Adding Ethanol to Petrol Fuel Doesn’t Improve Air Quality

by Joe Gokaho/2009.10.31.D6

Key backer of ethanol fuel wants to increase the amount of ethanol into typical petroleum fuel mix. Many of the large cities use “improving air quality”, as the reason for doing so to comply with the federal, EPA, air quality mandate.

It’s tested by many organizations, like MotorWeek, showing the overall fuel efficiency has drop significantly in many vehicles. Even though “per gallon” pollution has reduced as the result of combining petroleum fuel with ethanol, but it takes more “gallon” to get to where you want to go.

I live in a city, where the area is not subjected to the “tougher clean, ozone days”, but we are approaching to the EPA limits. Many of the gas stations dispense fuel without ethanol. The gas stations at the nearby city dispense fuel with 10% ethanol mix. Here is my personal repeated many times over - “1 data point” experiment done on my vehicle (not optimized to run ethanol, no turbo to take advantage of higher compression etc).

Fuel with 10% ethanol = 20.5 mpg
Fuel without ethanol = 22.0 mpg

10% ethanol may have reduced the polluting compound, but it takes 7% more of the blended fuel than conventional fuel. The net results are:

1. More CO2, for the global warming stuff – (according to some scientists)
2. It costs me more money to take me to places
3. It’s doesn’t really make air cleaner, it actually makes it worse because we need to burn more of it.
4. We get burned on both ends, by paying (subsidizing) the ethanol producers, and use it more at the pump.

Let’s save the subsidy toward making ethanol, let farms grow corn where it most suited – for food. (cost vs benefit).

The subsidy can be better used, for encouraging use of “proving” technology that actually burn less fuel. Here are some examples:

1. Manual transmission: It’s improves city driving fuel efficiency.
Consumer Reports test result shows, 2008 Honda Accord, 4 cylinder
18 mpg for 5-speed manual
15 mpg for 5-speed automatic

That’s whopping 20% improvement,
20% less of CO2
20% less of money spent on “possible foreign oil”
14% less of “pollutants” than running E90
2. Making more gears, and more aerodynamic shape vehicle
Consumer Reports test shows, a 8-speed automatic 2009 Lexus LS460 improves fuel consumption (32 mpg) over the 5-speed 2003 LS430 (29 mpg highway) by 10%

Well, going green, consuming less is great and we should. But we need spend money (subsidy) wisely, congressman.

End Subsidy on Ethanol, Add Subsidy for Proven Fuel Saving Technology

by Joe Gokaho/2009.10.31.D6

Key backer of ethanol fuel wants to increase the amount of ethanol into typical petroleum fuel mix. Many of the large cities use “improving air quality”, as the reason for doing so to comply with the federal, EPA, air quality mandate.

It’s tested by many organizations, like MotorWeek, showing the overall fuel efficiency has drop significantly in many vehicles. Even though “per gallon” pollution has reduced as the result of combining petroleum fuel with ethanol, but it takes more “gallon” to get to where you want to go.

I live in a city, where the area is not subjected to the “tougher clean, ozone days”, but we are approaching to the EPA limits. Many of the gas stations dispense fuel without ethanol. The gas stations at the nearby city dispense fuel with 10% ethanol mix. Here is my personal repeated many times over - “1 data point” experiment done on my vehicle (not optimized to run ethanol, no turbo to take advantage of higher compression etc).

Fuel with 10% ethanol = 20.5 mpg
Fuel without ethanol = 22.0 mpg

10% ethanol may have reduced the polluting compound, but it takes 7% more of the blended fuel than conventional fuel. The net results are:

1. More CO2, for the global warming stuff – (according to some scientists)
2. It costs me more money to take me to places
3. It’s doesn’t really make air cleaner, it actually makes it worse because we need to burn more of it.
4. We get burned on both ends, by paying (subsidizing) the ethanol producers, and use it more at the pump.

Let’s save the subsidy toward making ethanol, let farms grow corn where it most suited – for food. (cost vs benefit).

The subsidy can be better used, for encouraging use of “proving” technology that actually burn less fuel. Here are some examples:

1. Manual transmission: It’s improves city driving fuel efficiency.
   Consumer Reports test result shows, 2008 Honda Accord, 4 cylinder
   18 mpg for 5-speed manual
   15 mpg for 5-speed automatic
   
   That’s whopping 20% improvement,
   20% less of CO2
   20% less of money spent on “possible foreign oil”
   14% less of “pollutants” than running E90
2. Making more gears, and more aerodynamic shape vehicle
   Consumer Reports test shows, a 8-speed automatic 2009 Lexus LS460 improves fuel consumption (32 mpg) over the 5-speed 2003 LS430 (29 mpg highway) by 10%

Well, going green, consuming less is great and we should. But we need spend money (subsidy) wisely, congressman.

Car Problems Repairs, Acura, Honda, Nissan, Lexus, Subaru

2007 Lexus RX350 FWD 18"  235/55R-18

wear/fuel/handling/braking/comfort
Michelin - Pilot® MXM4®   50,000
  8/ 9/10/ 9 / 9

Michelin - Energy™ MXV4® S8   50,000
 8/10/ 9/ 9/10

Michelin - Pilot® Sport A/S 3  45,000
10/ 9/ 9/ 8/10

Bridgestone - Dueler H/L 422 Ecopia (eco)


# # # # #

third update 2013.04

second update: 2012.05

first update:  2012.04

Acura MDX 2002
Lexus RX350 2007
Honda CRV 2011

======

Model: 2011 Honda CR-V SE  FWD
Spec: 4 Cyl 5AT
Miles Driven: 26,000 (on going)

Model: 2002 Acura MDX
Spec: 6 Cyl 5AT
Miles Driven: 180,000 (on going)
(not caused by bad driving)
Problems, unexpected repairs:
@ 24k – A/C Compressor (out)
@ 67K – Engine mounts (2 places) – replaced
@ 90K – Window shield wiper arms
@ 102K - Engine transmission
@ 138K - check-engine - EGR Valve (cleaned)
@ 158K - SRS, front driver seat belt buckle sensor
@ 164K -  A/C heater blower blower motor resistor (AC/front blower stopped working)

Model: 2007 Lexas RX350 Fwd
Spec: 6 Cyl 5AT
Miles Driven: 37,000 (on going)
(not caused by bad driving)
Problems, unexpected repairs:
@ 6K Tire – low pressure sensors (complaints)
@ 6K Difficulty opening center console storage bin
@ 28K - leaking rack-n-pinion, power steering
@ 33K - rear brake rotors

Historical Models
Model: 2005 Nissan Altima 2.5S
Spec: 4 Cyl - 4AT
Miles Driven: 152,000/disposed
@ 128K - Starter
@ 128K - Alternator (un-necessary repair)
@ 146K - headlight (wear and tear)

Model: 1992 Subaru Legacy L
Spec: 4 Cyl - 4AT
Miles Driven: 74,000
(not caused by bad driving)
Problems, unexpected repairs:
(compaints)
@ 30K - sticky ac control panel - no repairs made



Model: 1992 Acura Integra 3dr
Spec: 4 Cyl - 5-speed manual
Miles Driven: 67,000
(not caused by bad driving)
Problems, unexpected repairs:
@ 20K - Engine mount replaced
(complaints)
@ 30K - ABS (on - and off) - no repairs made

[2] # - # - #

Model: 1995 Toyota T-100 DX
Spec: 6 cyl 4AT
Miles Driven: 125,000
(not caused by bad driving)
Problems, unexpected repairs:
@ 90K - shocks absorber repalced
@ 114K - driver side hydraulic brake line replaced

[3] # - # - #

Model: 1996 Nissan Maxima SE
Spec: 6 cyl 4AT
Miles Driven: 104,000
(not caused by bad driving)
Problems, unexpected repairs:
@ none (complaints)
@ 40k - alignment needs a lot of correction

[4] # - # - #

Model: 1996 Nissan Maxima GLE
Spec: 6 cyl 4AT
Miles Driven: 96,000
(not caused by bad driving)
Problems, unexpected repairs:
@ 15k Sunroof water seal replced
@ 85K right CV-joint boots replaced


Model: 2003 Honda CRV Real Time 4WD
Spec: 4 Cyl 4AT
Miles Driven: 105,000
(not caused by bad driving)
Problems, unexpected repairs:
@ 66K – A/C Compressor

3 Levels of Inferior Learning – and Global Warming

Joe Gokaho/2009.10.22.D4

I recently heard on a radio show where someone was describing the current health care reform debate. I thought the terms were funny, but they can also be used to describe our own learning behavior.

According to the online dictionary, the 3 terms

Stupid – Slow of mind, lack of interest

Ignorant - resulting from or showing lack of knowledge or intelligence

Gullible - easily duped or cheated

Of course, no one can be that “stupid”. Everyone’s a lifelong learner, so being “stupid” is not what we were born with, rather what we’ve grown into it.

We are often fall into the trap, believing, simple, convenient, and comforting answer as truth. Are we easily turned away the moment encountering first rock on the path, and settle in for that scare answer? When we look around, it seems ok, because everyone else is also setting for that simple, convenient, and comforting finding as the ultimate truth.

Seeking out advice from “expert” is a sure short-cut to greatness. Could have one’s desire for quick answer from “experts” lead to being ignorant all over again – believing everything for granted?

When it comes to our global warming issue, no one is stupid, but we are not too far from being “ignorant” and “gullible”. Believe me, when VP Gore says “all science facts show…….” I would argue, being skeptical may be the first step getting closer to truth – how did VP Gore know “all science”, or just only the “all science” he knows or want you to know.. 

Joe Gokaho/2009.10.22.D4

I recently heard on a radio show where someone was describing the current health care reform debate. I thought the terms were funny, but they can also be used to describe our own learning behavior.

According to the online dictionary, the 3 terms

Stupid – Slow of mind, lack of interest

Ignorant - resulting from or showing lack of knowledge or intelligence

Gullible - easily duped or cheated

Of course, no one can be that “stupid”. Everyone’s a lifelong learner, so being “stupid” is not what we were born with, rather what we’ve grown into it.

We are often fall into the trap, believing, simple, convenient, and comforting answer as truth. Are we easily turned away the moment encountering first rock on the path, and settle in for that scare answer? When we look around, it seems ok, because everyone else is also setting for that simple, convenient, and comforting finding as the ultimate truth.

Seeking out advice from “expert” is a sure short-cut to greatness. Could have one’s desire for quick answer from “experts” lead to being ignorant all over again – believing everything for granted?

When it comes to our global warming issue, no one is stupid, but we are not too far from being “ignorant” and “gullible”. Believe me, when VP Gore says “all science facts show…….” I would argue, being skeptical may be the first step getting closer to truth – how did VP Gore know “all science”, or just only the “all science” he knows or want you to know.