MPG Increase - Non-Ethanol Gas - What to Expect?

It's not if you are using number of E0 and E85 stations as a measurement of popularity. E85 stations need E85 cars to support them. In 2017, there were 64 new car choices that could use E85. This year it is 44. Before Ecoboost, the popular F150 engine was flex fuel, now it's not.

pure-gas.org relies on users to input the stations, the first listing I clicked for Iowa had a comment saying they didn't have E0. An increase in listed stations can simply be more just being added to the database, not an actual increase in stations offering E0. Then not all the stations are actually stations. Listings include speed shops selling high octane racing fuel by the jug or barrel, that's what the three closest for me are. I spotted airports on the Iowa list, and I'm sure marinas are on others. Those two places likely can't fuel a car.

But Iowa has 346 sources listed on pure-gas.org, and an ethanol site says there is 288 E85 stations. The most recent number for total number of gas stations in Iowa comes from 2012 at 2398. So someone looking for E0 or E85 will have about a 14% or 12% chance of finding it at a random gas station in Iowa.

 

Meanwhile, E85 sources, pushed by gov't & "ethanol in gasoline industry" in the U.S. (very few in Canada?) appear to be less than 4000, while grass-roots user-powered E0 sources in the U.S. & Canada are almost 15,000

 

As I pointed out, there are fewer cars on the road that can use E85, than ones that can use E0. There is also the demand for E0 from power tools, ATVs, boats, and planes.

 

E85 has been pushed by "ethanol in gasoline industry" for decades(?). If E85 was any good, lots more cars would be designed to use it. Despite gov't & "ethanol in gasoline industry" pushing ethanol in gasoline, by far E0 provides the best efficiency in 87 octane gasoline engines, which are the standard engines of america. trollbait agrees with "ethanol in gasoline industry"....... & communist chinese (always small letters).

 

Pointing out that number of E0 stations vs number of E85 stations is a flawed metric for measuring E0 popularity for cars is not a statement for or against ethanol in fuel.

The lack of E85 stations is big reason for why there aren't more flex fuel cars being made. I wanted to experiment with ethanol blends back when I had the Ranger, but getting E85 here was as much trouble as getting E0. The ethanol lobby did try to get more stations, but with ethanol not being able to be piped through petroleum lines, it simply gets costly to truck it outside the corn belt. If there were more E85 stations, the lobby may not be trying to force E15 on everyone now.

Another big cause for lack of flexfuel cars is that the E85 loophole in CAFE closed in 2015. It is no longer assumed a flexfuel car would run on E85 half the time. Instead, the EPA looks at how much E85 actually sells, or the manufacturer has to prove how much their customers are using.

 

Some people may be confused that E85, pushed by gov't & "ethanol in gasoline industry", is beat out by E0, which only the grassroots push. But, I'm not confused, because 87 octane E0 is the fuel designated to run best in 87 octane gasoline engines. E85 is still beat out by E0 by 3.5 to 1..... make that 3.7 to 1. trollbait trolls, but has no bait.

 

The lack of E85 MPG is "why there aren't more flex fuel cars being made".

 

And others don't understand that reality has more variables.

In 2013 there were 158 flex fuel cars listed on Fueleconomy.gov.
In 2014, it was 140.
2015 was down to 98.
And 2016 had just 69.

The decline had nothing to do with customers not buying flex fuel cars. The flex fuel engine was the only option in some, and they could run on E10 and E0 just fine. Car manufacturers stopped making them because the CAFE credits for flex fuel cars changed for MY2016. They would only get the inflated MPG value of using E85(for CAFE only the 15% gasoline is counted) for E85 actually used by their cars, not the assumed 50% use in the past. Without E85 stations to supply the cars, there could be E85 used in those cars.

2019 is down to 43 flex fuel cars. They are dying out without input from consumers.

There is 69 cars that can use grid electricity this year.

 

litesong said:
The lack of E85 MPG is "why there aren't more flex fuel cars being made".
///////

E85 vehicles are dying because they are without good MPG. Ethanol needs high compression ratio(15:1-higher?) ethanol (INDY) engines to improve MPG.

 

You are ignoring the impact CAFE policy can have on car manufacturers' decisions.

Years ago, selling a flex fuel car gave a large credit to a company's CAFE value. So many cars and trucks had flex fuel options. When the E85 loophole was closed, the car companies stopped developing new flex fuel engines, and newer cars didn't have the option. Those still offered are older models used as base engines in most cases.

Around the same time, start/stop systems started getting a credit for CAFE, and now many new cars have those systems.

There are plenty of reasons to not use E85. The car companies didn't care if it was used or not. Making a car flex fuel was cheap compared to the CAFE benefit. If that benefit was still in place, they would still be pumping out FFVs.

 

I'll take a start/stop system over E85 anyday. And some E0 , please.

 

I'd just be happy with the open fuel standard. Let methanol and butanol compete if we are going to add an alcohol to gas.

 

There are plenty of reasons to not use E10, E20, E50, etc. The oil companies care, if ethanol is NOT used.

 

Posted somewhere else in this website, this post is a nice follow-up for the above post, less than two months later:
There are now two milestones, one already accomplished & another very very near:
1) pure-gas.org just published 15,000+ sources for ethanol-free gasoline(E0) in the U.S. & Canada.
2) New York state has one source less than 1000 & should shortly be the first state to offer 1000 sources for E0. At least a handful of states offer well over 900 sources for E0. People continue to increase, who are learning that E0 is better than gasoline, that has at least 10% diluting ethanol corruption added to our nation's fuel stocks. Presently, about 11,000 more grass-roots inspired sources are available for E0, vs. E85 sources, which languish despite major backing by the federal gov't & "ethanol in gasoline companies".

P.S. pure-gas.org has just reported the 1000th E0 source for New York state. There are 3 other states with well over 900 E0 sources. These four states ONLY, have E0 sources comparable to the number of E85 sources within the entire U.S. E0 sources, pushed only by grass-roots efforts, continue to rise. In comparison, E85 sources, pushed by the fed gov't & the "ethanol in gasoline industry", slump. Years ago, "ethanol in gasoline" advocates stated that E0 would end in the U.S., without help by gov't & no other organization to support it.

P.S. II.....New York state did get to 1000 listed E0 sources. However, the continuing user-driven method to eliminate (correct) individual E0 sources, when they stop E0 sourcing, has reduced New York state to 971 E0 sources. North Carolina now is the lead state sourcing E0, with 977.

 

Altho I have often mentioned that my last five 87 octane, low-compression ratio gas engines obtain 8%, 8%, 7%-8%, 7%, & 5% better MPG using 87 octane E0(ethanol-free) vs. 87 octane E10 (ethanol blends), I've only experienced very minor to no running problems while using 87 octane E10 ethanol blends. Other people have mentioned greater running problems using 87 octane E10 than me. Now, I have come across a poster from another website who has the greatest problems with E10 ethanol blend, that was solved by switching to E0.
Here is his post in full:
I just wanted to comment on Tacoma’s in general. I bought my first Toyota this summer a 2019 Tacoma OR DC 4x4 manual. I bought the manual because of the complaints about the auto tuning and the hesitation, weird kicks, etc. in having the manual I noticed the truck had some weird tuning issues of no power to 3k then being goosed oddly. Very noticeable in first gear, mostly but all the way to 3rd. The second tank of fuel (June 2019) to present (Nov 2019) I have been running E0 and the difference is night and day! This truck pulls harder up the hills, acceleration is better, mileage is better, I have 12,000 miles now since new and exclusively run E0 in my Honda 1000RR (2019) and my wife’s Murano. The Tacoma really likes it and I have noticed drivability being a lot better. Just my own seat of the pants observation. Oh I drive 125 miles a day to work and back, I get 24 to work and 18 on the way home. Elevation at home is 7,000ft and work is 5100ft. Project Farm has a video on the damage ethanol does in 9 months time. – James, Colorado (November 27, 2019)

 

In southern North Carolina for the holidays. The two stations with advertised ethanol free regular were 45 and 66 cents more than the E10. Roughly a 19% to 28% increase in price.

 

I have seen E0-E10 price gaps even wider. Yes, the increasing E0-E10 price gap that "ethanol in gasoline industries" & the EPA have managed to work into our ever increasing ethanol diluted national gasoline stocks, is amazing to behold. Often, the ever widening E0-E10 price gaps have occurred during events that have caused quick price rises or drops in ethanol diluted gasoline stocks. These quick rises & falls have disguised the widening E0-E10 price gap that the "ethanol in gasoline industry" & EPA have managed to hang around the economic necks of countries. In effect, the "ethanol in gasoline industries", with propaganda & economic trickery, have turned standard E0 gasoline of many decades ago, into a "specialty fuel" worthy of excess price fixing.
The "ethanol in gasoline industries" & EPA thought a lesser E0-E10 price gap would drive E0 to extinction. However, grassroots information that E0 was truly superior to E10 has surprisingly built an E0 following that now supports almost 15,000 E0 sources through-out Canada & the U.S. Thus, the "ethanol in gasoline industries" & the EPA have had to increase by disguise, the E0-E10 price gap in renewed efforts to squash E0.

 

Sounds like a conspiracy to me.

 

You understand. Its NOT just the EPA & ethanol companies at fault. Previously, I have mentioned that oil companies also LIKE ethanol blended in their gasoline productions. Many decades ago, when ethanol in gasoline was first introduced, oil companies understood immediately that ethanol introduced into gasoline would lower MPG. Not only would drivers need to use more ethanol blended fuel, but oil use would increase to produce ethanol AND support growing "ethanol in gasoline industries". The oil industry knew that people would NOT like decreased MPG, so the oil companies propagandized that they weren't at fault. The problem was the EPA pushing ethanol to promote better emissions. Oil companies effectively separated themselves from the EPA & "ethanol in gasoline industries". In reality tho, oil companies enjoy extra profits because of ethanol blended fuels..... AND have NOT over-worked to keep our gasoline stocks undiluted by ethanol.

 

The only conspiracy is the ethanol producers whining about oil refineries getting waviers to not use ethanol while asking for waviers to not make advanced technology ethanol.

Wait, I meant hypocrisy.

The price gap between E10 and E0 is mostly the work of basic economics. There is a lower supply of sources for E0, and people are willing to pay more for it.