TW200 Forum banner

1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,225 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Watch this!


GaryL
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
141 Posts
The closest E0 gas station to me is hours away... ohh California

I switched my TW to Tygon yellow fuel line and go through a full tank of gas at least once every 2 weeks (minimizing risk of separation). I've thought about extracting the ethanol myself, but I'm not sure if it's worth the effort.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
548 Posts
Give this a read...
[h=1]Health Risks and Benefits Associated with the Use of 10% Ethanol-Blended Gasoline in CanadaHealth and the environment[/h]Air pollution and climate change concerns have prompted governments to introduce measures to reduce the use of fossil fuels. One recent fossil fuel reduction initiative that has been widely implemented is the "greening of fuel" by the addition of ethanol to gasoline. Health Canada has completed a risk assessment evaluating the potential risks and benefits to the health of Canadians from the use of E10, a formulation of gasoline containing 10% ethanol per volume. E10 is the most common proportion for ethanol-blended fuel and is considered usable in gasoline engines without the need for mechanical modifications.
[h=2]Risk Assessment of E10 Fuel[/h]The risk assessment of E10 fuel focused on the human health implications due to changes in air quality that might arise from its widespread use in Canada. The risk assessment compared the health impacts of E10 blended fuel to those of conventional gasoline. Risk characterization was performed for: ozone (O[SUB]3[/SUB]), nitrogen dioxide (NO[SUB]2[/SUB]), particulate matter of 2.5 µm or less in diameter (PM[SUB]2.5[/SUB]), sulphur dioxide (SO[SUB]2[/SUB]), carbon monoxide (CO), acetaldehyde, benzene, 1,3-butadiene, formaldehyde, ethanol, and peroxyacetyl nitrate (PAN). Other possible emissions from the production, transportation, and distribution of E10 fuel, and the potential effects of leaked E10 fuel on aquifer contamination were beyond the scope of this analysis. Potential health benefits from reduced greenhouse gases due to the use of renewable fuel (ethanol) and its economic impacts were also beyond the scope of this assessment.
[h=2]Atmospheric Modelling[/h]Ambient concentrations of hazardous air pollutants were determined using a combination of: modelling of vehicle emissions; quantification of changes in the emission inventory based on changes in vehicle emissions; and, atmospheric modelling. To assess the impact of E10 fuel, two geographical regions of Canada were considered:

  • West domain: an area extending from the western shore of Vancouver Island to the B.C./Alberta border, and 500 km on either side of the Canada/U.S.A border; and,
  • East domain: an area covering the most densely-populated areas of southeastern Canada in Ontario and Quebec, and most of the northeastern U.S.
Atmospheric modelling of both the West and East domains indicated that widespread use of E10 had almost no impact on concentrations of several criteria air contaminants (NO[SUB]2[/SUB], SO[SUB]2[/SUB], O[SUB]3[/SUB], and PM[SUB]2.5[/SUB]) and formaldehyde, and some impact on pollutants primarily associated with traffic (benzene, 1,3-butadiene, acetaldehyde, and CO), compared to conventional gasoline. Overall, atmospheric modelling results indicated that a change to E10 fuel in Canada would not substantially change the levels of pollutants observed in ambient air.
[h=2]Human Health Risk Characterization[/h]For the criteria air contaminants (CO, NO[SUB]2[/SUB], O[SUB]3[/SUB], PM[SUB]2.5[/SUB], and SO[SUB]2[/SUB]), human health risks and benefits for the widespread use of E10 fuel were estimated using Health Canada's Air Quality Benefit Assessment Tool (AQBAT). Changes in cancer risk due to a change in fuel were estimated for exposure to benzene, 1,3-butadiene, formaldehyde and acetaldehyde. Overall, there were no substantial differences in the predicted health effects for the widespread use of E10 fuel compared to conventional gasoline.


What they neglected to report is the amout of fuel that has to be dumped out because it's "gone bad". Working in the marine industry we see huge repair costs due to E10, mostly from incorrectly stored equipment. Every year we get boats towed up here from Washington and Orgeon where the fuel has sat for months and upon arrival they flash the engines at the dock and make it just past the breakwater when their engines get a drink of the crud thats on the bottom of their fuel tanks. Some its just a tow back in and flush of the fuel system but for others its much much more. Even local seasonal equipment such as gas powered trimmers and lawnmowers see this type of damage. On an older trimmer the cost of repair is more then the unit is worth, so its off to landfill due to Ethanol. More cost and enviromental damage, and according to this report above it isn't helping the air quality at all. Only one that seems to profit from E10 / E85 is the farmer that grows the corn. Kicker here is almost all their farm equipment is diesel powered!:eek:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,225 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
As long as someones making money its all good!
As long as their cronies are making money it is all good for them! Never has been any good for US!

GaryL
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
129 Posts
That video is from 2012 and they're still pushing that E15 crap. I only use E10 in my 2016 Hyundai that's driven every day. Everything else gets NA ($0.50/gal more).
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top