figured out how to scam the system and make billions of dollars off the government.

[Ga. bow-man]

Thanks rocky_j

 Tell it like it is.

[Gary_C]

Ethanol is an energy negative. Without huge government subsidies it would not be viable as a fuel additive. Anybody touting ethanol as any sort of 'energy independence' answer is uninformed and/or biased. Ethanol takes more energy to make than it produces, it doesn't produce anywhere near the energy of the gasoline it is diluting and it plays havoc on rubber fuel lines, carburetor diaphragms and other fuel system parts. It is highly corrosive, it is not stable and it attracts moisture. It is a very expensive boondoggle perpetuated by people who figured out how to scam the system and make billions of dollars off the government.

That sounds like something straight from one of Exxon's press releases. Do you have any facts to back up your claims or is it just wild opinion and personal bias that you have heard somewhere?

[Rocky_J]

I don't remember where I've read all my info. It's not like I have a filing cabinet full of documentation next to my desk. But I have about 30 years of experience running small gasoline powered engines for a living as well as for recreation. I also am asked by friends and neighbors to fix their stuff for them. I have seen hundreds of machines destroyed by ethanol, and I have experienced as well as seen much documentation on the reduced fuel efficiency of ethanol mixed gas. This is common knowledge. The attraction to water makes it unstable as a fuel for marine use and my friend who owns a marina has seen a drastic increase in seized motors due to ethanol/water ingestion.

Perhaps it is you who needs to document your assertions, because your statements sound like a publicity release for the ethanol industry. I see you're in Corn Country. Do you grow corn for a living?

[Brian_Rhoad]

I have worked with alcohol as a fuel for over 30 years. It is one of the worst fuels for every day use as a replacement for gasoline. It absorbs moisture, causing severe corrosion. It has half the btu's as gas. It burns with a clear flame. I have seen several people get seriously burned because they had no idea there was a fire. Storage and transport is a major problem because of the moisture absorbsion.

[Gary_C]

I don't believe I made any claims for or against ethanol that need backing. All of what I posted was just history and I have lived that in the middle of any number of ethanol plants. Even though I am not an investor, a local banker that I know was instrumental in setting up financing for one of the first farmer owned ethanol cooperatives and it is still running today and doing well. And that plant was built before all these government handouts that encouraged the large players like ADM and others to flood the market.

One of the last ones built near me is in Janesville, MN and it cost somewhere around $160 million and was never started up. The lender got it back and is trying to sell it now. The company that built it got caught up in the euphoria of government money and is now bankrupt.

If I was to defend ethanol, there are two things I would say. One, all the studies that have shown ethanol to have negative energy are just biased and wrong. I think they counted as energy used to produce ethanol all the way back to the gas the farmer used to go to town to buy the seed to plant to grow the corn. That may be an exaggeration on my part, but you get the message. And they do not count all the energy it takes to extract the crude from the ground and get it to your gas station. Just an unfair comparison all the way around.

Second, they never take into account the real feed value in the corn is preserved and then sold as animal feed in the form of DDG's or dried distillers grains. So the ethanol plants are taking an animal feed and extracting what they want from it and then selling it back as an much better animal feed that the original corn. And it can be a very profitable business, at least untill the government throws money into the game and causes over capitalization.

And yes, I am a corn farmer though on a small scale. But that doesn't mean that I am biased. It does mean that I know a lot about the ethanol industry. And since I also run chainsaws and older tractors, I also know of the problems you can have using both ethanol blends and biodiesel blends in my equipment. But I also do not believe all of the claims of engine destruction solely because of ethanol in the gas. But then knowing the problems are there, I do take some precautions to prevent problems and I do regularly pay service people to replace the fuel lines in my chainsaws.

Edit: One thing I forgot to include. Since I do sell much of my corn to ethanol plants, I am proud to say that I am part of an industry that has done something to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. I would much rather spend my fuel money on a product that was made right here in the USA and not send it to some Arab Ruler. Even if it does create some maintenance problems. 

[PlicketyCat]

Neither defending nor reviling ethanol as fuel....  (I don't grow corn, I don't work for Exxon, I'm not affiliated with any militant Green group, and I'm not invested in any bio-fuel manufacturing or sales operation)

If ethanol is so destructive to *rubber* fuel lines and diaphragms, etc is there not some equally inexpensive but alcohol resistant material to produce such parts for small engines?  I'm fairly certain there are for large engines, or that older vehicles used difference materials, as my great-grandfather ran most of his gas-powered farm equipment on home-brew (albeit back in the 60's and 70's).

I know from experience that pure ethanol has better performance than ethanol that must be diluted (by law) with gasoline for resale. I know from experience that pure gasoline has better performance than gasoline that must be diluted (by law) with the (oxygenate) ethanol. Perhaps the problem isn't intrinsically ethanol, but the blend of ethanol and gasoline? It may a situation where one or the other in pure form has less detrimental qualities than when combined... kind of like nitric acid and glycerin.

If fossil-fuels are at risk of depletion, forcing us to invest in bio-fuels, perhaps the ineffiencies of petro-engines using bio-fuels needs to be addressed by the engine manufacturers and designers... to include inexpensive retro-fits for current users. I am certain that someone out there is bright enough to achieve nearly identical performance results with a bit of modification.

The hygroscopic properties of ethanol do not automatically mean reduced engine performance and increased maintenance due to increased water content. That is a bit of a red herring... the fuel itself absorbs and incorporates the water, it's not like you have free water in your fuel lines. This increased water content in the fuel does not interfere with the expansion rate of the gases created when the fuel is burned inside your cylinder... which is really all you're interested in with regards to driving the pistons.

[PlicketyCat]

Ethanol ... is highly corrosive, it is not stable and it attracts moisture.

Highly corrosive - false. If it were, it wouldn't be freely available for human consumption in every supermarket and liquor store, much less stored in convenient 12 oz aluminum cans.  It is, however, an organic solvent and can deteriorate certain other organic materials... like rubber.

Not stable - huh??.  What do you mean by not stable? Do you mean highly explosive? Do you mean chemically unstable, as in molecular decomposition?

Attracts moisture - true.  See previous post about why being hygroscopic doesn't matter in this context.

[Rocky_J]

Unstable as in the fuel goes bad very quickly. For 20 years I've been able to let equipment sit up all winter with fuel in it and it would still start up and run well 3-4 months later. These days the fuel is only good for a couple weeks. I can tell when my 2.5 gallon can of mix is going bad because my 200T will start running lean. It has been a nightmare for marine use and it won't even work for aviation, the changes in elevation cause it to suck up too much moisture too fast.

I'm no fuel expert, why am I arguing this? If you think ethanol is all fine and dandy, then stay in your little dream world. I can't stand the stuff. You act like you've never heard of any problems with ethanol before and all this is news to you? Yeah, right.

[bandmiller2]

The problem is newer fuel in older equipment,the problem will go away as soon as newer engines are designed for this mandated fuel ,same as with unleaded fuel a few years back.Frank C.

[Gary_C]

I'm no fuel expert, why am I arguing this?

That's a good question.

Leaving any gasoline or a blend with ethanol in your equipment and expecting it to run four months later may not be a good idea and most people that do that use a stabilizer to prevent problems. And that problem may well be due to the reformulation of gasoline blends four times of the year for air quality issues and not caused by ethanol. It's a well documented problem especially in the fall when some engines will not run right on the fall or winter blend.

So you keep on blaming ethanol for your problems till the Arabs or Hugo Chavez own this country. Hope you will be happy with your anger and ignorance then.

[ed in idaho]

plus one on everything rocky said. ethanol legislature is purely politacal to buy the cornbelt votes. besides the trouble it has caused as a fuel it has increased food prices, typical of what politians do . take a problem and make it much worse

                              Ed

[Gary_C]

There is another vote for ignorance. I know it's difficult for some to comprehend and ya, it might cost waaaaaay to much to change and it's just toooo hard. But I sure hope you can comprehend Chinese and Arabic cause you are going to need those two languages.

[PlicketyCat]

I haven't experienced the same fuel degradation as you have; but I don't tend to store my equipment fueled and I add stabilizers to my fuel (of any flavor) if it's going to sit for awhile.

The fiasco that the politicians have wrought surrounding ethanol should not be confused with the fuel itself. Politicians, as usual, have their own agenda and often put the cart before the horse. Washington is well-known for ignoring a problem too long and then messing things up worse with a knee-jerk mad dash in the eleventh hour. We've known that reliance on fossil fuels is a problem since the 70's, why is this suddenly being haphazardly addressed *30* years later?

We grow so much corn in this country that ethanol and food should not impact each other. The corn used for ethanol was not destined for the dinner table... either as "human grade" corn or by proxy through livestock feed (as mentioned before the corn mash left over from the process can and is still fed to livestock just fine). The increase in food prices is a combination of factors the most prominent being increased costs of petro fuel for transportation of goods. There may be a secondary factor in that farmers choose to plant more corn for the ethanol "boom" in hopes of making some more money and getting any government subsidies, and therefore did not plant as many food crops. This isn't an inherent problem with ethanol (or any other bio-fuel) or it's production; but a problem with the way our food system is currently operated and the (unintentional?) consequence of government's inappropriate and inadequate involvement.

[Norm]

So Gary I wondered where you've been hiding! 

Ethanol has been the favorite whipping boy for big oils crappy gas for years now. We've had it in our gas for 30 years now and have no more or less problems with our small engines that use it. Somehow folks decide that must be the problem for the same issues we've been dealing with for years. The engines of today have far fewer fuel problems than before due to better small engine design and engineering.

I know I won't change any closed minds to evil ethanol but at least think for yourself instead of following big oils scare stories to keep their lock on fuels. For me I'd rather support farmers in our country than the countries where we are whoring ourselves to for their oil.

Yes I do farm part time and grow corn and other food for your table....darn proud of it.

[chevytaHOE5674]

Cellulosic ethanol fuel made from switchgrass will be much better alternative than corn. Switchgrass produces something like 500% of the energy used to produce it, where as corn is estimated to be between 75-125% of the energy used to produce it.

And I try to run ethanol free gas whenever it is available. Get more power and better mileage out of straight gas.

[Al_Smith]

It's spotty on this state weather you have blended gasoline or not .Not so much here in the middle of a big cornfield but more so around large metro areas such as Cleveland and Columbus .

Now the ethanol thing .Did you know that a majority of ethanol plants are somewhat backed by the gov but the initial money comes from investers looking for that pie in the sky .Well most of them declare backruptcy within about a year of being in operation .Two or three large conglomerants buy them up for about 20 cents on the dollar,check it out .

Literally billions of dollars of investers money has been flushed down the toilet. The price of corn drove the price of everything up up from Wesson oil to whisky .The seed companies got rich,the farmers for a short while ,we got hosed .

Undoubtedly the biggest scam ever pulled on the American public since the Hunt brothers and Billy Solestes .--not to mention Kenneth Lay .

Put gasoline in the tank and save the corn for good beef and bonded whisky .That's my story and I'm sticken to it .

[Norm]

Ok one last try and then I'll leave the chainsaws to the experts. 

The 75 -125% is an old line that has been thoroughly proven wrong. It is actually more like you get 150-175% yield with the leftover waste called dry distillers grain. The cattle folks love it as it's just as good if not better for weight gain. So first you get the ethanol and next you feed the beefers DDG's and get Micky D's burgers out of it. Of course that is never figured in to the propaganda about the yield for corn to ethanol. If switch grass was that good believe me I'd quit the corn and grow it but it is another one of those urban legends that doesn't hold up. There is no technology to do that.

Most of the ethanol plants here are owned by individuals at first with no gov money to seed them. They are then sold to larger investors and so on and so on. Some have gone under but that is more due to poor hedging than anything else.

Look I don't come on this board and profess to tell folks how and what about chainsaws even though I do some logging and sawmilling myself. I come here to read and learn from the ones more knowledgeable than me as most here have more experience than I do. How about giving the same respect for what me and Gary say because this is what we do for a living.  I'm not telling you this stuff just to sell corn or ethanol but to try and tell you what the facts about it are.

[Rocky_J]

I get lower fuel economy using ethanol blended gas. I get much better mileage with non ethanol gas. And ethanol blended gas will go bad in as little as 2-3 weeks. I've had to dump out more bad gas in the last 2 years than in the previous 30 years.

[PlicketyCat]

I have to agree with Norm. Before anyone starts throwing out statistics you have to do a quick sanity check to make sure there aren't any blatant holes and errors in logic. The propagandists on both sides of the ethanol argument are guilty of skewing the data, omitting a few facts, and sometimes out and out lying. Sensationalism, the Chicken-Little Syndrome, and the "It's all fine, we'll take care of it" methods are effective psychological manipulators and these folks know it. They're pulling our strings so they can achieve their own agenda. Most people buy it... hook, line and sinker... on whatever side they want to believe. Taking a small amount of time to analyze most of those statements with even the tiniest modicum of logic (and high school math & science) should definitely alert you that they're leaving something out of the equation.

Is ethanol the perfect fuel? No. Is bio-diesel the perfect fuel? No. Is gasoline the perfect fuel? No.  There is no one-size-fits-all perfect solution to every problem. People don't seem to want to face that. It's the same with all the other alternate & renewable energy discussions.  What works for Bob on a farm in Maine might not work for Sally in condo in LA. The only reason that petro and grid-power seem so "perfect" is that we've all be trained to use it the way it's been given to us.  If we all grew up using pea pods for fuel and our entire system was geared for pea pod power production and use, then we'd think that fossil fuels sucked.

I'm not opposed to supporting my local farmer rather than shelling out my hard earned cash to a foreign country and fat-cat investors. I'd like to see the government stay the hell out of the way of the small farmer, get out of the market control business altogether, and stop making stupid legislation that makes it neat impossible for small farmers to survive but keeps agri-corps running the world.  ** but that's an entirely different rant **

[Al_Smith]

Well grain  for a fuel might not be that bad if the yeild were a tad higher per volume .Sugar beets,cane or has been mentioned switch grass would be better than corn .

I live smack dab in the center of the midwestern grain belt and I know all about brewers grain etc .Never the less it's a poor alternative for fuels to use feed stock grain when other alternatives would be a better choice in my opinion .

Besides that don't think for a minute the farmers are getting rich because since this high tech moonshine thing the cost of producing grain has skyrocketed .Monsanto and Arthur Daniels Midland and DeKalb seed company might be getting rich but it doesn't trickle down .

[chevytaHOE5674]

If switch grass was that good believe me I'd quit the corn and grow it but it is another one of those urban legends that doesn't hold up. There is no technology to do that.

The technology is in the works, trust me there are many people at Michigan Tech University alone working on it.

I too grow corn, raise cattle, and run run chainsaws. I refuse to use ethanol case when possible. 

[PlicketyCat]

<sigh> Now I'm going to have to take my little Shindy apart, swap out the rubber bits, and run it on pure ethanol (not blend) just to see what happens.  Man... yet another side bar project

[John Mc]

<sigh> Now I'm going to have to take my little Shindy apart, swap out the rubber bits, and run it on pure ethanol (not blend) just to see what happens.  Man... yet another side bar project

Actually, straight ethanol (or at least 170 or 180 proof or so) makes a better fuel than the 10% blend we are using now. Lower energy content, so MPG is lower, but a lot fo the other problems are eliminated. Not sure how well straight ethanol will mix with 2-cycle oil, though

[chevytaHOE5674]

Ethanol is an efficient fuel if you have a motor with high compression to take advantage of it.

[Al_Smith]

To a point but it still takes about 40 percent more of it to produce the same power . A little nitromethane to oxegonate the fuel and before you know it you have rocket fuel .

Now don't get me wrong ,I love the smell of nitro and castor in the morning .Not to be confused with a line out of a movie talking about jellied gasoline and jungles . 

[PlicketyCat]

JohnMc - I'll dig around and see if I can come up with a 2-cycle oil that works, or is at least non-reactive with the ethanol.

BATFE requires an ethanol producer to add 10% gasoline to their ethanol (presumably, so we don't all go out and drink it).  10% ethanol in gas, 10% gas in ethanol... for pete's sake why don't they just say 50-50 for both and call it good? One fuel to rule them all  mwuahahaha

Chevy - precisely, just need a little engine modification and we'd be cooking with gas, er, alcohol.

Aw Al -- Willy Pete is so much more fun than a few styrofoam cups melted in diesel!

[tbrickner]

Just my 2 cents

I have had a lot of problems with the ethanol gas blend in my mowers and chainsaws.  I use star-tron stabilizer and I haven't had a problem since.  It encapsulates the ethanol somehow and you can see it work on a sample.  I am very skeptical on the magic additive potions but this stuff seems to work and I have a Mac 610.  Maybe some other people have had luck with other products and could list the fuel stabilizers they use.

My bias: 

All I know about ethanol is that there will be sugars produced that may be hard to filter out during processing of the alcohol.  This could cause problems.  Also alcohol burns really hot compared to gasoline so I am not sure how good that will be for an engine designed for gas.  Maybe new engine designs will help this.

My worry.  We must be the only culture in history that uses a food source as a fuel while other people are starving. I'd rather eat it than burn it. We need to look for other fuel sources like fuels made from coal or maybe drilling on our side of the planet.  But until we sufficiently develop these synthetic fuel sources over the next 10 to 20 years we have to use what we have. 

I like big oil.  A lot of fire trucks, police cars, and ambulances run on the stuff and have saved a lot of lives.

Well that’s my 2 cents you can kick me around on this one.
Tom

[PlicketyCat]

We use Sta-Bil and it seems to work just fine in all our machinery.

Ethanol chemistry - during fermentation, yeast convert carbohydrates (sugars) to alcohol. No sugars in the end product to worry about carbonizing or gumming up the works.

We aren't the only culture to use food for fuel.  Olive oil has been used for fuel since recorded history. Tallow and lard has been used for fuel since then, too.  Ethanol isn't new either, it's been used for fuel since we figured out how to ferment and distill grains.  OK - maybe they weren't used for machinery, mostly for heat and light, but combustion mechanization is fairly new technology in the larger scheme of the human race.

The "feeding the world" argument is a little misleading. There is more than enough food being produced to feed people, but it might not be available to everyone (for various transportation, financial and political reasons). I've got a whole other rant about agriculture, the stock market and global dependence/influence... but I'll hold my tongue

[Gary_C]

For those of you that believe all your problems with what is called gasoline come from the ethanol in the blend, consider this chemistry lesson.

Here is what it takes to describe what is in gasoline:

The bulk of a typical gasoline consists of hydrocarbons with between 4 and 12 carbon atoms per molecule.

Many of these hydrocarbons are considered hazardous substances and are regulated in the United States by Occupational Safety and Health Administration. The Material Safety Data Sheet for unleaded gasoline shows at least fifteen hazardous chemicals occurring in various amounts. These include benzene (up to 5% by volume), toluene (up to 35% by volume), naphthalene (up to 1% by volume), trimethylbenzene (up to 7% by volume), MTBE (up to 18% by volume, in some states) and about ten others.

The various refinery streams blended together to make gasoline all have different characteristics. Some important streams are:

Reformate, produced in a catalytic reformer with a high octane rating and high aromatic content, and very low olefins (alkenes).
Cat cracked gasoline or cat cracked naphtha, produced from a catalytic cracker, with a moderate octane rating, high olefins (alkene) content, and moderate aromatics level. Here, "cat" is short for "catalytic".
Hydrocrackate (heavy, mid, and light), produced from a hydrocracker, with medium to low octane rating and moderate aromatic levels.
Virgin or straight-run naphtha (has many names), directly from crude oil with low octane rating, low aromatics (depending on the grade of crude oil), some naphthenes (cycloalkanes) and no olefins (alkenes).
Alkylate, produced in an alkylation unit, with a high octane rating and which is pure paraffin (alkane), mainly branched chains.
Isomerate (various names) which is obtained by isomerising the pentane and hexane[citation needed] in light virgin naphthas to yield their higher octane isomers.
(The terms used here are not always the correct terms. They are the jargon normally used in the oil industry. The exact terminology for these streams varies by refinery and by country.)

Overall, a typical gasoline is predominantly a mixture of paraffins (alkanes), naphthenes (cycloalkanes), and olefins (alkenes). The exact ratios can depend on

the oil refinery that makes the gasoline, as not all refineries have the same set of processing units.
the crude oil feed used by the refinery.
the grade of gasoline, in particular the octane rating.
Currently, many countries set tight limits on gasoline aromatics in general, benzene in particular, and olefin (alkene) content. Such limits result in increasing demand for high octane pure paraffin (alkane) components, such as alkylate, and is forcing refineries to add processing units to reduce the benzene content.

Gasoline can also contain some other organic compounds such as organic ethers (deliberately added), plus small levels of contaminants, in particular sulfur compounds such as disulfides and thiophenes. Some contaminants, in particular thiols and hydrogen sulfide, must be removed because they cause corrosion in engines. Sulfur compounds are usually removed by hydrotreating, yielding hydrogen sulfide, which can then be transformed into elemental sulfur via the Claus process.



And here is what it takes to describe ethanol:

Ethanol fuel is ethanol (ethyl alcohol), the same type of alcohol found in alcoholic beverages. Ethanol is a straight-chain alcohol, and its molecular formula is C₂H₅OH. Its empirical formula is C₂H₆O.

Now when they blend these two things together in a gasoline blend and recognizing that the gasoline part of this mixture is reformulated four times per year, can you honestly say that all your engine problems are caused by the ethanol in that very complex blend of chemicals? And is it any wonder that tests comparing fuel economy come with disclaimers that the various blends vary from one supplier to another and from one tanker load to another?

Is it any wonder that mileage comparisons can sometimes favor one fuel or the other?

I do run two older gas tractors and a couple of chainsaws and I never add stabilizer to any fuel. Though I rarely have a problem with bad gas, one of the two tractors does always foul the spark plugs every fall about the time of the reformulation of the gas to a fall blend. And yes in the past I have falsely cursed ethanol as the cause of the problem, but it isn't true.

So I don't understand why all this "blame ethanol" sentiment arises cause it defies all logic.

And did you also know that the petroleum industry has been bad mouthing ethanol since the days of John D. Rockefeller and Standard Oil because ethanol is a competing product. I for one don't believe their BS and all my evidence says it just not true.

[Al_Smith]

       
 
 
And did you also know that the petroleum industry has been bad mouthing ethanol since the days of John D. Rockefeller and Standard Oil because ethanol is a competing product. I for one don't believe their BS and all my evidence says it just not true.

In addition to living in the grain belt  I also live within the proximity of the very first refinery old John D. ever had .Interestingly enough at one time I spent a lot of time inside that facility much akin to working in a bomb factory .Thank heavens those days are over .

If I'm not mistaken the first of Henry Fords horseless carriages was designed to run on pure alkie .Historically though refined gasoline did become the fuel source of choice early on .

It's not the fact of is ethanol a viable fuel but more so the politics and how the alkie is derived which is upsetting to most,my self included .


Not only has OPEC got us under the gun but now we have to deal with Cargill,Central Soya ,Arthur Daniels Midland and others . Everybody wants to get in our wallets and to tell the truth there usn't much left for them to get .


I mean when a dozen eggs cost a buck 75 something is obviously rotten in Denmark to coin a phrase .The price of corn might be a  lame excuse for high prices but we consumers really feel it .

[Rocky_J]

Gary, why do so many boats end up with seized motors after running ethanol mixed gas? And why can't airplanes use it?

Sorry, I'm not a chemistry expert, my eyes blazed over trying to read your last post. All those big words confuse me.

[PlicketyCat]

Gary, why do so many boats end up with seized motors after running ethanol mixed gas? And why can't airplanes use it?

Sorry, I'm not a chemistry expert, my eyes blazed over trying to read your last post. All those big words confuse me.

Just in case Gary's gone to bed or something, I'll pitch in my 2 cents.

The only reason an engine siezes, truly siezes - the piston melts into the bore or a bearing siezes, is bad lubrication. I haven't heard of boat engines having this problem; however if it is the case, I suspect that because ethanol burns slightly hotter than gasoline  that the boat motors aren't designed to handle the increase in temperature and are getting heat build up in the cylinder or burning through the piston. This is a design failure, not a fuel failure.

Planes don't use ethanol because planes don't use gasoline. Aircraft fuel is a special blend, more similar to kerosene (#1 diesel).

[Rocky_J]

I believe it has something to do with alcohol attracting and holding moisture. And lots of planes use gasoline, that is why you can buy non alcohol gas at airports (if you know the right people).

[PlicketyCat]

Again, water content fully absorbed in an alcohol fuel will NOT affect a combustion engine. If the fuel can ignite, the gas expansion (yes, steam is a gas) will force the piston don the cylinder and turn the drive cam. This moisture is not free bulk water, it doeesn't stay in the in the cylinder or any other part of your fuel or mechanical system as water.

Now, there is a problem with water and boat engines, and that's the way they are cooled. In a water-cooled car, you have a radiator and it's pretty much temperature regulated, air can flow past it to help cool it down even more.  But in a boat, there is an intake port at the base of the propeller housing that sucks in water from the river/lake/ocean that it's traveling in, forces it through the engine compartment, and then back out into the body of water. If this intake port is not large enough, or designed to allow a higher degree of water flow through the compartment, then the additional heat generated by ethanol in the fuel blend could cause overheating, possibly leading to piston & cylinder burn through or gasket failures.   Design problem, not fuel problem.

OK - yes, there are smaller piston-engined airplanes that use gasoline... in fact, they're used a lot out here in the bush. I have not heard of ethanol blends being a problem for these aircraft; however if it is the case, I suspect it is because these engines are purely air-cooled, and are overheating.  To the best of my knowledge, all the piston-engined aircraft that use gas up here do not use MO-gas (for cars) they use AV-Gas specially formulated to handle the rapid changes in pressure caused by altitude in planes as all automotive fuels can vaporize in the fuel lines causing a vapor lock and stalling out the engines.

[PlicketyCat]

Had a dig around, there are some independent sources for researching ethanol-based aviation fuels, this one is the best:

University of North Dakota (very technical article), summary AGE85, 88% ethanol, 11% gasoline, 1 % bio-diesel is an effective high-octane unleaded aviation fuel.

At 81,000 Btu/gallon, AGE85 has 28% less energy than 100LL (at 112,000 Btu/gallon), but because of higher thermal efficiency, only about 12 to 15% higher fuel flow rates were observed for equal power settings on AGE85 and 100LL.

For you non-techies, that means while AGE85 produces less energy per gallon than Av-Gas, it's MPG is only 12-15% less than non-ethanol low lead AV-Gas because it burns hotter.

Commercialization: (FAA) Certification proceedings are in progress for three more engine–airframe combinations, one of which includes a supercharged engine.

It seems that the delay in commercialization is not fuel inefficiency but a delay in FAA testing and certifying the product.

[Rocky_J]

Y'all are just arguing way too hard for this junk. Alcohol pulls moisture out of the air and then separates out from the gasoline and settles to the bottom of the tank. The gas remaining has much lower octane and then the alcohol at the bottom holds too much water. So you end up running on crappy gas and then the motor seizes when you get to the water at the bottom of the tank. This is especially dangerous for 2 cycle motors where the lubrication is provided by oil mixed in the gas. Separation of fuel is a bad thing.

 I live on a 150 mile wide sandbar and our humidity levels range from 60%-100%, so there is always moisture in the air. Ethanol fuel is not suitable for this area. Mandating its use does not make it any better.

Living in Alaska, your moisture freezes out of the air so you end up with lower humidity and it isn't as much of a problem for you. But your environment does not apply everywhere.

[PlicketyCat]

Phase separation once saturation point has been reached is problematic, not just in ethanol but most fuels. Ethanol, unfortunately, separates a little easier. If your live in a climate with high humidity, store your equipment fueled for long periods, and/or cannot reduce the amount of water or mositure vapor that can enter the mixture then ethanol is the appropriate fuel for your situation or the system design needs to be modified in order to correct this problem. (Humidity is very low here and we have low rainfall, so ethanol would be a viable fuel in my situation with almost no modification).

I agree that the government shouldn't try to force a one-size-fits-all solution on everyone because one size most certainly does NOT fit all. However, if we are facing a fossil-fuel shortage, then more viable solutions need to be addressed and incorporated in production designs so that fuels and equipment can be selected that are appropriate to the conditions in which they are used.

As I said earlier, I'm neither pro or con... ethanol has it's place along with a multitude of other fuels. Maybe not in your gas tank, but in others.

[John Mc]

JohnMc - I'll dig around and see if I can come up with a 2-cycle oil that works, or is at least non-reactive with the ethanol.

I wonder what they use in Brazil, where they're big on burning straight ethanol in their cars? They must have something to mix for 2 cycle engines.

On the other hand, this is mostly just a curiosity for me. I'm not likely to go out and mix up a batch of moonshine with 2 cycle oil to try out in my chainsaw... even i the oil is intended for use with ethanol.

John Mc

[Ianab]

JohnMc - I'll dig around and see if I can come up with a 2-cycle oil that works, or is at least non-reactive with the ethanol.

I wonder what they use in Brazil, where they're big on burning straight ethanol in their cars? They must have something to mix for 2 cycle engines.

On the other hand, this is mostly just a curiosity for me. I'm not likely to go out and mix up a batch of moonshine with 2 cycle oil to try out in my chainsaw... even i the oil is intended for use with ethanol.

John Mc

Have a read of this page. http://www.duckworksmagazine.com/06/columns/rob/maib2.htm

It relates to 2 stroke outboard motors, but his recomendation is an ester based fully synthetic oil which seems to mix properly with the alcohol.

The thing is that Ethanol isn't a 'bad' fuel, it's just that older and even some current engines are not designed to run on it. Some relatively minor changes, compression, carb jetting, corrosion resistant materials and the right lubricants and it should work fine. New saws have a positive pressure fuel tank, that should reduce moisture moisture getting into the fuel etc.

Maybe the manufactures have to up their game, make a few minor changes and start putting "designed for E15" stickers on their gear? Of course then they will need to go back to making carbs adjustable again 

Ian

[Rocky_J]

As someone who grew up in my father's service station back in the 70's (during the first 'gas crisis'), IMO there is no fossil fuel shortage. 30 years ago there were panic claims of only 30-35 years of oil left. Back in the 90's there were panic claims that we only had 30-35 years of oil left. Today there are panic claims of only 30-35 years of oil left. 3 months ago the largest oil reserves ever discovered were announced off the coast of Brazil. They dwarf the reserves in Iraq and Saudi Arabia and should be coming online in the next 10 years.

Prices are manipulated by the people selling the oil. They want as much money as they can get without stifling demand. If alternative fuels get cheaper, then oil will get cheaper also. If corn squeezin's, wind and solar power are more expensive, then they can get more money for their oil without cutting demand.

[Aces]

I have a bias against Ethanol, based on one set of personal data. In Seattle, they have mandated using 10% Oxygenated gas in the Winter months. It's done for air pollution reasons. I've always tracked my Fuel Economy. What amazed me was how my Honda Accord got about 10% lower mpg in the Winter months than the Summer. It seemed to me that's the same as if I'd just bought 10% less gas!  There's talk now of going this route year-round...

BTW, my solution to reducing our dependence on foreign Oil was to switch to a car that gets better fuel Economy. My 2-year-old Prius is averaging 54 MPG, double what my old Accord used to get.  So I guess that's the equivalent of burning 50% Ethanol in my old car...

[Ironwood]

My issue is, I will NEVER purchase NEW equipment w/ the ethanol tolerant equipment, so for me the issue is BIG.


         Ironwood

[Al_Smith]

 
Planes don't use ethanol because planes don't use gasoline. Aircraft fuel is a special blend, more similar to kerosene (#1 diesel).

Perhaps that is true of jet engines which I assume you are refering to .In that case it would likely be JP-4 .

However piston driven aircraft indeed do run on gasoline ,100 octane rating to be exact . I doubt a spark ignition engine would run too good on kerosine unless it was a low compression John_Deere A or something similar .Even at that they had to be started on gasoline from an auxillary tank but that's another subject all in itself .

[John Mc]

Planes don't use ethanol because planes don't use gasoline. Aircraft fuel is a special blend, more similar to kerosene (#1 diesel).

As a Pilot, flight instructor, and owner of a Cessna 172 (piston engine aircraft), I can assure you that most small aircraft (piston engine) do in fact use gasoline. The fuel you are referring to that is similar to diesel is Jet-A (among other Jet fuels) - and is burned in jets, and the relatively few diesel-engine aircraft out there.

Most piston engine aircraft run on what is known as 100LL (stands for 100 octane, low lead). This is the last leaded fuel used in the world. The "Low Lead" is a bit of a misnomer, since it has 3 times or more the lead that used to be in the old leaded auto fuel (it's only "low" as compared to the older 100 octane aviation gas which is no longer made). There is currently a lot of R&D going in to developing an alternative to 100LL, since the lead is a real problem environmentally, and logistically (can't use same trucks or pipelines to transport it, and refineries have a major change over to go from producing leaded fuels back to unleaded ones -- don't want to risk contaminating auto gas with lead).

Some piston engine aircraft, my own included, can run on automotive gas, provided the gas has NO ethanol in it. I typically do not use auto gas, since the Avgas is more stable... it doesn't degrade as quickly as auto gas, and doesn't gum up carburetors as easily if it sits for extended periods.

[PlicketyCat]

I recanted the airplane comment

Talked with the bush pilot who delivers the mail yesterday about this. He said "I'll take whatever gas I find out here. She might run choppy, but she runs."  Now, granted, we do have really low humidity up here, so the moisture isn't as much of a problem.  I'm sure at the larger/city airports they offer high grade fuels, but gas is hard to come by in the bush communities so you take what you can get when you can get it. Unless a pilot is flying within his tank's range, or he's using his cargo space to haul his own fuel instead of cash goods, then it's likely he'll end up with some strange and funky mix of whatever is available at the airstrips he lands at.

My interest in ethanol is simply wanting to have a fuel that I can make myself so I 1) don't have to pay big $$$ at the bush pump, 2) don't have to drive 4 hours into town with a huge in-bed tank to buy in bulk then have to stabilize it, 3) will always have fuel as long as I can grow the source crop, and 4) can stop being (as much) at the mercy of arbitrary legislation and market fluctuations.  Bio-gas doesn't work up here because it's too cold to keep an anaerobic digester going... so replacing propane is not an option. Diesel gels up here long before we get to the real cold, so bio-diesel isn't an option (esp. since it gels at higher temps than petro diesel). So that leaves ethanol and methanol, and methanol is a much more complicated process that doesn't lend itself to home brew. 

It's not like I think that ethanol is the next miracle of modern technology that will save the world from destruction... just that it's the best solution for me in my circumstances. Other people have different circumstances, so their fuel requirements and options are going to be different.  If I still lived in SC, I'd have converted everything to propane and be making bio-gas from our hog poo or running bio-diesel made from peanuts.

The problem is SCALE... when everything is centralized and legislated as if every circumstance was identical, it just doesn't work. Back in the day, way way back, you had things that were localized... special equipment for the needs of that particular area. It worked, but wasn't convenient if you wanted to manufacture and sell distributed, or if you moved and had to replace your gear. So you end up with something that works "good enough" for all over, but doesn't really do an excellent job in any one place.  It's just a matter perspective.

[Al_Smith]

If you are really interested in home grown fuel do a little research on it .You can take garbage,organic material etc and kind of cook it into a type of gooey crude oil then run it through a basic vacuum still and get crude gasoline .

There's all kinds of options besides moonshine .Then again you could blow yourself to kingdom come fooling with that stuff too . At least with the 'shine you could take a nip now and again to ward off that cold Alaska air this time of year .

As for myself I just buy the stuff,ethanol or not .The stuff that wards off the chill I get at the liquer store .--for medicinal purposes of course . .

[PlicketyCat]

Yep, Al, there are many many different types of home grown fuel and ways of making it. Man, I think we probaly have 2-3 boxes of reference materials in the storage room and a million online links just researching it all.  A big plus for ethanol is that the still design and processing is already tried and true, since we've been boozing it as a species for several hundred years .  Why reinvent the wheel and take unnecessary risks, eh?

[Al_Smith]

Seriously there must be a zillion ways to fuel an internal combustion  engine .Moonshine,Browns gas,home made gasoline ,producer gas from charcoal ,wood alkie .You name ,it's there .

It just boils down to how enthusiastic a person is in obtaining "free" fuel --which isn't really free  if you think about it .

To the subject though which is chainsaw engines .How long they could run on a diet of pure alkie is anybodies guess .A racing kart engine in the 60's was good for about 10-12 races but they were souped to the max .In cold weather they will not start worth a hoot though .

Racing saws is entirely different from a work saw .A racer might run less than two hours total during its' usefull  lifetime .Ran at less than 10 seconds at a time .You can't do that with a work saw .

[PlicketyCat]

That's one of the reasons I was thinking about modifying my little Shindy to see how she holds up on pure ethanol before we actually end up relying on it.  The way I figure, if she runs good and holds up to work most of the year; even if I have to replace her entire fuel delivery system every year, the non-taxable (as opposed to "free") home-brew fuel would be cost effective and we can use one of the bigger saws with different fuel in the winter... cuz, yeah, ethanol only does slightly better in the cold than diesel.  This isn't too great a hardship, since the Shindy won't stay running once it's -10 anyway, guess it never gets that cold in Japan

[tstex]

Gentlemen,

I can appreciate the myriad of both comments and viewpoints, some taken from quantitative research, some learned for the real-life application. 

What is common to all of you is whatever set of resources [fuels/inputs, engine types, tools, etc] you have works for you and you can profit from it, you favor it.  If your resources [now] negatively impact you in anyway that you perceive as either a major inconvenience and/or it costs you more, you are looking for options.  Either way, no one likes change that is to their detriment.

Fact, and putting this into scientific terms, when we suddenly notice the toilet paper roll is down to the last 4-5 squares, we all get creative.  At this point, it is too late to have changed your food consumption rate that got you there and it is too late to change the design of your a-hole.

Fact, hydrocarbon based fuels are far superior in all facets of cost-performance ratios for all of us regardless of where you live.  Almost 100% of all combustion based engines are designed for hydrocarbons and nearly 100% of all world infrastructure is in place to explore, locate, drill, extract, transport, refine and distribute oil-based products and by-products.  Is your keyboard you are using made from alcohol, or the screen you are reading?

Preference, I would absolutely promote to keep all our money here and not send either a dime to the M-East or China.  Fact, however, capitalism, special interest groups, tax bases, greed and "our leaders" will solely dictate what is made and what are our only viable options,  barring any catastrophic event making 911 look like a hiccup.

Right now, we have to do the best we can do with what it is we have and take advantage of any products or services that can help us.

Good luck,
tstex

[PlicketyCat]

Well and admirably stated tstex!

Our government and other powers that be do not care about our individual or collective interests. As with any system, they have gotten large enough to exist solely to keep existing... they no longer serve us.

With that in mind, now that we realize our toilet paper running out can cause us some problems in the future, we (the people) have an opportunity to find appropriate alternative materials, consumption trends, and a-hole design improvements to mitigate the impact for us, based on our needs and what's available to us.  Ignoring that the TP is running out (or could) just delays the inevitable stinky hand!

You don't have to give up on what works, although you may have to work around what the gov't is doing, but looking around for alternatives and trying a few new things certainly couldn't hurt

[Rocky_J]

I just read your signature line and the thought expressed there seems completely opposite from the thoughts you express in your posts. And I'm sorry, but my eyes glaze over when some people start talking about crazy stuff like us running out of toilet paper. Wood is a renewable resource and toilet paper is not made from old growth wood.

[PlicketyCat]

Rocky - I'm truly sorry if you feel that I'm trying to tell you to live the way that I have chosen to live. That certainly isn't my intention, since I firmly believe that people should be able to live as they wish to live as long as it doesn't directly harm others. It has only ever been my intention to expose different perspectives so a problem can be looked at from all sides.

The TP thing - that's an analogy, it wasn't meant to be literal. Sometimes using analogy helps eliminate the arguments about details and focus solely on the core issue.  I often use home-building analogies when talking about complex software designs... home-building is something most people are familiar with and it keeps us from getting side-tracked from the main issue of building a stable infrastructure.

[Rocky_J]

Well all the pie-in-the-sky explanations touting all the benefits of ethanol don't jive with my personal experience. I run small equipment for a living (chainsaws) and Federal regulations have resulted in manufacturers making modifications to meet standards. These modifications result in machines that run very lean and very hot, right on the razor edge of self destruction and user adjustment is limited. Now add an unstable fuel like ethanol to the mix and you have a very major problem of your fuel being fine one day and capable of destroying your source of income the next day. Yes, I have personally seen many engines seized up due to running lean as a direct result of ethanol instability. I've lost a couple myself in spite of being aware of the problems and doing my best to deal with them using the means available to me.

Then we have the incompatibility with seals and gaskets. About 7-8 years ago Stihl decided that the $3 gas and oil caps weren't good enough and they redesigned all their caps into $17 flip top multi-piece caps. The o rings on these caps tend to swell up from the ethanol and the caps are difficult to remove and replace in daily use. After a few months the caps get jammed or forced and then the core separates, rendering the cap useless. I now have to stock several extra $17 gas caps for my Stihl saws solely because of ethanol poisoning.

[PlicketyCat]

You may be surprised, but I do understand and feel your frustration. Some of the so-called "eco-friendly" design changes that have been forced upon us by poorly analyzed legislation affects me as well. Namely the new environmentally friendly gas cans that no one asked if we wanted, they're just suddenly the only thing available.

Advanced spout design combined with child-resistant features and emission reducing technology delivers a user-friendly and environmentally safe storage solution

Those child-resistant features, a thumb depressed ratcheting collar, effectively make this cap-spout impossible to remove at temperatures below freezing because the plastic is too hard to depress. The emission reducing venting system also creates a vapor lock at those temps, permanently vacuum welding the cap to the tank.

Easy-to-use spout features convenient variable flow, automatic venting, automatic locking when lever is released, and an airtight seal when not in use to reduce spills

Again - nifty little plastic locking levers are impossible to move and depress when temps are below freezing. I have to pound the lever with a hammer and then stomp on the flow tab just to get the slow flow. And the new spout is too short and at the wrong angle to pour into my generator without a funnel... who wants to fumble around with a funnel when it's -40 and you're wearing gumby gloves?

So - you see, everyone gets bitten by these rules & regulations because they're a quicky one-size-fits-all solution that completly ignore the needs and conditions of the individual consumers.

[Al_Smith]

Well first of all one must remember that Stihl dealers have several levels of pricing .For example rich self employed tree trimmers are charged 17 bucks for a gas cap .At the same time the price for the same for poverty strickened electricians is about half that . No matter what the price though,they suck .

Now then ,home grown moonshine gasoline and wind powered electrical generation and the like might appear to be really neat .However it's highly impractical . About like cutting wood with a bowsaw and axe when a chainsaw would suffice better .

Whatever floats your boat though but 'taint my cup of tea . Now if I had an oil well in the back yard that might be another story but as it is the closest well is a mile away .
Oh I suppose I could sink about a 2000 foot hole in the front field and suck out the oil because I live right over an active oil field . High sulpher stuff .Smells like a bucket of skunk butts .So I think on that I'll just trot off to the gas station which is two miles away and fill-er-up .

[Ironwood]

On the gas cans, you should have run out and bought all the old style you could have before the "improved" ones came out.  I look at the local flea market for the "outlaw" cans

 FYI, buy ANY diesel engine you want now (generator, BIG truck, SMALL truck), the EPA mandated post burn filtration (urea filters) are a costly solution imposed upon us, costing the average consumers millions of dollars collectively nationwide. Personally, I am looking for a 2000  "ish" 33,000 lb truck w/ a good dependable "old" style engine (but new enough to be more effiecent). Folks tell me avoid a Cat, as the computer "read" is only thru an expensive computer module needing updated yearly. Evidentally, Cummins are cheaper and easier to diagnose.  I bought my Ford F-550 w/ a 7.3, knowing the 6.0 nightmare (pushed out of design early by EPA regs) were the going to be an issue. Now, by the way I am adding lubricity additive to the "new and improved" low sulfur diesel. Great! 

 Never a dull moment trying to keep up Uncle Sam's next round of regs . I'll get off my soap box now.


          Ironwood 

[PlicketyCat]

I'm circumventing the whole gas can mess and getting the metal ones from "Fire & Safety" -- apparently, emergency crews don't have to follow some regulations.  Although, with a bt of tinkering and the bolt cutters, I've fixed the improved cans so that they are child-unsafe, do not "helpfully" cause vapor lock, and are in the "pour" position unless I intentionally pound them into the "store" position. Now I just have to figure out how to attach one of the old flexi-spouts to it and we'll be all good.

I just love how they help make something "dangerous" more "safe" for us by making it completely unusable

[tstex]

I just read your signature line and the thought expressed there seems completely opposite from the thoughts you express in your posts. And I'm sorry, but my eyes glaze over when some people start talking about crazy stuff like us running out of toilet paper. Wood is a renewable resource and toilet paper is not made from old growth wood.

Rocky J,

I emphatize with your position and appreciate what impact ethanol has had on your gear.  This is what peaked my interest on the orig post.  A friend of mine recently bought some land and chain saws and made the comment of how the corn-additive to his gas was reeking havoc on his c-saws.  I have 4 c-saws [.023 & up] and over the last 13+ yrs have recently noticed the issues of blended fuels.

My point of the TP was an analogy, meaning run with what we have that works well, but don't wait until we are out of our primary resources thus forcing us to make both a radical and costly transition.  however, it is all about economics.  no one sought real alternative fuels sources until the $150/barrel climb.  Now those folks were killed at $37 a barrel tumble and the current vacillating $70/barrel. 

In a perfect world, it would be great to be able to buy either 100% true gas for a conventional combustion-based engine or 100% ethanol for an engine solely designed for that fuel, and then let the two technologies and their respective supplies duke-it-out.   If an ethanol based engine was built that was truly optimized to run 100% ethanol and it worked great, it would pith those users off too if we then added 10-15% 87 octane to make a blend...

Hope this makese sense.  Either way, I appreciate having a forum where I can get some good info and indulge in some good conversation...you guys would be welcome at my dinner table anytime.

Season's Greetings
tstex

[LeeB]

What time and what we eating? 

[old_hb]

Without getting into a pissing contest, the evidence that gasohol is bad for plastic and most rubber gaskets is overwhelming. It shouldn't be a point of dissension. Everyone I've talked to who uses chainsaws, weedeaters and other machines with 2 cycle engines has pointed out that the old advice of emptying your machines for winter or whatever season involves non-use, is no longer valid. I look for gas without gasohol but it is getting harder and harder to find. Using such gas, I've had considerably fewer problems with my many machines than those who use gas w/gasohol.
HB

[whiskers]

that Daniels fellow figured a great way to add color, flavor and a working container, I'd be pleased to leave it with that.