- Joined
- Feb 21, 2003
- Messages
- 26,776
- Location
- SE Michigan in the middle of nowhere
- Tractor
- Kubota M9000 HDCC3 M9000 HDC
Here we go again. Not that I really care. Just read my comment in post 44. It explains simply why corn alcohol is in pump gas. You need a tinfoil hat.It depends. Where I live, the answer is no, premium has no more ethanol than regular and actually may have less ethanol in it. The state mandates 10% ethanol in all gas under 91 octane and anything 91+ octane can have anywhere between no ethanol and 10% ethanol. In practice premium here is either 10% ethanol, or no ethanol and sold at a big premium.
Ethanol has a very high octane rating. Adding it at low concentrations is like mixing in 115 octane fuel, adding 10% to regular gas increases the octane by 2.5 points. Adding it in higher concentrations depends on the engine it's run in. E85 is roughly 105 octane in a naturally aspirated engine, about 115 octane in a forced aspiration and aftercooled engine, and 130+ octane in a forced-aspiration non-aftercooled engine. Ethanol takes a bunch of heat to vaporize which significantly lowers charge air temps, which is a big component of power production in forced-aspiration setups.
Ethanol was initially introduced to reduce MTBE as an oxygenate to reduce emissions due to the previously-mentioned groundwater contamination with MTBE. The discussion regarding corn subsidies came a bit after that. The fact that it raised octane levels did not appear to be a factor initially as the initial ethanol blend here was 89 octane mid-grade and that was it. This was regular 87 octane with a little under 10% ethanol added. If it was about raising octane they would have added ethanol to all grades right off the bat and you would have seen them add ethanol to 92-93 octane premium to make 94-95 octane super-premium. E85's very high octane rating would have also been widely publicized, instead I have seen an octane rating on exactly one E85 pump ever. Now that we very well know ethanol raises octane, it still isn't a factor. It seems any time there is discussion outside of the racing community (where it has some big fans) about actually using ethanol to boost octane and moving beyond the 1970s post-leaded-gas malaise-era 87 octane standard, you get all of the "it screwed up my chainsaw I hadn't used for four years" or "you are just making evil Monsanto rich", "you are starving kids in Zimbabwe," and the other usual responses. And now we are stuck with DI setups and their significant drawbacks in gasoline engines in order to try to work around running a heavily-turbocharged engine with double-digit compression ratios on the same swill that barely ran engines with maybe an 8:1 compression ratio in the '70s.