Gasohol and Small Engines

[davesl708]

Wheat price close Friday... $5.09. Price October 1995... $4.80 Inflation adjust price would be today.... $7.35

Oats price close Friday... $2.27. Price October 1995... $1.90. Inflation adjust price would be today... $2.97

Corn and soybeans already discussed. What exactly would you like to see grown in place of corn that folks actually want and are willing to pay for. When it comes to the big kahunas.... corn, soybeans, wheat, and oats, there really doesn't seem to be all that much demand for any of them that they are bringing, on an inflation adjusted value, a lower price than 20 years ago. All of them. So none of them are experiencing any kind of shortage that would cause prices to rise. The opposite is occurring, all grain prices are lower in cost than in 1995, across the board.

It all comes down to this, this almost religious bias against ethanol is skewing some folk's basic brainwave activity to see the facts for what they are. I really could care less if anyone wants to use ethanol or not. I have nothing to gain either way. But demonizing something using arguments that fall flat on their face in front of anyone who wants to actually look at the markets is pretty telling. Man, that is bias on steroids.

What about the fact that ethanol does not add anything to fuel economy or reduction in pollution? The fact that grain prices are currently lower does not diminish from the fact that ethanol in fuel does no good. And the grain prices are a commodity. Prices will fluctuate constantly. You cannot take a snapshot of prices. If you follow the markets you will see grain prices are expected to increase. Lower fuel cost effects every aspect of food production.
If you had to pay the full price for ethanol you would see a big increase in the cost of fuel. Taxpayers are subsidizing the industry. You do not see the total cost.

 

[dfkrug]

Curious minds want to know..... how does ethanol increase food prices? I looked at the corn market today.....closed at $3.82 a bushel. Now if we look at the corn price in 1995, for October it was between $3 and $3.25 a bushel. Now if we adjust that 1995 price for inflation, the price today should be.....$5.08 a bushel. So from that little tidbit of information, I am confused on how corn price at the current $3.82 is an increased food price.

Credit goes to you for asking these questions, and searching out your own data. More folks should do that,
since info is super-easy to get these days. We should all do our own verification of statements that are
bandied about as if they are fact.

What we do not easily see is the effect of limited resources (farm land) being allocated in different ways due
to market distortions caused by mandates and other govt interventions. It is easy to track the prices of
corn, for example, but what happens to the prices of other food crops if more farmers grow corn as a
result of the mandates? DAVESL is on the right track here.

Ignorance of basic economics runs throughout our govt and society. I remember some of our reps actually
saying that disasters are actually good cuz of all the jobs they create. Focus on reconstruction efforts keeps
the attention of the media while, almost invisibly, limited resources get allocated from conventional day-to-day
business.

 

[davesl708]

Credit goes to you for asking these questions, and searching out your own data. More folks should do that,
since info is super-easy to get these days. We should all do our own verification of statements that are
bandied about as if they are fact.

What we do not easily see is the effect of limited resources (farm land) being allocated in different ways due
to market distortions caused by mandates and other govt interventions. It is easy to track the prices of
corn, for example, but what happens to the prices of other food crops if more farmers grow corn as a
result of the mandates? DAVESL is on the right track here.

Ignorance of basic economics runs throughout our govt and society. I remember some of our reps actually
saying that disasters are actually good cuz of all the jobs they create. Focus on reconstruction efforts keeps
the attention of the media while, almost invisibly, limited resources get allocated from conventional day-to-day
business.

dfkrug. Don't forget Nancy Pelosi's famous statement that more people on unemployment was good for the economy.

 

[Tractor Seabee]

Thought some of you would find this useful; an answer from the maker of StaBil regarding their products:

Hello Ronald,

Thank you for contacting Gold Eagle Company. For small engines, we usually recommend using STA-BILｮ 360 Performance. The marine formula has additional additives that are mostly designed to work in very humid conditions. However, in your situation, perhaps the marine formula would be more beneficial because of the humidity. At the moment, we offer STA-BILｮ 360 marine in 8oz. If you require further assistance, please let us know.

Best regards,

Conrad Manzano
Gold Eagle Co.
(800) 367-3245
marketing@goldeagle.com

Protecting, Preserving, & Performing Since 1932.


I have had excellent results with their older Marine product but am now switching to 360 Marine. It is not cheap but I buy 50 gallons at a time in my transfer tank. The most temperamental of my engines are the chain saws and they have performed flawlessly using the previous Marine product.

Ron

Well!! I never intended this thread to wind up as a economic/political discussion instead of a technical discussion related to combating the demon, alcohol, we have to live with. I just filled my 50 GL transfer tank with E-10 plus 8 OZ (a little extra for good measure) of Stabil 360 Marine (it is now available in 32 OZ bottle) as recommended. I also changed the filter on my Gasohol pump to a hygroscopic type. As my 17.5 KW Generac is not designed for Gasohol (voids the guarantee) I plan to add a spin on fuel filter (again hygroscopic type) in the fuel line.

As alcohol's affinity for water seems to be the root of corrosion problems; getting the fuel into the process as anhydrous as possible seems to be at least part of the answer.

By the way; non-alcohol gas is rare around here, $.30 GL more and a long drive so do not like that option. Futile to fight the program so I will try the non-agressive route.

Ron

 

[TomSeller]

dfkrug. Don't forget Nancy Pelosi's famous statement that more people on unemployment was good for the economy.

Well it is if the higher unemployment rate leads to a change in leadership that puts in place better policy.

 

[Sodo]

Credit goes to you for asking these questions, and searching out your own data. More folks should do that,
since info is super-easy to get these days. We should all do our own verification of statements that are
bandied about as if they are fact.

Credit to this statement, with one caveat.

Info is super easy to get, truth is NOT. The truth is drowned by false "news releases". Political action committees, and industry associations flood the internet, blogs, TV, radio and print media with BS. More money = wider distribution and more people believing. People don't even care anymore, such that news agencies freely admit that the info came from "news release". They know it's BS, or contains elements of BS cooked up by some organization with a goal, yet present it as news anyway.

It used to be that you could follow the thread of truth. That is still perhaps possible, but there is mountains more BS that you have to wade thru, and it's full INTENT is to bury the truth. And it works

Ethanol to me isn't that bigga deal. It has its benefits, like keeping the Petrol industry on guard, reducing $$ flowing out of the country to the mid-east. And its problems, like perhaps hight overall pollution and depletion of croplands, raising food prices. less mpg, less power, attracting water. But fuel lines don't freeze like they used to.

I suspect the Anti-Ethanol campaigns are mainly to instill the nature of dis-trust and confusion, so we can be swindled on a different subject. It hist people where it counts, in their hobbies, and leisure time. The citizenry is dissatisfied, divided while they work other schemes. Anyway that's my conspiracy theory.

 

[prs]

Here in America, it would be in keeping with our heritage and our claims as being free to have a choice. Maybe mid-grade should be sober and we could choose as per our likings. Right now, the middle east has nothing to do with it; we are up to our arses in crude oil from this continent.

Rooster

 

[Copperhead]

Well, Tractor Seabee, I can't speak for your area, but many of us in the U.S. don't "have" to live with ethanol if we choose not to. I can get ethanol free, regular or premium, all around me any day of the year. If you don't have ethanol free as a choice in your area, then you need to complain to your state capitol. While there is a Renewable Fuel Standard mandate, it does not demand that ethanol free fuel not be available right along side ethanol gas at the pump. That is either a state requirement for some reason, or the station itself limiting your choices. If ethanol is a demon in your mind, then don't use it! Or if it is going to cause you such grief, we still have freedom of movement in this country, so go where you can buy it as you want. Simple, eh! I get ethanol free when I want to use it in some applications. I usually fill a 30 gallon drum and keep it on hand for those applications. For my vehicles, I don't mind various blends of ethanol, anything from E10, E15, E20, E30, and E85. I actually like using the higher blends as it is usually a cost value, and it goes further to satisfying the mandate of 13 billion gallons of ethanol be used in the U.S. each year and frees up ethanol free gas for those that have OCD issues about it.

True, ethanol does have a love relationship with water. But unless you are dumping water into your non vented automotive fuel system, I am not sure it is ever a significant issue. For a vented system like small motors and such, sure, it could be an issue. I have never experienced a problem from portable generators, power washers, lawn mowers, etc over the years when I have used E10 in them, but I understand the concern. For those, then buy ethanol free if it helps you sleep well at night. But it is going to be a hard case to make that moisture is that big of an issue with the vapor capture, non vented automotive fuel systems. Even when cooling, condensation is a virtual non issue, as the vapors captured in the vapor canister are released to make up for that. Always remember... it is non vented. Outside air is not going to be an issue unless you leave the cap off or it is raining into your tank while filling. Even then the very minute traces of moisture that might show up are captured by the ethanol and moved on thru the system. Remember the product folks use to use... HEET. Sure it was methanol, but the same principle applies. It dried out the tank and fuel system by doing the same thing as ethanol... absorb it and move it on out as fuel is used.

Read this from the Boat Owners Association of the United States.....

Three Ethanol Myths Clarified - BoatUS Magazine

 

[ultrarunner]

I own a number of antique cars... all have vented fuel tanks and some cars rarely get used...

I'm a 40+ year member of the Model A Ford Club of America and with the advent of Ethanol Fuel without alternative here in California... we are all experiencing fuel issues we never had before...

Sure... much of it can be attributed to vehicles that may sit for months... just like they did before.

Another is Fuel Tank Sealing of Sloshing Compounds are are were used a lot in the antique auto hobby and the alcohol turns the Tank Sealer into goo... and that is a huge problem as the tank is part of the body of the car and not separate like a modern car...

There are consequences and just because they only affect a minute percentage of users does not mean they are not real...

 

[prs]

Now there is an oddity! Iowa residents can purchase sober fuel, yet they grow much the corn used to intoxicate the fuel the rest of us use. Maybe the inside knowledge of Iowans has them with good reason to demand the option. That is sort of like the Scottish folk selling the rest of the world that nasty scotch "whiskey", while they keep the good ole' rye "wisky" for their own use -- like my spelling implies, the scotch "whiskey" has unnecessary additives (is it peat or horse potatoes?).

Rooster