• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

E10 Fuel - Worthwhile?

Brian-M

Daydreamer
Brian-M
Joined
Jul 22, 2008
Messages
8,044
Here in Australia we've had E10 fuel for quite a while (E10 means 10% Ethanol), as a cheaper alternative to plain unleaded. But I've noticed that the price difference has been getting smaller over time.

Filling up my old Mazda this morning, I noticed that the price difference (at least in my part of rural Victoria) was only 1c per liter. Naturally, I chose the plain unleaded. If I'm going to pay $40 to fill up my tank, an extra 30c makes no difference.

But this has me thinking. If the price difference is only a fraction of a percent, and E10 fuel doesn't take you as far (meaning you end up paying more in the long run), is there any practical reason for the consumer to choose E10 over plain unleaded?
 
fuelair said:
Make money for corn farmers (at least that's the reason in the US).
Click to expand...

That's not really practical from the consumer's viewpoint, since they don't directly benefit from it.

Doing a little web searching, I found a site that says: Ethanol is produced in Australia by the fermentation of molasses and wheat by-products. The production capacity is 170 million litres.

And according to Wikipedia: Domestically produced fuel ethanol is currently effectively exempt from excise tax until July 1, 2011 (an excise of 38.143 cents per litre is payable on petrol). From this date, excise will be increased at 2.5 cents per litre annually until it reaches 12.5 cents per litre in 2015.

So E10 fuel over here is getting a tax break of 35.6 cents per litre, and yet the price at the pump is about the same. Given that you have to refill your tank more often with E10, even with this tax break it actually costs more to travel the same distance with E10 than with ordinary unleaded.

(I just discovered that my auto-correct is using the American spelling liter rather than the British spelling litre. I didn't even realize that there were two different ways to spell it until now, which is probably why I've always had trouble remembering if it's litre or liter.)

ETA:

The price at the pump where I live was 136.6 cents per litre this morning. In American terms, that's $5.10 per gallon.
 
Last edited:
In Finland the options are E10, 98 and diesel. E10 is 5 cents per liter cheaper than 98.

As you say, the price difference is not relevant so I pump E10 because it sounds more eco-friendly. I don´t drive much so it doesn´t make much difference anyway.
 
I can't use E10 in the Jag. So as well as being a huge boondoggle for the corn farmers it's a nail in the coffin for classic motoring.
 
The Don said:
I can't use E10 in the Jag. So as well as being a huge boondoggle for the corn farmers it's a nail in the coffin for classic motoring.
Click to expand...
Get a Model T, they were designed to run on ethanol or petrol.:)
 
There is an argument, though, that the different rubber and seals used in "flex fuel" cars which are compatible with alcohol (e10) is a good thing, even though e10 is not a good thing.

Assume you filled up e10 pumps with methanol (m85). You'd then have a cheaper, better fuel, without any payouts to lobbies or any other special interests.

M85 requires the same seals and rubbers that e10 does. And it has a current wholesale price of about 1.15/gallon, resulting in a gasoline-gallon-equivalent price at the street of about 2.00 USD.

Outside the US, where gasoline prices are artificially held high, the differential between m85 street price and gasoline would be lower on a percentage basis. However, note that in these brief comments, I assume NO subsidy for methanol.

Ethanol, including the 10% in the e10 products, cannot compete without the subsidies. So to answer the OP, ethanol products are destined to have a shot lifespan as a gasoline replacement. Better, cheaper alternatives will displace it.
 
JJM 777 said:
In Finland the options are E10, 98 and diesel. E10 is 5 cents per liter cheaper than 98.

As you say, the price difference is not relevant so I pump E10 because it sounds more eco-friendly. I don´t drive much so it doesn´t make much difference anyway.
Click to expand...

You can't get anything lower than 98 RON? Man, I wish Australia was more like that. We get E85 (very few outlets) LPG, E10, 91RON, 95RON, 98RON and Diesel. 95 I can live with but I hate 91. I still end up buying it or E10 though, but when I'm out of TAFE and working...
 
Last edited:
I assume that the ethanol is denatured. Is it done with acetone? If so, that could cause some trouble. Some boat motors aren't made for the mixture.
Guess I'll do a google.
 
quarky, it's denatured with gasoline! :-) But I do believe they denature at the distillery as well, to prevent diversion.

It says here; http://www.astm.org/Standards/D4806.htm

"The only denaturants used for fuel ethanol shall be natural gasoline, gasoline components, or unleaded gasoline at the minimum concentration prescribed."

On the topic, it has another effect beyond moving some of the energy production to farmers; It oxygenates the fuel and cuts emissions.
 
BenBurch said:
quarky, it's denatured with gasoline! :-) But I do believe they denature at the distillery as well, to prevent diversion.

It says here; http://www.astm.org/Standards/D4806.htm

"The only denaturants used for fuel ethanol shall be natural gasoline, gasoline components, or unleaded gasoline at the minimum concentration prescribed."

On the topic, it has another effect beyond moving some of the energy production to farmers; It oxygenates the fuel and cuts emissions.
Click to expand...

Well, there's a touch of irony.
Used to be methanol and acetone, as i recall.

So Ben, are you saying that someone with a decent knowledge of fractional distilation could buy this new gas, with its 10% booze; pull out the et-oh, for cheap, and put the other stuff back in the car?

I am really disturbed by the implications of this.
 
quarky said:
Well, there's a touch of irony.
Used to be methanol and acetone, as i recall.

So Ben, are you saying that someone with a decent knowledge of fractional distilation could buy this new gas, with its 10% booze; pull out the et-oh, for cheap, and put the other stuff back in the car?

I am really disturbed by the implications of this.
Click to expand...

I would think that unless you had a decent knowledge of how to do this it would be very dangerous. Get fumes build up and you get a good big bang. You would also have to ensure the booze was 100% pure.
 
The Don said:
I can't use E10 in the Jag. So as well as being a huge boondoggle for the corn farmers it's a nail in the coffin for classic motoring.
Click to expand...

Assuming the seals and hoses can be changed, you could alter the jetting (I'm assuming you have a carb) to have it run correctly on E10- and only E10.

I had to do this for my carb-equipped motorcycle, although it could not be made to run as well on E10 as E0.

Dave
 
rjh01 said:
I would think that unless you had a decent knowledge of how to do this it would be very dangerous. Get fumes build up and you get a good big bang. You would also have to ensure the booze was 100% pure.
Click to expand...

True that, but imagine the potential profits.
Taxed ethanol for consumption is often 100 times the cost of the agricultural product.
For that matter, I wonder if their is a black market for the ethanol straight from the 'farm'? How much funkier than EverClear would this bio-fuel be, prior to denaturing?

(Btw, I'm surely not advocating criminal activity. Its just that whenever there is such potential for an easy buck, its usually exploited.)
 
quarky said:
Well, there's a touch of irony.
Used to be methanol and acetone, as i recall.

So Ben, are you saying that someone with a decent knowledge of fractional distilation could buy this new gas, with its 10% booze; pull out the et-oh, for cheap, and put the other stuff back in the car?

I am really disturbed by the implications of this.
Click to expand...

Mix the fuel with water- the ethanol mixes with the water- the water/ethanol mix settles to the bottom.

Some 'cleanup' of both products would be necessary, but ridding the fuel of the last of the water would not need heat, and distilling the water/ethanol/other-stuff mixture would be fairly safe.

Dave
 
Be careful, Dave.
We're treading thin ice now.

Speaking of which, can speed some of the process.

Making peace with ethanol will be a long strange trip for humans.
Ultimately, it could be the perfect fuel, in spite of the bad rap.
 
BenBurch said:
Works a lot better in warm places, for example, Brazil, where it is a big thing NOW.
Click to expand...

I was thinking more "utopian future with much smaller population" when i suggested ethanol as being the fuel of choice.
Produced biologically, and oxidized chemically, as in fuel cells, serious waste heat issues are solved.

I see today as the dark ages, as per energy use and production.
I site the traffic-jam, for instance.

Ethanol would be the dream fuel if we can make it to the future.
The one I'd enjoy, that is.

Not much good for rockets and such.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom