Ethanol Mandate for Iowa?

I should elaborate a little more. A little research indicates that
there are many problems with ethanol.


RST Engineering wrote:
Ethanol should not be approved for use in general aviation aircraft. It
seems like a great idea, but the ethanol is highly caustic

The hell you say. Your source? And to WHAT is it caustic? To fuming red
nitric acid, WATER is caustic.


and eats
hoses

Hasn't eaten a single hose on my Miata and it has been running on the stuff
for ten years.


Rubber hoses in recent models of cars have been made more resistant to
ethanol. The vast majority of airplanes, however, were built before
1987.



and corrodes carburetors

How? The chemical reaction between ethanol and steel/aluminum appears to be
benign. Again, your source other than OWT?


The chemical reaction between ethanol and steel/aluminum is not benign.
I was able to turn up several papers documenting that ethanol was
corrosive to aluminum, at the very lest. It also corrodes fuel
injectors.


and cylinders.

Seems that the entire US auto fleet would be in serious doo doo if this were
true. It ain't.


Oh, but it is true. You may be a little young to remember, but back in
the days when ethanol was first introduced, the entire US auto fleet
was in very serious doo doo. Mechanics all over the country were kept
busy cleaning and repairing engines and fuel system components damaged
by ethanol. No part of the fuel system was immune, from the gas tank to
the exhaust system. Of course, this was all before the Internet
existed, so if all you know is what you learn from the Internet, you
are probably totally ignorant of that bit of history.

An airplane is not an automobile. Over time automobiles have been
redesigned to be more tolerant of ethanol, whereas airplanes have not.
A somewhat shorter engine life may be acceptable to an automobile
owner. It is not to an airplane owner.




Ethanol is also more
expensive than gasoline.

Not the argument. Keep OT please.


Well, that was random. What are you, an ethanol salesman? You are going
to have to come up with a better argument than just telling me to shut
up. Ethanol is more expensive than gasoline. It also reduces gas
mileage. I suggest that those things are important to pilots.

RST Engineering wrote:
Ethanol should not be approved for use in general aviation aircraft. It
seems like a great idea, but the ethanol is highly caustic

The hell you say. Your source? And to WHAT is it caustic? To fuming
red
nitric acid, WATER is caustic.


and eats
hoses

Hasn't eaten a single hose on my Miata and it has been running on the
stuff
for ten years.


Rubber hoses in recent models of cars have been made more resistant to
ethanol. The vast majority of airplanes, however, were built before
1987.

Then we'd better wake up and smell the coffee. I don't mind tilting at
windmills, but when I've got legislators the country-wide embracing alcohol
as a Good Thing(tm) I'd damned well better learn to live with it. Politics,
my young friend. Get used to it. Replace the damned hoses if that's what
it takes.






and corrodes carburetors

How? The chemical reaction between ethanol and steel/aluminum appears to
be
benign. Again, your source other than OWT?


The chemical reaction between ethanol and steel/aluminum is not benign.
I was able to turn up several papers documenting that ethanol was
corrosive to aluminum, at the very lest. It also corrodes fuel
injectors.

OWT.




and cylinders.

Seems that the entire US auto fleet would be in serious doo doo if this
were
true. It ain't.


Oh, but it is true. You may be a little young to remember,

Sonny, I was shaving heads on flathead Fords when you were in liquid form.



but back in
the days when ethanol was first introduced, the entire US auto fleet
was in very serious doo doo. Mechanics all over the country were kept
busy cleaning and repairing engines and fuel system components damaged
by ethanol. No part of the fuel system was immune, from the gas tank to
the exhaust system. Of course, this was all before the Internet
existed, so if all you know is what you learn from the Internet, you
are probably totally ignorant of that bit of history.

First mechanic certificate came along in 1965. I hardly think the Internet
existed then. Sure there were unforecast problems, but if the aviation
industry can't build on that storehouse of information and experience and do
some serious redesign, then we'd better take the wings off and use the
fuselages for chicken coops, because that's what's going to happen.




An airplane is not an automobile. Over time automobiles have been
redesigned to be more tolerant of ethanol, whereas airplanes have not.
A somewhat shorter engine life may be acceptable to an automobile
owner. It is not to an airplane owner.

The world is changing. Get used to it.






Ethanol is also more
expensive than gasoline.

Not the argument. Keep OT please.


Well, that was random. What are you, an ethanol salesman? You are going
to have to come up with a better argument than just telling me to shut
up. Ethanol is more expensive than gasoline. It also reduces gas
mileage. I suggest that those things are important to pilots.

I'm not telling anybody to shut up. I'm asking for serious, unbiased,
analytic, scientific study instead of you quoting "Cecil" (the Seasick Sea
Serpent???) as your points and authority.

Jim

"RST Engineering" writes:

Replace the damned hoses if that's what
it takes.

Does everyone else get over 20 years out of the old rubber hoses? (I
sure don't!) I would have expected them to be replaced anyway.

Is all this wailing and gnashing of teeth really over replacing decades
old rubber?

--kyler

RST Engineering wrote:

RST Engineering wrote:
Ethanol should not be approved for use in general aviation aircraft. It
seems like a great idea, but the ethanol is highly caustic

The hell you say. Your source? And to WHAT is it caustic? To fuming
red
nitric acid, WATER is caustic.


and eats
hoses

Hasn't eaten a single hose on my Miata and it has been running on the
stuff
for ten years.


Rubber hoses in recent models of cars have been made more resistant to
ethanol. The vast majority of airplanes, however, were built before
1987.

Then we'd better wake up and smell the coffee. I don't mind tilting at
windmills, but when I've got legislators the country-wide embracing alcohol
as a Good Thing(tm) I'd damned well better learn to live with it. Politics,
my young friend. Get used to it. Replace the damned hoses if that's what
it takes.


Yeah, right. The scientific studies are wrong and the politicians are
right. What sort of engineer are you, anyway?

If you want to just bend over and let the politicians do whatever they
want, fine. But don't call it science.


and corrodes carburetors

How? The chemical reaction between ethanol and steel/aluminum appears to
be
benign. Again, your source other than OWT?


The chemical reaction between ethanol and steel/aluminum is not benign.
I was able to turn up several papers documenting that ethanol was
corrosive to aluminum, at the very lest. It also corrodes fuel
injectors.

OWT.

Really? Here is a study that shows ethanol corrodes engines.

http://age-web.age.uiuc.edu/faculty/qzhang/Publications/2005BT96(2)Hansen.pdf

And this study shows that ethanol corrodes aircraft engines:

http://library.msstate.edu/etd/show....1072004-122317

The automobile industry dealt with the problem by developing new
automobiles. The aviation industry can, too, but there will always be a
lot of legacy aircraft around that will not be able to handle ethanol.
All the bombast and belligerence in the world will not make that
problem go away.

I might mention that Cecil Adams of the Straight Dope has a board of
accredited scientists who check his columns. If it came down to his
word vs. yours, I would have to go with his. You can belittle him all
you want, but I suspect that the team that checked his column probably
knows quite a bit more than you do.

"cjcampbell" writes:

I should elaborate a little more. A little research indicates that
there are many problems with ethanol.

Oh, *research*??? Is that where we're going now? O.k., so you're
familiar with these folks, right?
http://www.age85.org/

Rubber hoses in recent models of cars have been made more resistant to
ethanol. The vast majority of airplanes, however, were built before
1987.

Like the Cessna 180/182?
http://www.age85.org/STCs.htm

I was able to turn up several papers documenting that ethanol was
corrosive to aluminum, at the very lest.

Piper Owner Society:
http://web.archive.org/web/200108081...rg/Ethanol.htm

Tests have shown there is no problem with AGE-85 and aluminum.
In fact, it seems to cause less corrosion than avgas. Virtually
all polymers used in aircraft made in the last decade are
alcohol compatible.

Oh, but it is true. You may be a little young to remember, but back in
the days when ethanol was first introduced, [...]

Ah...there we go.

--kyler

"Kyler Laird" wrote in message
...
"cjcampbell" writes:

I should elaborate a little more. A little research indicates that
there are many problems with ethanol.

Oh, *research*??? Is that where we're going now? O.k., so you're
familiar with these folks, right?
http://www.age85.org/

Rubber hoses in recent models of cars have been made more resistant to
ethanol. The vast majority of airplanes, however, were built before
1987.

Like the Cessna 180/182?
http://www.age85.org/STCs.htm

I was able to turn up several papers documenting that ethanol was
corrosive to aluminum, at the very lest.

Piper Owner Society:
http://web.archive.org/web/200108081...rg/Ethanol.htm

Tests have shown there is no problem with AGE-85 and aluminum.
In fact, it seems to cause less corrosion than avgas. Virtually
all polymers used in aircraft made in the last decade are
alcohol compatible.



One of the problems that recent society seems to have developed, is the
politicization of science. No one believes "the other side" anymore. No
one will even *read* the other side of the argument.

Also, the belief that the only people who can be trusted are you and me (and
I'm not so sure about you). If somebody else is doing it, (such as Brazil)
it can't possibly be any good.

There was a time where science was independent, and above all that. If we
don't get back to that state soon, every chance of progress will be scuttled
by one more OWT masquerading as scientific fact.

On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 21:20:30 -0700, "RST Engineering"
wrote:

Hasn't eaten a single hose on my Miata and it has been running on the stuff
for ten years.

The typical GA engine is a lot older than the one in your Miata.

The STC for mogas on the Piper Cub specifically rules out
ethanol-denatured gasoline, or at least the placard does.


-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

"Cub Driver" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 21:20:30 -0700, "RST Engineering"
wrote:

Hasn't eaten a single hose on my Miata and it has been running on the
stuff
for ten years.

The typical GA engine is a lot older than the one in your Miata.

The STC for mogas on the Piper Cub specifically rules out
ethanol-denatured gasoline, or at least the placard does.

So does the one in my 182, which is why I'm starting to beat the bandwagon
for ways around the gasahol restriction other than undocumented old wive's
tales. I'm as much a mogas enthusiast as anybody, but I'm starting to
understand the politics of the game.


Jim

On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 21:07:09 -0700, cjcampbell wrote:

expensive than gasoline. Although it is based on a renewable resource,
the fact is that the resource is not nearly large enough to meet demand
should it become mandated, meaning that costs will soar. Automobile
drivers might be able to live with these problems, but aircraft owners
would find them unacceptable.


Since almost all ethanol comes from corn, actually costs more to produce
(or roughly equal using the most modern and advance technology we have)
than what it can be sold for. As long as ethanol is produced from corn
crops, ethonol will remain a government hand out to farmers. There is no
way, based on current corn-ethanol conversion technology, corn makes any
economical sense at all.

This is no surprise this is happening in the middle of corn country.
These moves show just how corrupt the representatives in Iowa really are.
They've been trying to do stuff like this for over a decade...probably a
lot longer even...


Greg

On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 13:46:47 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

Today Rep. Jim Nussle -- potentially the future governor of Iowa -- was
reported as proposing that all gasoline sold in Iowa be required to contain
20% ethanol additive. Presumably, this legislation, if passed, would make
the sale of regular unleaded gasoline illegal in Iowa.

Though not to that extent, it will almost certainly be a nationwide
problem. There's no mandate, but Congress has declined to pass a
waiver for producers of MBTE to protect them from lawsuits. Much of
Northeast is on the MBTE standard, including the part of New Hampshire
in which I live.

Refiners won't use MBTE if they can be sued for the effects from
spills. The only other existing oxygenate is ethanol, so the Northeast
and I assume California (if it isn't already) will soon have only
alky-denatured gasoline.

I assume that Iowa and other state legislators are smart enough to
exempt 100LL from their ruling, but the spread of the alky economy is
really bad news for flyers who use mogas.



-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com