- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Score Board
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- SEC Score Board
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 10/22/14 at 12:42 pm to Iosh
quote:
If you're going to have ethanol subsidies, which I think are dumb, but let's go along for a moment, they should be ethanol subsidies. Not corn subsidies. Sugarcane has seven times the energy balance of corn for ethanol. There are symbiotic bacteria (gluconacetobacter) that can fix nitrogen so you use less chemicals. Why is our ethanol coming from the Midwest instead of the South?
Brasil uses sugar cane for their model. Corn is used here because of lobbiests.
Posted on 10/22/14 at 12:42 pm to Bmath
Bingo
Posted on 10/22/14 at 12:44 pm to Bmath
quote:
The article goes on to explain that ethanol has its own laundry list of issues. However, the simple truth is that lead was added to gas to prevent engine knock. Lead was determined to be harmful, and was replaced by MTBE. It was also found to be harmful, and was replaced by ethanol.
This may be the historical progression of gasoline additives, but I'm pretty sure that ethanol actually has nothing to do with preventing engine knock. I thought auto makers simply found ways to design engines that didn't require such an additive.
As I understand it, it was only through lobbying efforts of "big corn" that they were able to slip in ethanol as an additive in the place of lead, but that there is no useful purpose at all for car engines for the actual addition of ethanol. It really has nothing at all to do with "market" forces in the traditional sense of that word.
Correct me if I'm wrong, as I don't proclaim to be an expert on this subject, just an interested observer/consumer.
Posted on 10/22/14 at 12:45 pm to jimbeam
quote:
Gas leaks are a lot less common these days. Tons of stations have revamped their storage due to liabilities like this
In new stations, but not in older ones. My company handles quite a few remediations a each year when they tear down old stations.
The problem is that many mom and pop facilities can't afford to upgrade.
I've also seen detectable levels of MTBE on farms where they were using ethanol free fuels. That stuffs is tricky.
This post was edited on 10/22/14 at 12:49 pm
Posted on 10/22/14 at 12:46 pm to Bmath
We had a few older stations as well. Never seent any mtbe though
So many damn env. on this board
So many damn env. on this board
Posted on 10/22/14 at 12:46 pm to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
quote: The article goes on to explain that ethanol has its own laundry list of issues. However, the simple truth is that lead was added to gas to prevent engine knock. Lead was determined to be harmful, and was replaced by MTBE. It was also found to be harmful, and was replaced by ethanol. This may be the historical progression of gasoline additives, but I'm pretty sure that ethanol actually has nothing to do with preventing engine knock. I thought auto makers simply found ways to design engines that didn't require such an additive. As I understand it, it was only through lobbying efforts of "big corn" that they were able to slip in ethanol as an additive in the place of lead, but that there is no useful purpose at all for car engines for the actual addition of ethanol. It really has nothing at all to do with "market" forces in the traditional sense of that word. Correct me if I'm wrong, as I don't proclaim to be an expert on this subject, just an interested observer/consumer.
That's a good question. I have a toxicology back ground. Not a Chem-E background. However everything I have always read was that ethanol is used for anti knocking.
This post was edited on 10/22/14 at 12:48 pm
Posted on 10/22/14 at 12:54 pm to Bmath
quote:
everything I have always read was that ethanol is used for anti knocking
The EPA is worried about anti-knocking? I think you are either misinformed or at Slate too much.
Posted on 10/22/14 at 1:00 pm to Bmath
quote:
I have always read was that ethanol is used for anti knocking.
I've been using ethanol free gas in my truck for over two years and not once have I heard any pinging or knocking.
Posted on 10/22/14 at 1:01 pm to lsu13lsu
quote:
The EPA is worried about anti-knocking? I think you are either misinformed or at Slate too much.
I had never read slate until today, but I thought that article was a good summary of the history.
The EPA was concerned with health implications of additives used as anti-knocking agents.
Posted on 10/22/14 at 1:03 pm to Homesick Tiger
quote:
I've been using ethanol free gas in my truck for over two years and not once have I heard any pinging or knocking.
I know of no farm, lawn or boat equipment that knocks on ethanol free fuel.
Posted on 10/22/14 at 1:04 pm to Bmath
quote:
I had never read slate until today, but I thought that article was a good summary of the history.
The EPA was concerned with health implications of additives used as anti-knocking agents.
I think you and Slate are making a leap that the reason we are using so much ethanol is because of engine knocking. It is intellectually dishonest to even try this. It may be how additives first started but that isn't why the EPA is forcing ethanol use.
Posted on 10/22/14 at 1:09 pm to lsu13lsu
quote:
I think you and Slate are making a leap that the reason we are using so much ethanol is because of engine knocking. It is intellectually dishonest to even try this. It may be how additives first started but that isn't why the EPA is forcing ethanol use.
Right. As I appreciate it, it is simply how they snuck ethanol in as a mandate.
Hey, we no longer need this additive so who's going to notice if we sneak this one in instead?
Posted on 10/22/14 at 1:13 pm to Bmath
MTBE is anti knocking but mainly helps with oxygenation.
Ethanol is I'm assuming supposed to be a replacement oxygenator
Ethanol is I'm assuming supposed to be a replacement oxygenator
This post was edited on 10/22/14 at 1:14 pm
Posted on 10/22/14 at 1:13 pm to lsu13lsu
quote:
I think you and Slate are making a leap that the reason we are using so much ethanol is because of engine knocking. It is intellectually dishonest to even try this. It may be how additives first started but that isn't why the EPA is forcing ethanol use.
You are pretty dense. I was only pointing out how we got there. I am in no way a champion of gasohol.
Posted on 10/22/14 at 1:17 pm to Bmath
quote:
However, the simple truth is that lead was added to gas to prevent engine knock. Lead was determined to be harmful, and was replaced by MTBE. It was also found to be harmful, and was replaced by ethanol.
This is absolutely the first time I have ever heard that ethanol is an 'additive to prevent knocking' - that is imho bullshite. Ethanol is supposed to 'burn cleaner' in terms of emissions, but knocking was a result of valve clearances or some such. Lead additives eliminated that problem.
When unleaded gas first came out, I started using it (doing my part for the environment doncha know) and burned out the valves on my truck. It didn't knock - just burned the valves. Went back to using leaded gasoline as long as it was available.
Then the auto manufacturers made engines that could use unleaded gas without burning out the valves.
Ethanol came along as a strictly environmental additive. - Unless there was some technical discussion that I completely missed out on.
Posted on 10/22/14 at 1:19 pm to jimbeam
quote:
MTBE is anti knocking but mainly helps with oxygenation.
Ethanol is I'm assuming supposed to be a replacement oxygenator
I've seen it sited for both. I'm curious what current ethanol free fuels are blended with, if at all. Dug around some, but the details are vague. Although I did see that lead can still be used in some aviation fuels.
Posted on 10/22/14 at 1:24 pm to ChineseBandit58
quote:
This is absolutely the first time I have ever heard that ethanol is an 'additive to prevent knocking
I took 6 different toxicology classes in grad school and we talked about the phasing out of leaded and MTBE fuels in all of them. We also discussed it in enviro chem. This isn't new information.
Once again, I'm not arguing for it, but we got to this point for a reason. Unfortunately ethanol has tied into economics in such a way that it creates bigger issues.
Posted on 10/22/14 at 1:31 pm to Bmath
quote:
I took 6 different toxicology classes in grad school and we talked about the phasing out of leaded and MTBE fuels in all of them. We also discussed it in enviro chem. This isn't new information.
I am only addressing the anti-knocking claim not toxicology.
It is my impression that knocking occurs when the octane of the gas is not high enough relative to the compression of the engine to prevent pre-ignition. <-- what I call 'knocking.'
It is also my impression that ethanol effectively lowers the octane of fuel.
My impressions may be wrong, and I have never studied the matter, but I have been aware of all the public arguments put forth for ethanol. I just don't recall 'anti-knock' being one of those arguments. I'm pretty sure I would have noticed since it is - to me - illogical.
Posted on 10/22/14 at 1:38 pm to ChineseBandit58
Ethanol is an octane enhancer or anti-knock additive.
Louisiana DNR
Louisiana DNR
This post was edited on 10/22/14 at 1:42 pm
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News