Cali shifting to 15% ethanol in gas

[Bret Grabber]

Roh roh.... here goes nothin....

I am a fuel ethanol expert. Ask me anything about it's manufacturing.
I was in the fuel ethanol business many years ago, but not currently.

70% of the corn kernel is converted into ethanol and CO2 via natural fermentation. 30% is made into animal (cattle) feed. None is wasted.

Give me 100 pounds of corn.
I will give you:

35.7 pounds of 200 proof ethanol
Which is 5.42 gallons.

35.7 pounds of pure CO2
Which is sometimes bottled
Which is sometimes made into dry ice
Which is sometimes vented

28.5 pounds of calorie dense cattle food

0.15 pounds of corn oil.
Which is sometimes called "yellow grease"
Which is sometimes made into bio-diesel
Which is sometimes (most often) added to the cattle feed to add fat to the cattle feed.

100 pounds of corn costs $7.44 on October 15, 2025.

One gallon of ethanol has 76,300 btu of energy.

To make ethanol you have a brewery and distillery under on roof. Combined this is called a "bio-refinery".

Inside the modern ethanol "bio-refinery" it takes 24,000 btu of fossil fuel heat to distill, and 0.4 kWh of grid electricity to make 1 gallon of ethanol.

People like to say moving the corn from field to refinery used fuel too. Sure. But very little. With trains, 1 ton of corn can be moved 400 miles on 1 gallon of diesel. Or move 400 tons of corn 1 mile per gallon. Usually, the bio-refineries are surrounded by corn field. Transportation of corn truly uses minimal fuel.

How far do oil companies transport oil?
Much greater distances.

And one should not delve into subsidies if trying to discredit ethanol. Oil companies get more subsidy than ethanol companies. And no one has gone to war over ethanol.

Now please. Ask me anything about fuel. Ethanol.

Back during the hurricaine Katrina week when gas was increasing in price exponentially, I began researching E85 as a fuel for my drag racing Plymouth Barracuda. Confirring with a couple top level alcohol racing collegues, I confirmed my upjetting and tuning calculations were in the ball park and set about converting.
Long story short, I ran that car on the strip and street on E85 until I sold it in early 2020. Also wrote a couple articles on the conversion and helped several others tune their own stuff as well. Sanctions changed rules, racing fuel companies came out with E85 blends (at a much higher price than pumps, but with closer tolerance to percentage) and a lot of drag racers are still running it today. Corrosion, phase seperation, water retention, hose deterioration and lots of other myths were dispelled during that time as well, right in my own garage!
My 74 Barracuda still had it's original fuel tank, I did replace the 5/16 fuel lines with 3/8 and add an electric boost pump at the tank to accomodate the increase volume need and replaced the cork composit gaskets in the carburetor with silicone which Holley produced for methanol applications. I did keep the tank full as it was vented to the atomosphere and never had a problem with water absorbtion. Also managed to drop a tenth of a second off the elapsed times with just the fuel change to E85 from Pump Premium even with only 9.8-1 compression. I suspect it would have run exponentially better at 12 or 12.5-1. Fuel economy? Well, with a ride like that, who cares anyway?

Sponsored

 

[Maverick2022XL]

Any increase in octane will do that. Also, ethanol absorbs more heat than gas in the evaporation process and burns slower than gasoline as well.
I don't have a boost gauge in mine but did in my F150 3.5 twin and 2.3 Mustang. When running a higher ethanol content, up to 40%, the Mustang woke up phenomenally, buried the boost gauge at 20 psi and took off like a jack rabbit on a date! The F150 normally pushed 13-14 on E10, on E15 it was solidly 15 psi under WOT.
I run E15 in "Bret" most of the time and have never noticed any drop in fuel economy over E10. Happy motoring!

It doesn't mean your ignition timing and fuel map in the ECU are also correct. The more ethanol in the mix the more aggressive the ignition timing can be because of ethanol's ability to suppress detonation.

 

[Maverick2022XL]

As far as real world people like myself are concerned about the following. I am no expert nor have I done any calculations to determine what the answer is.
First besides the obvious issues of ethanol concerning water being bad for rubber gaskets, it is also corrosive to aluminum. To be fair all alcohol based fuels can be corrosive not just ethanol. So will I have issues with my fuel lines? The answer is probably not since the corrosive issues most likely have been dealt with on vehicles by this time.
Next is fuel density, in the case of E85 you need 30% more fuel to meet the same conditions as gasoline meaning bigger fuel lines, injectors and a nonstandard fuel pump are needed. Is a jump to 15% going to require equipment upgrades to get the same power output as I do now with 10% blends? Also are the existing ECU mappings sufficient? These can be upgraded so it will be a question of not if but how by the manufacturers.

 

[dwinch53]

Good day.

A quick perusal of our 2025 Maverick Lariat Hybrid literature has provided the following information.

So, no worries for you as to using 15% Ethanol fuel in your Maverick...and the environment thanks you in advance!

Andy

TOP TEIR

 

[dwinch53]

Good day.

A quick perusal of our 2025 Maverick Lariat Hybrid literature has provided the following information.

So, no worries for you as to using 15% Ethanol fuel in your Maverick...and the environment thanks you in advance!

Andy

Yes Indeed TOP TIER FUELS ARE THE BEST!!

 

[zorki1c]

Had a 2008 ford f150 v8. On the highway it got 24 to 16 mpg. On ethanol mix. With non ethanol gas it got 18 to 20 mpg on the open road. Ethanol has to be hauled in oil burning tankers. Can’t go through a pipeline. It subsidizes corn farmers

 

[James K]

CA is in the process of increasing ethanol from 10% to 15% in the fuel mixture sold in the state. Is this a concern if used in the 2.5 hybrid engine in the 2025 Mav. Thanks

As others stated, it should be fine. I'll add one caveat: Alcohol is hydroponic so you don't want it in the tank for long term storage without a stabilizer.

 

[MakinDoForNow]

CA is in the process of increasing ethanol from 10% to 15% in the fuel mixture sold in the state. Is this a concern if used in the 2.5 hybrid engine in the 2025 Mav. Thanks

Several years ago before I retired I was contract employee working for a refiner which blended gas separately for different cities/areas. One proposed change by one area would have increased gas cost by $0.28......

 

[MakinDoForNow]

Roh roh.... here goes nothin....

I am a fuel ethanol expert. Ask me anything about it's manufacturing.
I was in the fuel ethanol business many years ago, but not currently.

70% of the corn kernel is converted into ethanol and CO2 via natural fermentation. 30% is made into animal (cattle) feed. None is wasted.

Give me 100 pounds of corn.
I will give you:

35.7 pounds of 200 proof ethanol
Which is 5.42 gallons.

35.7 pounds of pure CO2
Which is sometimes bottled
Which is sometimes made into dry ice
Which is sometimes vented

28.5 pounds of calorie dense cattle food

0.15 pounds of corn oil.
Which is sometimes called "yellow grease"
Which is sometimes made into bio-diesel
Which is sometimes (most often) added to the cattle feed to add fat to the cattle feed.

100 pounds of corn costs $7.44 on October 15, 2025.

One gallon of ethanol has 76,300 btu of energy.

To make ethanol you have a brewery and distillery under on roof. Combined this is called a "bio-refinery".

Inside the modern ethanol "bio-refinery" it takes 24,000 btu of fossil fuel heat to distill, and 0.4 kWh of grid electricity to make 1 gallon of ethanol.

People like to say moving the corn from field to refinery used fuel too. Sure. But very little. With trains, 1 ton of corn can be moved 400 miles on 1 gallon of diesel. Or move 400 tons of corn 1 mile per gallon. Usually, the bio-refineries are surrounded by corn field. Transportation of corn truly uses minimal fuel.

How far do oil companies transport oil?
Much greater distances.

And one should not delve into subsidies if trying to discredit ethanol. Oil companies get more subsidy than ethanol companies. And no one has gone to war over ethanol.

Now please. Ask me anything about fuel. Ethanol.

 

[Probity]

And one should not delve into subsidies if trying to discredit ethanol. Oil companies get more subsidy than ethanol companies. And no one has gone to war over ethanol.

Now please. Ask me anything about fuel. Ethanol.

Very informative post, thanks. Had no idea about the amount of carbon dioxide involved in fuel ethanol production.

I do take exception to your comment on oil industry subsidies; enlighten me, what "subsidies" (as you define them) are you talking about?

I've seen this comment in one form or another for over 50 years. As is usually the case it depends on how you define what a "subsidy" is. Many many interweb articles on this, but it always boils down to 'consider the source' (of the person or organization presenting their fun-with-numbers so-called facts and figures). If someone promotes an anti-fossil fuels agenda they'll claim a humongous $$ number and very broadly define what a "subsidy" is (ex. - so-called indirect costs defined as environmental externalities, defense/military protection of fossil fuel supply, etc).

And claimed direct subsidies like tax deductions that allow businesses to recover costs related to production, infrastructure, and operational expenses - as taxpayers, individuals like us are allowed to deduct certain items from our taxes; does that mean the government is giving us "subsidies"? I doubt you think in those terms- you probably feel your taxes are subsidizing the government, and being allowed deductions to lower your tax bill ain't what I consider to be a subsidy.

 

[Mavster Mechanic]

As far as real world people like myself are concerned about the following. I am no expert nor have I done any calculations to determine what the answer is.
First besides the obvious issues of ethanol concerning water being bad for rubber gaskets, it is also corrosive to aluminum. To be fair all alcohol based fuels can be corrosive not just ethanol. So will I have issues with my fuel lines? The answer is probably not since the corrosive issues most likely have been dealt with on vehicles by this time.
Next is fuel density, in the case of E85 you need 30% more fuel to meet the same conditions as gasoline meaning bigger fuel lines, injectors and a nonstandard fuel pump are needed. Is a jump to 15% going to require equipment upgrades to get the same power output as I do now with 10% blends? Also are the existing ECU mappings sufficient? These can be upgraded so it will be a question of not if but how by the manufacturers.

I have confirmed in the Maverick Technical Service Manual the truck may throw an error code if fuel injector output exceeds 25% greater than sociometric A/F ratio for gasoline.

So there is AT LEAST 25% extra headroom built in. Just to get to the error code part. I'll guess the actual fuel injector and fuel pump stock on every vehicle has 33-35% extra actual mechanical output capacity.

In my Escape hybrid, I got such a code at 50% ethanol. But the vehicle continued to purr like a kitten.

A check engine light does not always mean something is broken. Sometimes it means... check engine. As in "I'm using more fuel than I think I should." So just check engine.

The biggest difference in a "flex fuel" vehicle is the computer programming.

And since the fuel still has gasoline, the fuel is still "oily" and still has lubrication properties.

 

[Mavster Mechanic]

Fun Fact

1990 - Pre ethanol blended fuels
2% of household income was spent on vehicle maintenance and repairs

2004 to 2018 (latest year provided) when 10% ethanol blends become prevalent

1.5% of household income was spent on vehicle maintenance and repairs

Now, it is very hard to prove a cause and effect relationship. Maybe engines just got "better" during this time period.

But, at least there is evidence (not proof) that ethanol did not increase the cost of vehicle maintenance.

 

[Mavster Mechanic]

Is there a reason it isn't sold at the pump? Ethanol free gasoline is better for the environment since those that use it get almost 3 more miles per gallon than gas with ethanol, due to its higher energy content.

Ethanol is for sure better for the environment. Using more is still a win because it is THAT much cleaner.

100% 200 proof Ethanol you can drink.

Pure ethanol diluted with water is non toxic. You can never make gasoline non toxic.

Pure ethanol diluted with water is harmless to plants, fish, wildlife, and humans. If a tanker tips over on the highway, you are literally able to flush it down the drain with copious water from a fire hose for example. You can't do that with gasoline or diesel.

If ethanol spills in a river lake or ocean, it is harmless. Already copious amounts of water present.

When ethanol burns, it makes carbon dioxide and water vapor. That's it! Literally no toxic pollution. You are allowed to burn pure ethanol indoors.

The fact all fuel in the USA is blended with gasoline means all fuel sold is toxic and spills must be treated as Haz-Mat.

But if a tanker of E85 spills into a river, at least the toxic stuff is reduced by 85%.

 

[colinl]

In my Escape hybrid, I got such a code at 50% ethanol. But the vehicle continued to purr like a kitten.

A check engine light does not always mean something is broken. Sometimes it means... check engine. As in "I'm using more fuel than I think I should." So just check engine.

The biggest difference in a "flex fuel" vehicle is the computer programming.

that programming is adding fuel, and when you were running E50 you were lean, which is a great way to cause detonation.

that's the reason the vehicles aren't flex fuel. it isn't because they don't have the capacity to add more fuel. it's because Ford didn't put a real alcohol sensor in it and program it for flex fuel, as that would cost more money.

 

[Bret Grabber]

As far as real world people like myself are concerned about the following. I am no expert nor have I done any calculations to determine what the answer is.
First besides the obvious issues of ethanol concerning water being bad for rubber gaskets, it is also corrosive to aluminum. To be fair all alcohol based fuels can be corrosive not just ethanol. So will I have issues with my fuel lines? The answer is probably not since the corrosive issues most likely have been dealt with on vehicles by this time.
Next is fuel density, in the case of E85 you need 30% more fuel to meet the same conditions as gasoline meaning bigger fuel lines, injectors and a nonstandard fuel pump are needed. Is a jump to 15% going to require equipment upgrades to get the same power output as I do now with 10% blends? Also are the existing ECU mappings sufficient? These can be upgraded so it will be a question of not if but how by the manufacturers.

Rubber gaskets are impervious to water. Methanol will soften it but Ethanol leaves it alone. Automotive hoses and gaskets are now made of materials like EPDM and neoprene which are resistant to ethanol deterioration.
Prior to converting my Cuda, I soaked several parts including hose segments and a raw aluminum piece in E85 for 3 months with no indication of any corrosion or softening. The aluminum body of the Holley carburetor was unaffected as well. In 2023 I emptied that jar and tossed or sold all the parts that were soaking now for 19 years! Even that piece of raw aluminum looked shiny and new.
As for the additional 5% ethanol requiring larger fuel lines, no, the OE lines can handle the slight increase in volume over E10 or E0.
Yes, the ECM/PCM will adjust for the octane, burn rate and volume but that won't necessarily be +30% as the tune, especially at part throttle will increase the power enough to reduce the consumption need. At worst your fuel consumption might increase .96% based on 30% higher consumption of 15% of your fuel mix. If you get 30 mpg with E10 that means 29.7 with E15. Even at that, around here E15 is $.15/gallon less so there would be a resulting cost per mile change as well. At $3/gallon, with 30 mpg your cost per mile is $.10. At 2.85/gallon at 29.7 mpg, cost per mile is $.095. Pretty much the same.
I use E15 whenever it is available where I stop and I don't see any negligable decrease in fuel economy over E10, especially on the highway and even pulling my trailer.

Sponsored