Here we go again. Not really what the OP was asking but morphed into a discussion about pros and cons of ethanol, bioethanol, gasanol ,what ever. Put green or bio or eco in the description of something and some people just have to have it. Ethanol, C2H5OH, is grain alcohol, same stuff some people mix with orange juice and drink.
While it does have a higher octane number, 109 to 97 of gasoline RON or 92 to gasoline's 86 MON, it only has about 65% the energy that gasoline does. And before you mention the big green circle around the NASCAR fuel filler with "green energy" written on it, If the corn producers gave you 100 million dollars you'd have that on your car as well. It cost money to put ethanol into fuel, you get less energy out of it, it cost more to get from point A to point B.
It does give out less emissions when you drive your car, but producing ethanol puts more greenhouse gasses into the air than does producing and burning gasoline. That and the large amounts of carbon dioxide produced and released during production doesn't make any more ecological sense than pumping oil out of the ground and refining it into gasoline, motor oil, etc. And the oil also makes other products, even makes the plastic canoes and kayaks protesters stand in when they hold up their " leave the oil in the ground" signs. Then there are the vast carbon eating rain forests Brazil and other countries have cut down to plant sugar cane, corn and other plants in order to make ethanol. Not much eco in that, but in Brazil's case they no longer have to import oil, Here we can pump it out from under us.
The economic none-sense hits me right in the gut when I go to buy a steak. Hundreds of farmers are selling corn, grain, sugar beets/cane etc. to the ethanol producers. Makes perfect sense to me, they are in the farming business and they get good money for their products. I would do the same. But the production of ethanol is subsidized by the government. That is you and I, taxpayers. It's cheaper to take oil out of existing fields and refine it than it is to make ethanol. but it's so called "green" so the government spends millions to make it. Now, for the rancher to feed the steer that was going to make my steak, he has to pay an overly priced cost for feed, thus steak goes up 300%. I say eat food and burn gas.
Ethanol absorbs water, that will lead to corrosion in your fuel system. Ethanol wears out fuel pumps. Ethanol is not compatible with older rubber seals and parts in the fuel system including senders, pumps, carburetors etc. Cars made after the eighties have ethanol resisting parts. Don't try to put it into an old outboard. My wife's car is a 2005, everytime we fill it at a gas station that has ethanol in the fuel her check engine light comes on, it takes about three tank full of straight gas to get the light to go off. When I put it [8% here] in my bird it runs like [censored] until I can dilute it with gasoline.
If you have your car's fuel system completely switched over for E85 and have a steady source then give it a try.
We can argue the pros and cons till the cows come home but we should consider what effects it has on near 50 year old cars. Nothing good.
That is just my opinion, I'm not an expert. Nor an ecologist, geologist, chemist, economist etc. I did not intend to offend anyone with my opinions. Being in the logging/milling business and killing trees for a living, one may think I don't give a s**t about the green earth, rainforest or any other forests for that matter, but the opposite is true. We consider trees a renewable resource just as a hay farmer does grass. And replant millions of trees a year. Just don't get me going on tree spikers, tofu, sandals, 1% milk, light beer, granola, PBS, taxes, electric self driven cars, drones, vegetarian burgers, muffler laws, the metric system, carbon tax, etc.
