15% ethanol-Ok or not?

It seems the highly subsidized corn growers are producing more ethanol than is needed for 10% gas so they have pressured the EPA to raise the max limit to 15%. Any problems with this? The rational is to "reduce our depence on foreign oil"

 

In Technical you'll find PLENTY of troubles and car damages (to Ferraris) of ethanol.

They do not always 'observe' the 10% now, per field sampling......raising it higher will only make it worse!

 

NOT.

 

They've had 15% in the Alexandria VA area for years.

If you look around, you can still find 10%, but that's the best you can manage, in these parts.

 

Bad news...ask Dave Helms...

 

Long enough to study effects on fuel systems?

 

Ethanol can be a problem for fuel system components as it can attack seals and other soft parts. The more there is the more you can have a problem. Some newer cars are OK with it but many are not. I would not expect Ferraris to be among the leaders to spec ethanol tolerant fuel systems, especially older models. If you can't avoid ethanol fuel be sure that inspection is covered during annual checkup and be prepared to replace system components such as fuel pumps more often than might otherwise be expected.

 

YES, it is a big problem. As a general rule of thumb, any Ferrari older than 2000-2001 will have problem with ethanol-containing gasoline. It will cause degradation of fuel and emission components. Moreover, many times the resultant damage is not readily visible (e.g., fuel lines will look and feel perfectly fine externally).

Dave Helms at Scuderia Rampante Innovations (SRI) has developed a (ever-expanding) line of fuel system components manufactured by fluoroelastomers which have incredible resilience to the various gasoline additives currently being utilized. Replacement of said components with those produced by SRI will SOLVE the problem.




Here is a brief overview of the problems caused by three of these additives:

Due to increased environmental regulations (e.g., the 1990 Clean Air Act), a number of chemical additives are currently added to automotive and marine fuels in the United States and in numerous countries world-wide. These chemical additives have been shown to directly contribute and/or cause numerous problems in the fuel and emission control systems in internal combustion engines.

1. Alcohols
Currently, the alcohols methanol and ethanol are added to automotive and marine fuel in most areas of the United States and its use in fuels globally is increasing at a dramatic rate. The primary alcohol added to fuel is ethanol, at a concentration ranging from 10-20%. Interestingly, the aviation industry filed suit against the federal government and was granted an injunction against the requirement of adding ethanol to aviation fuels.
Food shortages, particularly in the third world and emerging economies, are resulting from the more lucrative income offered to farmers growing grains for ethanol production. Proponents of alcohol use in fuel allege that they burn cleanly and offer environmentally “friendly” octane enhancement.
Other octane enhancers (e.g., MTBE and all alcohols) are oxygenates that proponents claim burn cleanly and offer environmentally-friendly octane enhancement. However, the addition of oxygenates like ethanol, simultaneously lean the stoichiometric air:fuel mixture and diminish engine power, unless the gasoline refiners compensate for this loss. Moreover, lean combustion conditions can lead to detonation, potentially causing damage to the piston, valves, cylinder liners and/or fuel injectors.
The addition of alcohol (e.g., ethanol and methanol) to gasoline causes a plethora of problems including, but not limited to: (i) degradation of synthetic rubber- and polymer-containing elements within the fuel and emission systems; (ii) degradation of aluminum parts within the fuel and emission systems; (iii) degradation of internal fuel tank sealers and coatings; (iv) degradation of sheet metal, which necessitates the use of stainless steel within the fuel and emission systems; and (v) degradation of fiberglass composites used in fuel storage systems. In addition, alcohol and aromatic compounds in the fuel conveyed through many synthetic polymer fuel hoses diffuse at different rates through the fuel hose wall from that of the aliphatic components contained therein. The resulting change in the composition of the fuel within the hose can change the solubility thresholds of the materials (e.g., Nylon 11 or Nylon 12) comprising said hose, thus causing the formation of crystalline monomers and oligomers of these materials. The presence of various divalent ions (e.g., copper), found in fuel pump impellers, fuel filters, etc., accelerates this crystallization process. Subsequently, the crystallized precipitates can: (i) block fuel filters, fuel injectors, fuel valves, and the like; (ii) collect and limit the travel of the fuel pump or carburetor float and (iii) build up on critical control surfaces of the fuel pump, fuel delivery and emission control system devices.

2. Methyl tertiary-butyl ether (MTBE)
Methyl tertiary-butyl ether (MTBE), an oxygenate compound, has been used in low levels since 1979 to replace tetraethyl lead as an effective octane enhancer. However, starting in 1992 in response to the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments made by Congress, the concentration of MTBE used in gasoline has markedly increased. This compound is produced by the reaction of methanol with isobutylene. As an oxygenate, MTBE functions to raise the oxygen content of gasoline, which concomitantly increases combustion efficiency and reduces emissions. By way of example, residual sulfur and benzene constituents in gasoline are categorized by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as pollutants; the oxygenate MTBE serves to dilute or replace the sulfur/benzene content.
MTBE is flammable and volatile, as well as miscible with water that may be pumped into the fuel tank from the gas station fuel reservoir. While this effect is advantageous in aiding in the partial removal of extraneous water from the fuel system, it also causes major problems. The MTBE/water mixture forms a highly acidic, reactive solution which causes degradation of various rubber components within the fuel and emission systems. Moreover, the MTBE/water mixture forms a gas-water interface (i.e., a boundary layer) in the fuel contained within the gas tank, which, upon contact, causes rapid degradation of various internal, submerged components within the fuel tank (e.g., fuel pumps, fuel level sending/sensing assemblies, fuel tank liners, and the like).

3. Reformulated Gasoline (RFG)
The 1990 Clean Air Act mandated the EPA to issue regulations requiring gasoline to be reformulated so as to result in significant reductions in vehicle emissions of ozone-forming and toxic air pollutants. Reformulated gasoline (RFG) is required to be used exclusively in nine major metropolitan areas of the United States. In addition, several other areas have voluntarily chosen to use RFG. The exact chemical composition of RFGs vary from area to area. However, all RFGs contain high levels of oxygenate compounds which, according to the EPA, ameliorate the amount of pollutants produced by the combustion process.
A multi-layered or laminated synthetic rubber tubular structure has conventionally been used as a fuel transporting hose and in various emission control system components. For example, there is a currently known and utilized fuel transporting hose comprising three layers superimposed upon each other, that is, a heat and fuel resistant inner tube, a weather resistant outer tube, and a reinforcing layer interposed between the inner and outer tubes. For example, in conventional automotive fuel hoses, nitrile rubber (acrylonitrile-butadiene rubber) is typically utilized as a fundamental material of an innermost layer of the hoses and chloroprene rubber as a outer covering material.
Recently, however, fuel and emission control systems have become considerably more complicated due to the enactment of various legislative measures to achieve satisfactory control of exhaust emission. The implementation of these measures have lead to a number of problems with regard to degradation of the components of said fuel (e.g., fuel hoses, fuel injectors, manifold gaskets, O-rings, diaphragms, and the like) and emission control systems (e.g., vacuum hoses, fuel vapor hoses, and the like). This degradation is caused primarily by: (i) the addition of numerous chemicals to the fuel itself and (ii) exposure of the fuel to high temperatures generated by the exhaust emission control means and fuel injection systems, causing the partial oxidization of the fuel to form “sour” fuel which is highly erosive to many organic materials including, e.g., the natural and synthetic rubbers currently utilized in the fabrication of fuel and emission control system components.
When such change in the condition of the fuel and emission control systems is taken into consideration, the use of, e.g., nitrile rubber as fabrication material is no longer satisfactory with regards to its heat and oxidation/degradation resistance and any components which employ nitrile rubber have a markedly short service life. Moreover, as deterioration of, for example, the fuel hose is associated with fuel leakage, there arises a serious danger of catastrophic fires.

 

Will those components allow you to run E85?

I'm putting ethanol-safe fuel lines in my 365GT. My mechanic doesn't seem to think E10 will hurt the carbs-- they were recently overhauled.

Didn't Ferrari recently show a flex-fuel 430? I would think that would be a fairly easy way for them to solve their gas guzzler tax issue.

 

No, even putting E85-spec fuel lines on the car won't allow you to run E85.

It requires a new pump, fuel management (carb jetting/computer programming), all fuel system components to be evaluated for robustness which may mean tanks, injectors, regulators. You may also be looking at valves & seats. And then you could only use a fixed ethanol percentage, add more bits (or more tuning of algorithms that aren't in a normal gas-only ECU) to determine the actual level in your fuel (and it changes seasonally, not to mention you might want that FLEX fuel capability that real FFV cars have).

 

Due to our Fuel Hose developement I have been following all of the legislation related to this for a number of years now. The test studies were done on mid to late 2000 cars as no one cares about the olders cars, follow the money for that explination. The U of M studies listed all of the late model cars, all using plastic fuel lines and wide band O2 sensors which saw no problems. What they didnt look at was the rubber components inside the fuel tanks after a number of years... here lies more problems we are now addressing. Our fuel hose engineers figured out how to mold the liner material we are using in our fuel hoses into complex shapes of those rubber components inside the fuel tanks.

Two years ago all of the major oil companies bought up all of the alcohol refineries in the US... ya think its here to stay? Bet on it, we will be burning hog food and pond scum for some time to come!

There are very few rubber hoses that will stand up to the current fuels and remain intact, do some HARD research there before picking one. Most are advertized as ethenol resistant, few really are. Carb's with the external accel pump diaphrams (Weber's), external mechanical fuel pumps using flexible diaphrams.... they are all subject to failure as soon as the fuel eats the rubber off the canvas diaphram.

The alcohol has an odd effect on engine operation. O2 sensors are looking for extra O2 in the exhaust, when they see it they feed back to the computer to lean down the fuel mixture. Alcohol being an oxygenate by its very nature puts extra O2 in the exhaust yet alcohol requires a far richer mixture than pure gasoline to burn effectively in our engines.... Alcohol jets for the carbed engines are huge compared to the gasoline jets. After finishing jetting carbs on a fresh 330GTC engine we finsihed last year, using a wide band O2 sensor in the exhaust we ended up with main jets far larger than used at sea level and we at near 6000 feet elevation here. The earlier cars using a narrow band O2 sensor and a hard programed fuel curve are faced with some issues. Alcohol boils at a far lower temp, notice how hard they are to start hot? Terrible idle at the stop light? Weber never factored in boiling alcohol in the float bowls in their design. The days af reading spark plugs against the old photo charts are long gone, the game has changed.

We are currently working on an O2 sensor design we came up with to compensate for this situation. I hold little hope of ever getting these to market as the EPA will have to be involved in this and you know any time that 3 letter acro enters into a sentence the costs go up by a factor of 10 at minimum. With the "Cash for Clunkers" program... think anyone is lining up to help with this?

 

Here in the East Tennessee area in the past year three gas stations have begun selling 100% gasoline. One of the stations is just across the border in Virginia right next to the liquor store. I can kill two birds with one stone now.

 

And Brian Crall (Rifledriver)

 

It has been my understanding that the reason for oxygenated fuel was to lean out the fuel mixture in the winter, when the choke was adding fuel to the cold engine.

Fuel injection should, in theory, take care of this by itself.

If this is correct, why are we still oxygenating fuel?

 

Because there is a whole industry based on it now. Not to mention the outlet for corn grown by US farmers. What would happen to them if the demand for ethanol went down?

 

Maybe we would have to use corn as food?

 

What gas guzzler tax issue? Why would Ferrari care? It's a cost paid by the customer, and is small relative to the cost of the car.

Besides not caring, how would it solve said issue? Do you get an exemption for being flex-fuel?

 

Look for the BIG picture. Back when I started the research I laid out a 3 possible answer flow chart out to 10 levels to retain all the data points I was collecting. One line in red representing $'s, another in black following logic.

Follow the money, dont look for logic.

 

With regard to this issue, it's all about planned obsolescence and part replacement/sales. As Dave said, follow the money.

 

Lots of good information here...thanks for sharing Dave and others.


PDG

 

Bingo.

 

You get a huge credit for being flex-fuel. Basically, your "CAFE mileage" more than doubles. This is why all the GM SUVs are flex-fuel.

As for why Ferrari would care, you're right-- as long as they can pay the tax, who cares? At least, as long as it's just money, and they're not REQUIRED to comply with CAFE-- which I wouldn't rule out happening some day.

 

Ethanol is pure 'hell' in aluminum fuel tanks!!

 

Ah, but you were talking about the gas guzzler tax. That's a completely different thing.

 

Actually the alcohol itself isn't as bad as once thought, what is problematic is the water it absorbs. Upon separation of the alcohol/water blend and the fuel there is a small boundary layer between the two that is very corrosive to aluminum. I will post a photo of that from a test when I get to the shop.

With the separation happening in as little as 35 days in my test samples at the shop (fuel samples from various stations throughout Boulder stored in sealed graduated beakers and left undisturbed on a shelf. At the time I was testing for alcohol content and did not understand what I was seeing with the separation), starting the car up after a prolonged storage period could be problematic. Gasoline goes up, alcohol and water down and the fuel pick up is at the bottom....

I did not feel it prudent to take these tests any further once I saw the separation happen as a shelf of glass beakers in a shop fall's short of an approved storage method for fuel. If for no other reason the tests were quite an eye opener when seeing how much alcohol content variation there was station to station. Separation in the underground tanks and running them low? Supplied that way from the terminals? I have no clue as I never followed it further but can say without any doubt standard fuel hose failure happens in less than 1 hour at 16%.