The Truth about ethanol: Big oil is lying.

[Machete]

The oil companies and lobbyists have bs’d the public about ethanol in gasoline.
Having to replace a fuel vent hose due to the famous P0442 code I inspected the condition of the rubber. It was deteriorating in my hand leaving black soot on my hands.

First thing come to mind was that damn ethanol. So I decided to do the research and low and behold look what I found out.

Read the MSDS for any gasoline w ethanol and you’ll find some very bad cancer causing shit. Look for BTEX.
BENZENE
TOURINE
ETHLBENZENE
XYLINE.

This is what destroys your fuel lines etc. Not ethanol. Look at the active ingredient of most injector/carb cleaner- Methanol.

Here are a couple informatives to help you on your research.

 

[joethefordguy]

********.

 

[Machete]

********.

Very analytical response backed by data and personal research.

 

[DWhitley]

Machete, that is some interesting information to ponder. I am one to always keep an open mind and consider options by using my mind. While I have long said media distributes what they are told to and not an unbiased truth, I have a little reluctance to embracing the video portion. My analytical mind has one SMALL issue with the gentleman's testing video. I perceive one flaw in his scientific method. And I know it is very minor to most people. Please let me explain. In the fuel lines and components in vehicles today, specifically the soft lines, very few are subjected to full immersion in fuel. Their design and composition is to allow the movement of fuel from one place to another INSIDE of them. It is hard to dispute his point if view as there is a definite reaction. There is also not an equivalent substance that the new line has been soaked in for a week either. Those two issues create the weakening in his position. Don't get me wrong. We ARE hostages to Big Oil and regulations. I just feel I personally am not able to back the video portion fully with the imperfections of the scientific method as used in the video. I wish I had the resources to perform what may possibly be a better testing myself. I just am not able to do so. A test with an inert solution for a true control along with a test designed to better simulate real world usage by having the individual chemicals constantly flowing only inside the lines would, in my opinion, be better suited to present a stronger and more accurate case to illustrate the point. This has been only my opinion. And I hope that I have explained things clearly. I mean no disrespect to you or anyone. I do appreciate and want to thank you for sharing yours with the community as well.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[Machete]

Machete, that is some interesting information to ponder. I am one to always keep an open mind and consider options by using my mind. While I have long said media distributes what they are told to and not an unbiased truth, I have a little reluctance to embracing the video portion. My analytical mind has one SMALL issue with the gentleman's testing video. I perceive one flaw in his scientific method. And I know it is very minor to most people. Please let me explain. In the fuel lines and components in vehicles today, specifically the soft lines, very few are subjected to full immersion in fuel. Their design and composition is to allow the movement of fuel from one place to another INSIDE of them. It is hard to dispute his point if view as there is a definite reaction. There is also not an equivalent substance that the new line has been soaked in for a week either. Those two issues create the weakening in his position. Don't get me wrong. We ARE hostages to Big Oil and regulations. I just feel I personally am not able to back the video portion fully with the imperfections of the scientific method as used in the video. I wish I had the resources to perform what may possibly be a better testing myself. I just am not able to do so. A test with an inert solution for a true control along with a test designed to better simulate real world usage by having the individual chemicals constantly flowing only inside the lines would, in my opinion, be better suited to present a stronger and more accurate case to illustrate the point. This has been only my opinion. And I hope that I have explained things clearly. I mean no disrespect to you or anyone. I do appreciate and want to thank you for sharing yours with the community as well.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Agreed.
I guess my issue is that since I enjoy my whiskey, bourbon and scotch... and I have no holes in my stomach, and knowing the power of Big Oil and their lobbyists, then reading the MSDS of e10 gas and seeing HIGHLY carcinogenic chemicals ie BTEX, I lean towards believing ethanol is not the culprit.

Keep in mind I drive 30 miles one way to buy non ethanol gas @ $3.75 / gallon!!!!

I used to believe ethanol increased the price of my steaks but looking at that price graph I can see food prices are more tied to oil not moonshine!

Thank you for your input.

 

[rjdelp7]

Ethanol was added to gas for two reasons. It boosted octane after, MTBE(methyl tert butyl ether)was removed from gasoline in 2005(ground water pollution). However the recent government 'mandate', that requires all gas to be blended, began a couple of years age. Corn producers, have greatly benefited from the 10% Obama mandate. I refuse to use this crap fuel in any small engines or my motorcycle. My local junk yard, removes all the gas tanks(and fuel pumps), before letting customers take parts. They throw the tanks in the back of the vehicle. I have looked closely at the tanks and pumps. I see no evidence of any damage or corrosion inside the tanks or on the pumps. The actual fuel lines appear to be stainless steel. These are older vehicles with a ton of miles. I have personally looked at 4 or 5, 1st Gen gas tanks. I would not worry about using E10 in any daily driver. My local stations pump says 'may contain up to 10% ethanol'. I asked the manager, who claims he was told, depending on price, the blend goes up and down. Cheap oil, means less ethanol. The refineries supposedly cheat on the blend. So we may be getting only 4 or 5%.

 

[Plati]

Aside from replacing the (anti knock) MTBE additive , Ethanol blended into gasoline was "supposed" to reduce the importation of oil from the Middle East and make the country safer. It also was primarily a gift to the agriculture industry to buy votes and elect politicians. Greenies loved it since in their fantasy world it was GREEN.

Early studies showed that it took just as much or more petroleum to grow (and transport, etc) the corn needed to make the Ethanol than was saved by using it in fuel. So much for making the country safer. Politicians didn't much care because their main goal was to get re-elected by pandering to the agriculture industry. Replacing MTBE was just a bonus. Then fracking changed the whole (incorrect anyway) equation and now we are the largest oil producing nation in the world. The government created a bizarre system of RINS credits that has resulted in increasing the cost of gasoline at the pump for consumers as they are needed by larger refiner/blender corporations and traded on the open market. Traders on Wall Street gamble on this and make BIG money. But the main goal of creating wealth in the agriculture industry remained and votes were bought to re-elect the politicians. This was all over the head of the average consumer so that didn't hurt the vote count.

Now the current administration has approved use of E15. More votes!!

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/11/30/aaa-e15-gas-harm-cars/1735793/

 

[Machete]

It’s great to see how well informed our group is. Couldn’t agree more w both posts above.

Question is what can we the public do? I pay $3.65/g for rec 90 here in northern Illinois and it takes an hour out of my day.

E15 is coming.

 

[Rich_007]

It’s great to see how well informed our group is. Couldn’t agree more w both posts above.

Question is what can we the public do? I pay $3.65/g for rec 90 here in northern Illinois and it takes an hour out of my day.

E15 is coming.

You could move to Texas where it's only $2.10 / gal. and we typically refer to tree huggers as "bait".

 

[Machete]

Yeah, I’ve been to Frisco and it’s Africa hot in the summer.

I got a sunburn walking to my rental car from DFW to the terminal.

Florida next year will be home again. At least I’ll be minutes from the beach.