Alcohol enriched fuels and E85

[SomeTexan]

If there was such a thing as good gas anymore ....it wouldn't change anything....my eighties hypo engine got 10mpg, no matter what. empty, loaded, pulling a trailer, it didn't matter, it never changed.

What do you mean "if there was such a thing as good gas"? We have E85 at the pump and it will out perform C16 race fuel. There as never been a leaded gas at the pump that will out perform E85. Don't believe the fear mongering, E85 is way better than anything else you can get at the pump.

[Greybeard]

If there was such a thing as good gas anymore ....it wouldn't change anything....my eighties hypo engine got 10mpg, no matter what. empty, loaded, pulling a trailer, it didn't matter, it never changed.

What do you mean "if there was such a thing as good gas"? We have E85 at the pump and it will out perform C16 race fuel. There as never been a leaded gas at the pump that will out perform E85. Don't believe the fear mongering, E85 is way better than anything else you can get at the pump.

OK, point of fact...alcohol is not gasoline. E85 is alcohol with enough gasoline in it to not be considered racing fuel proper. Have you ever wondered why they don't market straight alcohol? I can look out my front window here in corn country and see the danged ethanol plant, what an eyesore! I used to have an uncluttered view out my window of nothing but fields and trees. But that is off the point.

Alcohol has a been a racing fuel since I was a kid in the sixties and likely since decades before that. Anyway, they only put 15% petroleum products in alcohol because that is the way the treaty is between big oil and the corn industry. But there is a lessor reason too, but a more important one to us old iron drivers. Alcohol eats at everything in these old vehicles, it causes corrosion on aluminum parts that are not designed for alcohol, it eats rubber, it hardens and makes brittle the old plastics that are in plenty of original old carburetors, and old carbs are not tuned to use the volumes of alcohol that are required to get the same BTU's as a smaller volume of gasoline. Gasoline burns much different than alcohol. When I worked at a custom Harley shop they had a alcohol fueled drag bike. About a 7 second bike in the quarter. The jets on that S&S Super D you could dam near poke a standard pencil through whereas a normal gas carb set up for the same displacement and horsepower engine would barely get the pencil lead through.

So, e-85 is not in the same realm as gasoline. It may be the best available today (for vehicles designed to use it) but it is not the best there ever was. 

[SomeTexan]

If there was such a thing as good gas anymore ....it wouldn't change anything....my eighties hypo engine got 10mpg, no matter what. empty, loaded, pulling a trailer, it didn't matter, it never changed.

What do you mean "if there was such a thing as good gas"? We have E85 at the pump and it will out perform C16 race fuel. There as never been a leaded gas at the pump that will out perform E85. Don't believe the fear mongering, E85 is way better than anything else you can get at the pump.

OK, point of fact...alcohol is not gasoline. E85 is alcohol with enough gasoline in it to not be considered racing fuel proper. Have you ever wondered why they don't market straight alcohol? I can look out my front window here in corn country and see the danged ethanol plant, what an eyesore! I used to have an uncluttered view out my window of nothing but fields and trees. But that is off the point.

Alcohol has a been a racing fuel since I was a kid in the sixties and likely since decades before that. Anyway, they only put 15% petroleum products in alcohol because that is the way the treaty is between big oil and the corn industry. But there is a lessor reason too, but a more important one to us old iron drivers. Alcohol eats at everything in these old vehicles, it causes corrosion on aluminum parts that are not designed for alcohol, it eats rubber, it hardens and makes brittle the old plastics that are in plenty of original old carburetors, and old carbs are not tuned to use the volumes of alcohol that are required to get the same BTU's as a smaller volume of gasoline. Gasoline burns much different than alcohol. When I worked at a custom Harley shop they had a alcohol fueled drag bike. About a 7 second bike in the quarter. The jets on that S&S Super D you could dam near poke a standard pencil through whereas a normal gas carb set up for the same displacement and horsepower engine would barely get the pencil lead through.

So, e-85 is not in the same realm as gasoline. It may be the best available today (for vehicles designed to use it) but it is not the best there ever was.

E85 is ethanol, not alcohol. Huge difference. An alcohol carb requires more work to switch over to E85 than a gasoline carb. It has 15% gasoline in it because that was what was deemed safe, to keep it from burning clear like alcohol. You can also buy E98, although not at the pump in most areas. Also, I live in the south, the eyesore to me is all the gas and oil sites.

Again, ethanol and alcohol are two different animals. I've run both, as well as methanol and they are all different. The 15% number has nothing to do with the oil industry except for their fear mongering. 2% will keep it from burning clear, 15% makes it safe for aluminum. As for seals and stuff, all you have to do is get new seals, gaskets and hoses rated for ethanol. They are all common now. If you still have stuff that isn't rated for ethanol, it's probably time to replace it for safety reasons anyways. As for the race Harley, there is extensive carb mods needed to switch from gasoline to any ethanol, alcohol or methanol. If they weren't done properly, then sometimes you can get away with over jetting the carb. It would be down on power from what it could be, but again, alcohol and ethanol are different and require different set ups. Another thing, if you could get the same power from any gasoline compared to alcohol, they were doing something wrong. Even more so with an air cooled engine. Alky runs cooler, an air cooled akly engine converted to gasoline would overheat and lock up before it hit the 1/8th mile. Unless it was never really set up to need alcohol in the first place.

We were talking about fuel avalible at the pump and nothing else come close to the performance potential of E85. Another thing to consider is that there are no production vehicles that are actually designed to run on E85. There are a lot that can use it, but if they were designed to run on it they would not run on gasoline. That is the reason for the myths that E85 costs you power and fuel mileage. Set up correctly, you gain considerable power and the mileage loss is negligible. Tenths on an mpg, not multiple mpg.

[roundhouse]

If there was such a thing as good gas anymore ....it wouldn't change anything....my eighties hypo engine got 10mpg, no matter what. empty, loaded, pulling a trailer, it didn't matter, it never changed.

What do you mean "if there was such a thing as good gas"? We have E85 at the pump and it will out perform C16 race fuel. There as never been a leaded gas at the pump that will out perform E85. Don't believe the fear mongering, E85 is way better than anything else you can get at the pump.

funny how all my cars get a lower mpg with E-10.  And ruins all
My chainsaws and mowers

E-10 lowers the mpg by about 20%. Causing vehicles to actually consume more gasoline than if there was no ethanol in it in the first place


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SomeTexan]

If there was such a thing as good gas anymore ....it wouldn't change anything....my eighties hypo engine got 10mpg, no matter what. empty, loaded, pulling a trailer, it didn't matter, it never changed.

What do you mean "if there was such a thing as good gas"? We have E85 at the pump and it will out perform C16 race fuel. There as never been a leaded gas at the pump that will out perform E85. Don't believe the fear mongering, E85 is way better than anything else you can get at the pump.

funny how all my cars get a lower mpg with E-10.  And ruins all
My chainsaws and mowers

E-10 lowers the mpg by about 20%. Causing vehicles to actually consume more gasoline than if there was no ethanol in it in the first place


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

E10 is a bad mix as far as I am concerned. You really need to have at least 60% ethanol to get any advantages from the mix. Have you advanced the timing and tuned the carb, including jetting, for the ethanol? 20% is way to high of a loss, there has to be another issue.

[Greybeard]

I use a little Ford Focus with a Zetec engine for my daily commute to work. If I run 91 octane no ethanol gas it gets 28mpg. If I put in the 15% ethanol gas at 87 octane I lose at least three mpg, sometimes more. No tuning a Zetec engine, it's all computer. Good plugs, wires, and coil and the computer takes care of the rest. It is not a coil on plug engine however. We have dual fuel vehicle at work we use as a school bus, it is a Ford Fusion. It runs on e85 too. Slow as a dog on two legs.

But I would tend to agree that a purer form of alcohol burning in an engine that is finely tuned to burn it would have good mileage and good power. Just like a alcohol fuel dragster does pretty good through the traps. The problem is that here in Iowa at least e85 is not as prevalent as e15 which is mandatory in every pump. e85 is still a specialty fuel like LNG and LPG. There are a few very new stations around that carry all of them but they few and far between.

Roundhouse got it right, I use older lawn equipment because stuff is simply to rich for my bank account. E anything ruins them. I made the mistake two years ago of buying alcohol fuel for my Stihl MS460 chainsaw, I forgot to dump the mix out when I was done and the saw sat for a couple of months with mix still in it. No problem I thought, just dump out the old and mix some new. It would not start. Spritzed some in the carb throat and it ran fine. Took cover off, the fuel lines where rock hard and crumbled when I touched them. Replaced those and still would not start. Retraced mt steps to make certain I assembled it correctly but still nothing. Took the carb off thinking the pump might be clogged with sawdust. But it was the diaphragm, it was swelled to the point it could not move. I showed the diaphragm to the Stihl mechanic and his first words were -ya used alcohol gas didn't ya? The book says it's OK, up to 5%. 15% is a no-no. I do however use it my Farmal M. It began life as a multi-fuel engine anyway. It can run distillates, gas, or kerosene but is now jetted only for gas.

[SomeTexan]

I use a little Ford Focus with a Zetec engine for my daily commute to work. If I run 91 octane no ethanol gas it gets 28mpg. If I put in the 15% ethanol gas at 87 octane I lose at least three mpg, sometimes more. No tuning a Zetec engine, it's all computer. Good plugs, wires, and coil and the computer takes care of the rest. It is not a coil on plug engine however. We have dual fuel vehicle at work we use as a school bus, it is a Ford Fusion. It runs on e85 too. Slow as a dog on two legs.

But I would tend to agree that a purer form of alcohol burning in an engine that is finely tuned to burn it would have good mileage and good power. Just like a alcohol fuel dragster does pretty good through the traps. The problem is that here in Iowa at least e85 is not as prevalent as e15 which is mandatory in every pump. e85 is still a specialty fuel like LNG and LPG. There are a few very new stations around that carry all of them but they few and far between.

Roundhouse got it right, I use older lawn equipment because stuff is simply to rich for my bank account. E anything ruins them. I made the mistake two years ago of buying alcohol fuel for my Stihl MS460 chainsaw, I forgot to dump the mix out when I was done and the saw sat for a couple of months with mix still in it. No problem I thought, just dump out the old and mix some new. It would not start. Spritzed some in the carb throat and it ran fine. Took cover off, the fuel lines where rock hard and crumbled when I touched them. Replaced those and still would not start. Retraced mt steps to make certain I assembled it correctly but still nothing. Took the carb off thinking the pump might be clogged with sawdust. But it was the diaphragm, it was swelled to the point it could not move. I showed the diaphragm to the Stihl mechanic and his first words were -ya used alcohol gas didn't ya? The book says it's OK, up to 5%. 15% is a no-no. I do however use it my Farmal M. It began life as a multi-fuel engine anyway. It can run distillates, gas, or kerosene but is now jetted only for gas.

When you look at e10 and e15 at 87 octane, you have to wonder what kind of junk fuel they are mixing with. Ethanol is a high octane fuel, even a rather small amount will add a few points. I've often wondered if that had anything to do with the results people get from it.

I'm sure your car can be tuned, it would just take an expensive program and credits. Like EFILive for tuning LSx computers. If it was optimized for the e15, you would probably be able to gain back most of your losses.

E85 is getting more common. I can use a little Google-foo and find enough gas stations that carry it to make road trips with a little planning. I've heard that Iowa had quite a few stations with E85, one of the states with the most actually.

The ethanol doesn't ruin them, just the non compatible parts. I picked up an ethanol rated carb kit for my old Ford tractor at tractor supply and haven't had a problem. I don't like the e10/e15 stuff but it's getting hard to avoid. Give me gasoline or e85+, don't waste my time with this low dose junk.

[Irish_Alley]

heres something to think about and use. they still make ethanol free fuel and you can buy it at airports cause they dont like to run ethanol in planes for some oddball reason

http://www.autofuelstc.com/fuel_testing.phtml
and a 282 page pdf on the ethanol fuel
http://easa.europa.eu/system/files/dfu/Final_Report_EASA.2008-6-light.pdf

[zieg85]

The difference in cost per gallon of E-85 over E-10 had to be $.70 lower in cost to equal $/mile in a 2011 Ford Escape I had as a company car.  Several times I did the calculations and it wasn't worth stopping for fuel as often to me.  All I know is the small engine folks must be happy because it is sure tearing up a lot of older equipment.  Gone are the days my 454 in my C20 would see 15-16 mpg with pure gas...

[gunrac]

A buddy of mine owns a BB 66' Vette. He won't run anything but airplane fuel in it, as he calls it. I think he transfer's more of it to run his small engine stuff then he I actually uses driving.

[SomeTexan]

heres something to think about and use. they still make ethanol free fuel and you can buy it at airports cause they dont like to run ethanol in planes for some oddball reason

http://www.autofuelstc.com/fuel_testing.phtml
and a 282 page pdf on the ethanol fuel
http://easa.europa.eu/system/files/dfu/Final_Report_EASA.2008-6-light.pdf

I haven't seen any at my local airports. Just the usual 100LL and Jet-A. Jet-A is high sulfur diesel, 100LL takes a lot of work to get to run right. You will be running some big jets in your carb to keep it from running lean and putting holes in pistons.

Before you try to compare airplanes to a cars, you need to understand what STC's are and how they work. Before you can change from 100% factory parts and what is specified in the manual, it has to be tested and a company has to back those tests. The Autogas STC for my Stinson 108-2 was written in the late 70's, and the newest ones I have found are from the 1980's. The FAA has made it really tough to make new STC's for old aircraft. You have to have them for everything too, a brake upgrade needed an STC. Going to tundra tires needed an STC. Running a different propeller than stock was another STC. Modifying the wiring to fix an issue required one too. Flying planes is one huge paperwork inspired headache.

One thing most people don't know, 100LL av-gas is not 100 octane low lead. It is 91 octane unleaded. 100LL is an altitude designation/rating.

[SomeTexan]

The difference in cost per gallon of E-85 over E-10 had to be $.70 lower in cost to equal $/mile in a 2011 Ford Escape I had as a company car.  Several times I did the calculations and it wasn't worth stopping for fuel as often to me.  All I know is the small engine folks must be happy because it is sure tearing up a lot of older equipment.  Gone are the days my 454 in my C20 would see 15-16 mpg with pure gas...

Of course. If your car was set up to run properly on E85, it would not run on E10. A flex fuel vehicle will limp along on E85, but it won't take full advantage of the fuel. You would see the same or worse losses if you tried to run C16 race fuel. Flex fuel is a joke, the fuels are too different to be used to their potential (read efficiently) in the same vehicle. Diesel fuel won't run well in a gasoline engine, does that make the fuel junk or the engine? No, they just aren't compatible. E85 performs great if you are over 13-1 compression or over 15lbs of boost.

[Greybeard]

Well then Tex that gets to the point of maybe we are comparing apples to oranges. If the engine is proprietary then it is not in the same class, other than it uses spark to ignite the fuel. Somehow I believe that was my point all along. The engines are not equal. You are correct that any engine that uses spark as it's ignition source can run any fuel it was designed to run (or converted to for running it). But therein is the kicker, the conversion can at times be expensive and not entirely worth the trouble. However, that begs another question, is this a political plan to eliminate old vehicles from use? I might verge on taking the role of conspiracist but I have watched for the last 45 years how the politicians have insisted in removing 15 year and older cars from use. I believe some states still participate in one Federal program that pays for junkers to be crushed. Junkers in this case is any car, running or not, that is a certain age. In addition, if diesel is any indication, they are purposely causing fuels and lubricants to be formulated so they hurt the older engines. Most folks call this progress, however, it seems funny how a we both have 75 year old tractors that were built to handle the fuels that are available today. My Farmall is a 1947. It runs great on anything I pour in it's tank. It's comp ratio about 6.9/1 or lower. Probably much lower, before I got it it had sat in a grove for 25 years and was full of water and rust, once broke free it has never been rebuilt or opened up. It starts at zero degrees with just a slight choke and purrs due to a electronic control module upgrade in the distributor. But I digress.

Below find a easy to locate article or two from the web on fuels and one or two peer-reviewed academic articles from the data base at my college. Read or don't read, everyone's choice. The last one is really long so I did not edit it space, it is simply copied and pasted here. Most of the charts and graphs did not render correctly, sorry about that...

Grain alcohol has been used as an engine fuel since engines were invented. But as you said in another post it burns so clean that it is dangerous.

Here is a breakdown of the comparison between alcohol and gasoline by BTU's> "Comparatively, a gallon of gasoline contains 116,090 Btu, and a gallon of 100 percent ethanol contains 76,330 Btu, or 65.75 percent of the energy of gasoline. The difference is due to the complexity of molecules in gasoline as compared to ethanol. Ethanol is composed of a molecule containing two carbon atoms, and gasoline is composed of a mixture of molecules containing four to 12 carbon atoms. Basically, gasoline has larger molecules and a broader range of molecules to be burned to produce power." (by Dr. Garrett W. Lindemann)http://classroom.synonym.com/btus-ethanol-compared-gasoline-7785.html

Also>

One US gallon of gasoline contains 114,000 BTU of energy; depending on the time of year, and depending on what is in the gasoline. It is getting harder to find gasoline's that does not contain 5 to 10% of Ethanol. Ethanol is ethyl alcohol; the kind of alcohol in beverages; beer, whiskey, bourbon, vodka, cocktails, etc.. It takes one and a half US gallons of ethanol to equal the energy in one US gallon of gasoline; the reason... because ethanol only has 76,100 BTU's of energy per gallon. Less energy means less miles per gallon. In 2007 George W. Bush made it possible for gas stations to sell Gasohol (E10) without labeling the pumps; in other words, you may not know alcohol is in the gas. Ever wonder where your gas mileage went?

Gasoline's blended with Ethanol will lower MPG in most engines. The EPA says Fuel efficiency can decrease by 1.5 to 3% but reports of 40 % are not unheard of. In winter, you get less mileage out of a tank of gas; we waste a lot of gas warming up our vehicles, but what about trips? Winter gasoline contains less BTUs per gallon, 112, 500; if you are using 100% gasoline (non-ethanol). A lot of States no longer sell 100% gasoline it at the pumps. They choose Ethanol in the gasoline as a way to meet the Clean Air Act emissions standard. If you have a vehicle that was made before 1990, it is most likely not compatible with alcohol in fuels. Alcohol deteriorates the gaskets and seals that touch the fuel will fail. Alcohol affects the engines timing;  makes the engine work harder. Many engine manufacturers prohibit the use of alcohol in the fuel; it is not just cars and trucks; industrial engines, generators, lawnmowers, weed eaters; all gasoline powered engines are affected.

It is the BTUs that allows us to get the best fuel economy. Adding alcohol, of any kind, to gasoline, dilutes the fuel and lowers the heat energy. The pumps provide us a choice of Octane's. The higher the octane rating, the less chance there is of pre-ignition. Octane has nothing to do with the BTU energy content of the gasoline, so use what your engine manufacturer recommends.
http://www.hho4free.com/gasoline_vs_ethanol.html

More>>>

METHANOL vs ETHANOL -- '96
G. R. James, Paul T. Richards,
William E. Schaefer and Steven A. Wilmes
James Chemical Engineering, Inc.
110 South Road, Groton, Connecticut 06340
Keywords: Methanol, Ethanol, Manufacture

The objects of this paper are:
To review the manufacture of ethanol and methanol.
*To compare current costs of manufacture.

*To look at current use situation.

*To comment on the current government subsidies for methanol and ethanol produced from renewable resources.

*To consider the possibilities of making methanol and ethanol from various renewable resources.

METHANOL

Methanol, known as "Wood Alcohol" for generations. was initially produced as a by-product from the destructive distillation of wood. Pyroligneous liquor, from heating wood in the absence of air, contains some 4 percent methanol and 7 percent acetic acid. Thus, wood produced the majority of methanol (and other by-products such as charcoal and fuel gas) until the mid 1920's.

Synthesis of methanol directly from H2 and CO appeared in the 1920's (in some cases methanol was a step in the purification of H2/N2 mixtures on route to ammonia synthesis). Methanol is still made directly from H2 and CO, which can be made from any hydrocarbon source. At present, natural gas is the major source, however, coal, oil, solid waste, and wood can and are being used to make methanol.

Methanol use (and price) have climbed, particularly in the past few years as shown in Figure #l. Figure #1 also illustrates that MTBE has been the significant driver of methanol demand in recent years.

The overall methanol market in the U.S. is expected to continue increasing by perhaps 10% in the next four years. At the same time, because of gas limitation in the US., imports are projected to increase from low priced gas locations with relatively low shipping costs to the US.

MTBE, the major driver in the past few years, has recently suffered some setback but is
expected to continue growing at a moderate rate instead of the explosive rate of 1990
through 1995. The ETBWEthanol situation, briefly discussed below, has and will have
considerable effect on the MTBE and methanol demand.

Federal Tax Credits in the past years for so-called renewable feed based fuel and gasoline additives (currently 54#/gal. for ethanol and 60$ for methanol) from 1978 raised production of ethanol from 800,000 short tons to 3,500,000 short tons by 1984. The credits or subsidies boosted the uneconomic use of corn based ethanol (food to fuel) but, unfortunately, did nothing for the biomass to methanol industry which makes considerable sense in the U.S. for several reasons:
1. Biomass* is available up to a large percent of our fuel use.
2. Methanol produces the most economical fuel oxygenate, MTBE.
3. Methanol itself is an efficient, clean burning fuel. As the biomass to fuel industry develops, it will compete with gasoline with no subsidy.
                               *Biomass includes:
                                   - Solid waste
                                   -Agricultural residues (see Table 5)
                                   -Wood
ETHANOL

Known as "Grain Alcohol" for the millennia, ethanol has been the basis of recreational beverages forever. It can be made from fruit or sugar containing materials such as molasses. For fuel use in the USA, it is made from starchy materials such as Corn, barley, and sorghum. These are all renewable resources and require, for example, about 0.38 bushel of corn per gallon of 100% ethanol. There are various by-products depending upon which system is used.

The "Wet Mill" system produces by-products such as germ, gluten and a small amount of C02. The "Dry Mill" process produces DDGS (an animal feed supplement) and a small amount of C02. There are disagreements in the industry as to which process is most economical. Apparently, it depends largely on the return from by-products at any particular time in the overall economy.

Ethanol is also made from petroleum sources by reaction of ethylene to ethyl sulfates and then hydrolysis to crude ethyl alcohol and dilute sulfuric acid (which is then Concentrated for re-use). Another process produces ethanol directly from ethylene via hydration over a catalyst.

Subsidies to the ethanol industry have resulted in rapid changes in the past 15 years. Plant capacity in 1979 of only 20 MM gallons PA became 750 MM gallons PA in 1986 and in 1994 was some 1,400 MM gallons (renewable resource based). At the same time, because of variations in the cost of grain, raw materials (approximately 45% in 1994) and apparent reduction in demand (July 1994 data show 8% reduction in demand over 1993), many U.S. Government loan guaranteed ethanol plants have had
difficulty.

The dramatic changes in ethanol demand in the USA over the last 30 years are illustrated in Figure #2.
In the recent past two things have happened to the ethanoVfuel industry:
1. The corn price has gone up from $2.75 in August 1995 to a current price of $3,90/bushel. At .38 bushels per gallon, this equals some 38# per gallon net increase (see Figure 9).
2. The public is at last becoming aware of the give-away of public funds by both political parties to corporations using corn uneconomically to make ethanol.

.....
The article is much longer than this. It is a peer reviewed article.

[Greybeard]

Continued from above^^^

here's another in part>

Procedia Engineering 100 (2015) 1013 – 1022
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
1877-7058 © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of DAAAM International Vienna
doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2015.01.461
ScienceDirect
25th DAAAM International Symposium on Intelligent Manufacturing and Automation, DAAAM 2014
A Comparison of Ethanol and Methanol Blending with Gasoline Using a 1-D Engine Model
Simeon Iliev*
Department of Engines and Vehicles, University of Ruse, 8 Studentska Str.,7017 Ruse, Bulgaria
Abstract
The world's fossil fuel reserves are limited and there has been intensive research to find out alternatives to fossil fuels. Hence, there is a progressive interest related to using non-fossil sources in vehicles. The biofuel is a major renewable energy source to supplement declining fossil fuel resources. Alcohols are an important category of bio-fuels. The ethanol and methanol have been good candidates as alternative fuels for the vehicles because they are liquid and have several physical and combustion properties similar to gasoline. That is why this study is aimed to develop the 1-D model of a four-stroke spark ignited engine for predicting the effect of various fuel types on engine performances and fuel consumption on various engine operating conditions. AVL Boost was used as a simulation tool to analyze the performance and emissions characteristics for different blends of ethanol, methanol and gasoline (by volume). The results obtained from the simulation of different fuel blends were compared to those of gasoline fuel. The results indicated that when alcohol–gasoline fuel blends were used, the brake power decreased and the brake specific fuel consumption increased compared to those of gasoline fuel. When fuel blends percentage increases, the CO and HC concentration decreases and there is a significant increase NOx emission when fuel blends percentage increases up to 30% E30 (M30).
© 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of DAAAM International Vienna
1. Introduction
The problem with crude oil depletion has arisen in the last years. There has been intensive research to find out alternatives to fossil fuels. Alternative fuels are derived from resources other than petroleum. When these fuels are used in internal combustion engines, they produce less air pollution compared to gasoline and most of them are more economically beneficial compared to oil. Last but not least, they are renewable. The most common fuels that are used as alternative fuels are natural gas, propane, ethanol, methanol and hydrogen. Lots of works have been written on engines operating with these fuels individually; but a small number of publications have compared some of these fuels together in the same engine [1–4]. The idea of adding low contents of ethanol or methanol to gasoline is not new, extending back at least to the 1970s, when oil supplies were reduced and a search for alternative energy carriers began in order to replace gasoline and diesel fuel. Initially, methanol and ethanol were considered the most attractive alcohols to be added to gasoline. Methanol and ethanol can be produced from natural products or waste materials, unlike gasoline which is a non-renewable energy resource [5, 6]. One of the important features is that the ethanol and methanol can be used directly without requiring any major changes in the structure of the engine. Among the various alcohols, ethanol and methanol are known as the most suitable fuels for spark ignited (SI) engines.
Peer-review under responsibility of DAAAM International Vienna
1014 Simeon Iliev / Procedia Engineering 100 ( 2015 ) 1013 – 1022
The use of fuel additives is very important because many of these additives can be added to fuel in order to improve its efficiency and its performance. Some of the most important additives to improve fuel performance are oxygen containing organic compounds (oxygenates). Several oxygenates have been used as fuel additives, such as methanol, ethanol, tertiary butyl alcohol and methyl tertiary butyl ether [7]. The use of oxygenated fuel additives provides more oxygen in the combustion chamber and has a great potential to reduce emissions from SI engines.
On the combustion characteristics, the auto-ignition temperature and flash point of ethanol and methanol are higher than those of gasoline, which makes it safer for transportation and storage. The latent heat of evaporation of ethanol is between three and five times higher than that of gasoline; this makes the temperature of the intake manifold much lower, and increases the volumetric efficiency. The heating value of ethanol is lower than that of the gasoline. Therefore, we need 1.6 times more alcohol fuel to achieve the same energy output. The stoichiometric AFR (air–fuel ratio) of ethanol is about 2/3 that of the gasoline, so the required amount of air for complete combustion is lesser for alcohol [8]. Ethanol has some advantages over gasoline, such as the reduction of CO, unburned HC emissions and better anti-knock characteristics [9]. Methanol and ethanol have much higher octane number than gasoline [10]. This allows engines to have much higher compression ratios, thus increasing thermal efficiency [11]. Methanol can be produced from natural gas at no great cost, and is quite easy to blend with gasoline, so this alcohol was seen as an attractive additive. However, when methanol was used in practice, it became clear that precautions had to be taken when handling it and that methanol is aggressive to some materials, such as plastic components and even metals in the fuel system [12].
There is plenty of literature to various blends of ethanol, methanol and gasoline. Palmer [13] studied the effect of using various blend rates of ethanol–gasoline fuels in engine tests. Results indicated that 10% ethanol addition increases the engine power output by 5%, and the octane number can be increased by 5% for each 10% ethanol added. He indicated that 10% of ethanol addition to gasoline could reduce the concentration of CO emissions up to 30%. Bata et al. [14] studied different blend rates of ethanol–gasoline fuels in engines, and found that the ethanol could reduce the CO and UHC emissions to some degree.  The reduction of CO emissions are apparently caused by the wide flammability and oxygenated characteristic of ethanol. Kim et al. [15] estimated that the potential for ethanol production is equivalent to about 32% of the total gasoline consumption worldwide, when used in 85% ethanol in gasoline for a midsize passenger vehicle. Shenghua et al. [16] used a three-cylinder SI engine with different blends of methanol (10%, 15%, 20%, 25% and 30%) in gasoline under full load condition. Results indicated that engine power and torque decreased, while the brake thermal efficiency improved with the methanol blends increase in the fuel blend. Bilgin and Sezer [17] investigated the influence of methanol addition to gasoline on the engine performance. They reported that the maximum brake mean effective pressure (bmep) was obtained from M5 fuel blend. Altun et al. [18] studied the effect of 5% and 10% ethanol and methanol blending in unleaded gasoline on engine performance and exhaust emission. Results indicated that M10 and E10 blended fuels demonstrated the best result in exhaust emission. The HC emission of M10 and E10 are reduced by 13% and 15% and the CO emissions by 10,6% and 9,8%, respectively. Increased CO2 emission for M10 and E10 compared with unleaded gasoline was observed. The ethanol and methanol addition to unleaded gasoline demonstrated an increase of BSFC (brake specific fuel consumption) and a decrease of break thermal efficiency in comparison to unleaded gasoline.
The reviewed literature shows that the emissions for methanol-gasoline and ethanol-gasoline blends are lower than that of pure gasoline fuel. The engine performance and exhaust emissions with ethanol-gasoline blends are similar to those with methanol-gasoline blends.
From the literature review, it was concluded that the emission and performance characteristics of different blends of ethanol and methanol in different engines have not been investigated sufficiently. For this reason, this study investigated the effects of ethanol–gasoline and methanol–gasoline fuel blends on the performance and emissions characteristics of a SI engine at different engine speed and compared them with those of gasoline.
The gasoline engine performance theory linked together with computer modelling of the engine thermodynamics in engine simulations is a great challenge, as the latter make the most complete use of the former and the models used are becoming widespread. Engine modelling is a very large subject, in part because of the range of engine configurations possible and the variety of alternative analytical techniques or sub-models, which can be applied in overall engine models. Engine modelling is a fruitful research area and as a result many research laboratories have produced their own engine thermodynamics models with varying degrees of complexity, scope and ease to use [19].
Engine simulation is becoming an increasingly important engineering tool for time and cost efficiency in the development of internal combustion engines (ICEs). Most of the results that are obtained by simulation are rather difficult to be obtained experimentally. The use of Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulations allow researchers to understand flow behavior and quantify important flow parameters such as mass flow rates or pressure drops, provided that the CFD tools have been properly validated against experimental results. For reasons such as the aforementioned, CFD simulations have become a valuable tool in helping both the analysis and design of the intake and exhaust systems of an ICEs. Many processes in the engine are 3-D but it requires greater knowledge and large computational time. Thus simplified 1-D simulation is often used. There are several components that manifest a complex three-dimensional flow behaviour, such as turbo machinery or manifolds which cannot be simulated properly by 1-D codes, and thus require viscous, 3-D codes.
Hence, it is a right choice to save computational time by simulating the complex components by means of a 3-D code and modelling the rest of the system with a 1-D code, i.e. the ducts. In this way, a coupling methodology between the 1-D and the 3-D code in the respective interfaces is required, and has become the objective of numerous authors [20–22].
In 1-D simulation, equations for conservation of mass, momentum, and energy are solved in time and in one dimension along the main flow direction in the engine pipes. Additional models, correlations, or measurements are needed in 1-D capturing 3-D phenomena such as flow over valves and combustion [23, 24].

[Captain Swampy]

My understanding of alcohol is that you need almost twice as much to get the same power as gas. That's why it wrecks small engines and old engines that can't compensate for the E-10, they run lean and burn up. Not to mention the corrosion. The reason it's used in racing is because by using twice as much liquid, it helps cool the combustion chamber.  The engine is started and warmed up on gas using a different carb, then the alcohol carb is installed, the fuel pump belt installed, and then raced on alcohol. After racing, the gas carburetor is put back on and the run for a while to get the corrosive alcohol out of the engine. If I remember correctly they also drain the whole fuel system.

Alcohol has less BTU than gas. (less energy in the same quantity of fuel). It's not possible to get better MPG when more fuel is required to produce the same energy. Propane and natural gas are the same way, they don't have the same energy content as gas or diesel.

That's the problem, the vehicle needs to be re-jetted for alcohol. I don't want to mess with jetting to mow my lawn. The blends suck, let gas be gas, and alcohol be alcohol. If someone likes alcohol they can install a fuel system to meet their needs.

Edit: Greybeard beat me to it. And with much more technical info. LOL