Comments on: Ethanol Free in Maine?

By: paul donovan

paul donovan — Tue, 20 Sep 2011 19:51:56 +0000

Notwithstanding that ethanol is bad from many perspectives, which include its ability to stand on its own in a free market, the negative impact it has on many components in machinery, energy in (what it takes to make it) versus energy out; I didn’t see anyone talk about the devastating impact it has on VENTED fuel systems. Automobiles are NOT VENTED. Therefore, ethanol’s hygroscopic nature (pulls water/moisture from the atmosphere) is less apt to cause water to build up in their fuel tanks. However, in boats where the fuel system IS VENTED, ethanol will literally cause gallons, yes gallons of water to build up in the tank over time.

Again, ethanol is bad from a multitude of perspectives. But, you haven’t really appreciated it until you are “dead in the water” or until you have had to pay to have your fuel tank pumped out.

Put the topic of ethanol at the center of the table and then move from one seat to another around that table to discuss it from the various perspectives of each seat. It loses each time. Like so many things in our country, ethanol is about lobbyists and influence.

By: barbara boone

barbara boone — Sat, 13 Aug 2011 05:37:57 +0000

I HAD A WEED EATER FOR 10 YEARS NO PROBLEM. THIS YEAR IT WOULDN’T START. I BOUGHT A NEW ONE IT BURNED UP. SO I THOUGHT IT WAS FAULTY AND I EXCHANGED IT FOR A MORE EXPENSIVE MODEL. IT BURNED UP. FOUND OUT IT WASN’T THE WEED EATER IT WAS ETHANOL. EVERYONE I HAVE COME IN CONTACT WITH IS HAVING THE SAME PROBLEM. THIS IS ABSURD UNFAIR AND WE ARE BEING USED. GET RID OF ETHANOL AND GOVERNMENT CONTROL. IT’ COSTS MORE TO MAKE THE ETHANOL. THIS DIABOLICAL. EVERYONE PROTEST. WE ARE BEING CONTROLLED BY A DIABOLICAL ADMINISTRATION.

By: matt

matt — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 21:18:38 +0000

Just found out that the intake boots on my snowmobile are junk! Talked to the manufacturer and they told me that the ethanol is eating the rubber and that is why they only last 2000 miles now. Great, I’m out 140 dollars because I’m forced to run ethanol. I even run the stabilizer to treat the ethanol and it didn’t help!

By: Tim

Tim — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 19:19:41 +0000

Currently having an issue with my truck sitting at the dealership. Complete fuel system rebuild for injectors, fuel tray and more is required for what the dealership (insurance warrantee company) is saying ethanol contamination. Insurance warrantee is refusing to pay for this high cost repair. Frustrated. Someone has got to be responsible for this or am I just residual damage as a taxpayer.

By: Jim Melia

Jim Melia — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 11:34:08 +0000

There are two arguements in this form…. the political, and the practical. Those posting the political arguement of oil independence may change their tune when Ethanol destroys their lawn mower engine, their boat engine, or their car. There is a reason why residents are ready to get the Ethanol out of gasoline- it doesn’t work………………

By: maineh

maineh — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 20:49:13 +0000

I don’t know much about mechanics, but I do know math.

The price per gallon of gasoline with 10% ethanol is 2.63 here. Because it reduces my vehicle’s fuel economy by such a gigantic amount, running the 10% ethanol is costing me the same as running straight gasoline at $3.50 per gallon. In other words, if I could get real gasoline without the moonshine in it, it is cheaper even if the cost per gallon is up to 87 cents higher.

By: Bradley Brown

Bradley Brown — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 17:59:54 +0000

I agree that we should have to option to buy straight gas. Many small engine manufacturers such as Poulan, Stihl and most others that make 2 cycle weed whackers, chainsaws and leaf blowers warn of engine damage if any ethanol is used. I think state is opening them self’s up for a class action suet when people start realizing why the equipment is being ruined by the gas that’s force down our throats. It many burn slightly cleaner, but since the switch I’m not getting 30MPH any longer, I get 25 to 26 MPH. So in the long run we all buy more gas so our greedy legislators can get more taxes out of us and feel more important because they made a law. I wont get started on taxes, that’s another issue that a day of reckoning is coming.

By: Everett

Everett — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 18:39:30 +0000

“Mitch Sremac
CEO
Flex Fuel U.S.”

Yeah, and you obviously have no financial interest in keeping ethanol for sale, do you?

What you posted about ethanol is a bald-faced lie. There is copious proof that ethanol destroys rubber and aluminum in many engines. Ethanol is hydrophilic, so it attracts water much faster than pure gasoline. This causes the fuel to boil faster and causes vapor lock. Ethanol contains more oxygen than gasoline which causes engines not made for it (which is over 99.9 percent of the gasoline engines running in the US) to run too lean, which can cause damage to valves and cylinder heads. Ethanol contains less energy (octane and energy are unrelated, contrary to what many in both the oil and ethanol industries would like us to believe – octane is simply a measurement of the temperature at which a fuel spontaneously combusts), which decreases fuel efficiency. Because of this, the ‘cleaner-burning’ nature of ethanol is offset by the fact that the engine burns more fuel. Repeated studies have shown that the emission-reducing effect of ethanol is null because of the additional fuel burned. Ethanol, at least corn ethanol, is not efficient to produce. More hydrocarbons are created from the production of ethanol than are saved in burning it. Millions of acres of land that could be used for better crops than corn are going into corn production simply because ethanol is being subsidized by the US government. In other countries, millions of acres of rain forest are being depleted in order to grow sugar cane for ethanol production. I’m not an oil fan by any means, but oil drilling has significantly less impact on the environment than ethanol production. We need green fuels, for sure, but ethanol is NOT the answer in any way, shape, or form. Ethanol use is just a big pork prize for the corn lobby (the same people who replaced the cane sugar in your food with high-fructose corn syrup). It’s no better and no less a special interest than the oil industry.

By: CL Parr

CL Parr — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 05:13:57 +0000

OH, and……..no, I don’t like the government or the Flexfuel lobbyists making ALL of the fuel blended. Shame on you.

By: CL Parr

CL Parr — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 05:10:24 +0000

Hey,
I’m a big fan of bio-fuels, and an even bigger fan of clean, domestic fuels. I must soundly protest the addition of ethanol to my fuel. It does drive up the price of food (worldwide), and it does harm my engines. The shop where I work has had to replace the carburetors on three chainsaws and we have seized one up. Ethanol fortified fuel is unstable and does not remain mixed. It eats rubber gaskets and seals and it’s harsh. I don’t expect much longevity out of my engines.

Furthermore, the yield on corn alchohol is too low. Cane and switch grass would be a better choice. Engines built and calibrated to run on alchohol would be the way to proceed. Once again, we have ruined a good idea with a knee jerk reaction. Let’s move that way, but let’s do it right. I like the thought of Methanol too. Here in the Northwest, we sure have a lot of wood lying around. ….HMmmm…

By: Toby Bishop

Toby Bishop — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 13:31:13 +0000

Mitch,

On the contrary, I’d say her motive is more likely she wants to give the consumer freedom of choice. Those that want to buy an ethanol blend should be able to do that; but don’t you think those that want to buy straight gasoline should also have the freedom to do that?

I am neutral on ethanol, but certainly dislike mandates telling me I must buy it such as the one Minnesota has.

By: Ethanol Headlines | Facts About Ethanol

Ethanol Headlines | Facts About Ethanol — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 21:20:24 +0000

[...] Ethanol Free in Maine? March 24th, 2009 Domestic Fuel/AP [...]

By: Mitch Sremac

Mitch Sremac — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 16:40:27 +0000

Senator Marrache’s initiative to remove ethanol from fuel in Maine is tantamount to supporting foreign oil interests. The only way America can ever get off of foreign oil is to support renewable energy sources, and at this time in history ethanol is our best option.

Ethanol is not perfect, but it is better than MTBE, which is what the oil companies previously used to boost octane in gasoline. Perhaps the senator would like to go back to MTBE?

There is no evidence that ethanol causes damage to engines produced from the late 70′s on. In fact all the current research shows that ethanol produces cleaner burning engines. Henry Ford used ethanol in his model-T’s, after all these years, this debate rages on, and its still being fueled by oil interests.

The senator’s position could be misconstrued as being anti-American energy, and against creating jobs in this country. The ethanol industry creates many good paying jobs in America. Does the senator really want to help create jobs in Venezuela?

Respectfully,

Mitch Sremac
CEO
Flex Fuel U.S.