• Welcome to the new NAXJA Forum! If your password does not work, please use "Forgot your password?" link on the log-in page. Please feel free to reach out to [email protected] if we can provide any assistance.

Is E85 really a Con?

I read a few weeks back that a company that makes home Bio-Diesel manufacturing kits is planning now selling a home ethanol kit brewing, complete with forms to fill out to be allowed to do so federally!
 
rock rash said:
Not entirely true...For oil, It must be drilled contained and shipped. Hydrogen, the main expense is to get a machine up and running. The machine uses solar energyt to seperate the hydrogen atoms from the oxygen in water...and it is completely renewable...I believe Hydrogen is the way to go, but oil companies and helpin with some "expenses" at automotive factories to help keep vehicles running on oil...
Click to expand...

Hydrogen out of Water? Oh, why should it be so simple? I read somewhere that the Bush admin already took of that loop hole in 2002. Nope, 90% of the hydrogen used in Hydrogen powered cars must be made from a petrol product. Not really suprising as the most efficient way to make Hydrogen it to crack it from a Petro product.

The Bushies also killed the Hybrid program which was looking like it would start paying out. I have been very dissapointed by the hybrids I have seen on the road. Either they are just as efficient as a regular car, or they are little ecco-boxes. Nothing like the 100mpg Escort Wagon the U of WI had for a while (Made and raced by the SAE class) that had a 2cy Kohler for a backup charger. It was truely enjoyable to watch that car autocross on just battery.

Nope, if you want independence from Foreign or, do it the 70's way and brew up some good ol' Ethanol in a still. Mother Earth News did a whole series of articles on this back in the day, complete with plans and vehicle studies.They also worked up studies on how to use the byproducts, methane and mash.
As was pointed out, Brazil has been an alcohol producer for years. They grow sugar cane just for fuel, no side effects that I know of and the mash is used for feed.
Don't back Alcohol? How about Bio-desiel? Automotive desiels have come quite a ways down the evolutionary scale since the VW rabbit of the 80's. The Big trucks use the stuff like crazy and that market alone would help quite a few farmers!

IMO, we need to make the farm ecconomical to run again. By having an additional market for their products, we all benifit and less land will be sold to these land hungry developers.

Ron
 
Last edited:
Lets all remember that the alternative fuels industry was not developed to make it more economical for us to drive, but rather to make it cleaner for us to drive. The primary goal of alternative fuels is cleaner air, not cheaper fuel.

I once saw a hippie VW bug with a bumper sticker that read 'Split Wood, Not Atoms'. Think about that for a minute. If everybody tried to burn wood, how long could that be sustained? Ethanol production is in the same ballpark. You can't produce enough ethanol by distillation to supplant all of the fuels needs of this country. If all of the corn production were turned to ethanol, it would still fall well short of eliminating petroleum imports.
 
RichP said:
Simple but then not everyone here understands everything

http://witcombe.sbc.edu/water/chemistryelectrolysis.html

http://www.hydrogen.com/faq.asp

And yes, I'm somewhat into it, anything that seperates me from dependency or simplifys my life.

I've actually hunted around for surplus O2/Hydrogen generators from navy surplus with little luck...
Click to expand...
WOW! That is some very good info. I remember reading about that 750hl when we use to get the BMW magazine. From what I understand they have been experimenting with it in fleets arround Germany.
 
RichP said:
Simple but then not everyone here understands everything

http://witcombe.sbc.edu/water/chemistryelectrolysis.html

http://www.hydrogen.com/faq.asp

And yes, I'm somewhat into it, anything that seperates me from dependency or simplifys my life.

I've actually hunted around for surplus O2/Hydrogen generators from navy surplus with little luck...
Click to expand...

I saw a story, probably on CNN American Morning (I never have any luck seaching CNN.com, so I haven't been able to confirm this) about a gentleman in the Northeast, I think, who has set up a hydrogen extraction/storage/fuel cell system for his home. the story mentioned that he got considerable funding through a grant from the local energy company.

I'm not a proponent of oil. I am a proponent of rational thought. Ethanol replacing oil is silly. Ethanol becoming cheaper than gasoline always requires that gas prices go through the roof. The more I look at the issue of energy in general, the more I like hydrogen. Generators are available and should become more affordable as time passes. Does NASA have a surplus store? :D

I was wondering: If you collect the water coming off your fuel cell and return it to the fueling center, could you get a credit off your next fill-up?
 
XJ Dreamin' said:
I was wondering: If you collect the water coming off your fuel cell and return it to the fueling center, could you get a credit off your next fill-up?
Click to expand...

No but if you had your own H2 generator you could reprocess it for the Hydrogen. If the generator was onboard you would have a somewhat closed system, not to say a no loss system but one that you would have to only add water to as needed. The pictures of the generator from honda that I saw showed a wall unit about the size of two 72 scuba tanks with a box on top almost the same size and a hose to connect to the cars tank to transfer.
Like I said before, we have been cracking H20 for the past 40+ years to get oxygen for submarines, it's not a new science. Downside is the navy ones work at 3,000-5,000psi so I imagine you'd have to have the tanks hydroed every few years.
With the right setup you would not have to stop at a service station, you'd fuel at home, this is one of the sticking points economically, ones big business would not like at all, no long term income potential for the executives and stock holders..
If anything the current business models of every corp is to make you more dependent on them, not less.
 
RichP said:
No but if you had your own H2 generator you could reprocess it for the Hydrogen. If the generator was aboard you would have a somewhat closed system, not to say a no loss system but one that you would have to only add water to as needed. The pictures of the generator from Honda that I saw showed a wall unit about the size of two 72 scuba tanks with a box on top almost the same size and a hose to connect to the cars tank to transfer.
Like I said before, we have been cracking H20 for the past 40+ years to get oxygen for submarines, it's not a new science. Downside is the navy ones work at 3,000-5,000psi so I imagine you'd have to have the tanks hydroed every few years.
With the right setup you would not have to stop at a service station, you'd fuel at home, this is one of the sticking points economically, ones big business would not like at all, no long term income potential for the executives and stock holders..
If anything the current business models of every corp is to make you more dependent on them, not less.
Click to expand...

:D I was thinking of fueling up at a service station with that thought :D

But, more seriously - Cracking water is easy, but it does take energy. A generator/fuel cell setup on a car is not a closed system. As far as the water-gases-water, yes, but it takes energy to crack the water. That has to come from outside because you're using the exothermic production to move the car, not to generate more gas. At any rate, neither of us is talking perpetual here. We both understand physics. Of course, the Navy can crack as much water as they like. They're in the ocean, and they've got a fission reactor handy.

I would certainly save the water. That does represent, directly, fuel for the car. But, I would need to crack it again. Where would you get the energy for the generator if it is mounted in the car? Even a catalytic electrolysis needs some energy input.

Also, if you're generating at home, are you drawing from the grid or can solar panels keep up with your needs?
 
XJ Dreamin' said:
:D I was thinking of fueling up at a service station with that thought :D

But, more seriously - Cracking water is easy, but it does take energy. A generator/fuel cell setup on a car is not a closed system. As far as the water-gases-water, yes, but it takes energy to crack the water. That has to come from outside because you're using the exothermic production to move the car, not to generate more gas. At any rate, neither of us is talking perpetual here. We both understand physics. Of course, the Navy can crack as much water as they like. They're in the ocean, and they've got a fission reactor handy.

I would certainly save the water. That does represent, directly, fuel for the car. But, I would need to crack it again. Where would you get the energy for the generator if it is mounted in the car? Even a catalytic electrolysis needs some energy input.

Also, if you're generating at home, are you drawing from the grid or can solar panels keep up with your needs?
Click to expand...

Thats where a catylist converter could come in vs an H2O cracker that requires power from the grid or some other source. As for power demands, it's been too long since I've been around one and I don't have my sibs anymore to look up what panel fed them then I'd know what the voltages were for both units, we had two and would spare them off. If you had a plug in method to run an onboard converter vs a wall mount you'd just plug it in and fill the hydrogen tank again over nite. The cells that nasa uses generate power, they don't need any to run but may to startup, don't know. With a hydrogen internal combustion engine or a hydrogen generator w/electric drive you would be using power from the grid to make fuel. As for solar cells, depends how big your roof is I guess. Going by several manufacturers of solar shingles my southeast facing roof would require between 25-30 rows of shingles for me to turn a profit from PP&L, twenty rows to break even based on past consumption but with my daughter moving to philly full time and going to school and the other heading for boot camp in january I expect alot of bills are going to go down [food mostly, electric too], electric already dropped 18%. The cost to do those 30 rows of solar shingles and the 'box' to plug in to the meter is ~$9,000, payback is about 5 years, shingles are warrenteed for 20years. This may work into our plans on a new house in 2 years, we'll see.
 
RichP said:
Thats where a catylist converter could come in vs an H2O cracker that requires power from the grid or some other source. As for power demands, it's been too long since I've been around one and I don't have my sibs anymore to look up what panel fed them then I'd know what the voltages were for both units, we had two and would spare them off. If you had a plug in method to run an onboard converter vs a wall mount you'd just plug it in and fill the hydrogen tank again over nite. The cells that nasa uses generate power, they don't need any to run but may to startup, don't know. With a hydrogen internal combustion engine or a hydrogen generator w/electric drive you would be using power from the grid to make fuel. As for solar cells, depends how big your roof is I guess. Going by several manufacturers of solar shingles my southeast facing roof would require between 25-30 rows of shingles for me to turn a profit from PP&L, twenty rows to break even based on past consumption but with my daughter moving to philly full time and going to school and the other heading for boot camp in january I expect alot of bills are going to go down [food mostly, electric too], electric already dropped 18%. The cost to do those 30 rows of solar shingles and the 'box' to plug in to the meter is ~$9,000, payback is about 5 years, shingles are warrenteed for 20years. This may work into our plans on a new house in 2 years, we'll see.
Click to expand...

Certainly the cells don't need power. That's the exothermic side of the equation. That's the energy that moves the car, but that's why it's not available to crack more water. There is a catalytic generator, but it is only more efficient, not independent. So, you have to put energy into it somewhere and that's where the shingles come into play, generating gas at home while you're off driving around. Bring the 'exhaust' back home to get cracked again and you're down to just that energy to crack the water (plus whatever inefficiency is inherent in the car's drive line).

I haven't read anywhere, but I was wondering: What is the temperature of the water 'exhaust' coming off of a fuel cell? That's energy I wouldn't like to waste.
 
E85 is cheaper at the pump but it is a deception to make you think E85 is cheaper overall and that you should buy a flexfuel car. E85 costs more per gallon to produce than regular gas, and by adding Ethenol to gasoline it actually raises the price of gas. The fact that E85 is less than regular 87 at the pump is to get the public to accept it as a better form of fuel. If gas is $2.45 and, E85 should cost $2.60, but its always $0.10 cheaper for some reason. Buyer beware. Give it 2 years and E85 will cost more than 87.
 
JONNYD said:
E85 is cheaper at the pump but it is a deception to make you think E85 is cheaper overall and that you should buy a flexfuel car. E85 costs more per gallon to produce than regular gas, and by adding Ethenol to gasoline it actually raises the price of gas. The fact that E85 is less than regular 87 at the pump is to get the public to accept it as a better form of fuel. If gas is $2.45 and, E85 should cost $2.60, but its always $0.10 cheaper for some reason. Buyer beware. Give it 2 years and E85 will cost more than 87.
Click to expand...

We don't have to deal with it in this area but what the gasoline retailers have done is quietly gotten together and set a price. EVERY SINGLE STATION in this immeadiate area is charging the same price, $2.39 9/10 per gallon. This is with stations that historically over the last 20 years I've lived here have had a typical spread of $.24 a gallon, I also found it interetsting that last nite I filled up in center city philly at the sunoco on walnut street for $2.39 9 a gallon, it was the same price on the turnpike where you usually get raped and at the 11 stations I passed further north off the turnpike on the way home. The single exception was this morning when I was in town, the Hess was $2.22 a gallon. The exceptions around here were the full service repair stations that really could not care less about pumping gas, their meat and potatoes is repairs not fuel, PA is a selfserve state BTW.
As far as E85, yea, you pay less per gallon but a gallon of E85 is about 20% less MPG than regular so you already pay more to drive 100 miles with E85 than 87 octane regular and thats even on engines built for E85 too. We're getting hosed again only more quietly this time... I normally pay $2.01-$2.10 in north jersey for gas. I know I'll be taking all my Blitz cans with me on thursday or friday when I need to go down there again, it will save me about $18 bucks..
 
http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/pr/2006/060831.htm

Just saw a program on german TV the other night. Turning straw into gold.
The process was simple, mostly mechanical with some catalyst required. The end product is synthetic gas, free of most all pollutants. The byproducts of processing can mostly be returned to the soil. Synthetic fuel won't help much with the CO2 problem. But sure could help with the oil imports and deficit spending.
If they could produce it for pennies on the gallon, I doubt the price would go down any. Any alternative fuel will likely be marketed to maximize profits.
 
I think it's a total con in the way they are marketing it. The stuff kills performance less MPG and isn't that much cheaper than gas not here in CO that is. The only good thing is the burning cleaner part of it. One guy at the shop here ran it for 3 months counted up his fuel records and was forking out 20 bucks more a week on fuel on that E85 that gas. 5% savings at the pump per visit maybe, but if you have to visit the pump more often than thats not saving.

Now I wouldn't hate the stuff so much if they told you that up front, but they were pushing it as better performance better gas milage and cheaper along with burning cleaner. I don't think I would be so ticked off about it or anti E85 you know.
 
The big thing is that yes it burns cleaner, but it also supports American farmers instead of foreign oil and lowers our dependence on said foreign oil.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

V
High temp woes
2
Replies
35
Views
1K
Fred
F
N
  • Locked
Basic Modification tips for the XJ 4.0 I6
Replies
0
Views
35
NAXJA_Archives
N
G
98 XJ tick tick ticking!
2
Replies
29
Views
5K
straws
S
B
Is this the last goodbye? - anyone in UK want a 1993 XJ?
Replies
6
Views
2K
XJI6191
X
N
2000 XJ, high miles, lots of new parts, still have vibration
Replies
10
Views
1K
N8N_99xj
N
Back
Top