 
Neither Soy Diesel nor Ethanol are an "Alternative Fuel" Panacea
Whether by choice or mandate, the past fifteen years 
have  brought changes to the formulas of our two most popular liquid 
fuels. In the  century-old market for diesel fuel, soy based 
alternatives became available.  Reasons for offering non-hydrocarbon 
diesel alternatives were several. Soy  fuels promised equal or better 
engine performance, fuel economy, reductions in  soot, smell, nitrogen 
oxide and carbon dioxide emissions. Since my only  diesel engine was in 
 WindSong, our  1970 Ericson sailboat, I began adding about  one-third bio-diesel during each fill up. Later in this article, I will discuss  my results.
 
 In
 the U.S. gasoline market, ten percent alcohol, derived from corn became
 mandatory.   Today, the liquid fuel we put in our automotive  and small
 engine fuel tanks barely resembles the gasoline of the 1960s. Since  
then, we have eliminated lead, added and then removed MTBE, added and 
retained  up to ten percent corn alcohol to the blend. In order to 
distance "corn alcohol" from "demon  rum",
 it was re-positioned as "ethanol". The ostensible reasons for adding  
ethanol to our gasoline are similar to the arguments for biodiesel. On 
several  accounts, that story falls short.
In
 the U.S. gasoline market, ten percent alcohol, derived from corn became
 mandatory.   Today, the liquid fuel we put in our automotive  and small
 engine fuel tanks barely resembles the gasoline of the 1960s. Since  
then, we have eliminated lead, added and then removed MTBE, added and 
retained  up to ten percent corn alcohol to the blend. In order to 
distance "corn alcohol" from "demon  rum",
 it was re-positioned as "ethanol". The ostensible reasons for adding  
ethanol to our gasoline are similar to the arguments for biodiesel. On 
several  accounts, that story falls short.
 
On the  engine performance side, alcohol  burns more cleanly, but is 
highly corrosive, while attracting  both dirt  and water. It does not 
have higher octane, and therefore it does not provide better  
performance. Since it carries less energy per gallon, it robs, rather 
than  improves fuel economy. With two strikes against ethanol, how did 
our  farm-state legislators pass a mandate to put their produce in our 
fuel tanks?  Simply put, they played the “foreign oil card”. After all, 
we grow the corn here  in America, so a ten percent reduction of foreign
 oil input to our gasoline  could help decrease our dependency on 
unreliable or expensive producers, like  the Middle East.
 
The
 only problem with using corn to create “homegrown fuel” is that it 
takes  more energy input to deliver it than we get out of it when we 
burn it. When you  figure the cost of growing, processing and 
transporting corn, and the alcohol  thus derived, it becomes clear that 
the corn-fueling program is nothing more  than a farm subsidy. Even at 
$5.00 per gallon, it is still less expensive to  import and refine oil 
than it is to create corn fuel. Since consumers pay that extra  tariff 
at  the pump, they do not perceive it as a tax. Hello, Tea Party... If 
you are  looking for a tax to eliminate, how about the Midwest corn fuel
 tax?
 
Of all the plants suited for alcohol production, corn is one of the 
lowest on  the list. When the G.W. Bush Administration started talking 
about “switch grass” as a better alternative  to corn, I knew something 
is fishy. Of all available plants, the dreaded and ill-fated  hemp plant
 may have the greatest potential. Since the federal government 
classifies  the more esoteric forms of that "weed" as a narcotic, it may
 be a while before we  positive developments there. In the biofuel 
market, corn is cute but hemp is  just plain ugly. Sometimes ugly can be
 more effective than cute.
 
Speaking
 of ugly, what corn fuel can do to a small gasoline engine is definitely
  not cute. If you let gasoline sit in the tank of an outboard motor or 
lawn mower, it will  transform, leaving a varnish that will  permanently
 plug any fuel system. With the ongoing American love affair with 
automobiles, we drive  enough for the corn alcohol to cycle through our 
engines before it can gum up the works.  With a small engine, lack of 
use leads to clogged fuel systems. 
 
My 1980's Honda EX1000 generator is a perfect example. Several years 
ago, I  allowed gasoline to sit in its tank for months. After that, I 
could start the engine, but  it surged constantly as it ran. After 
servicing it, a local mechanic simply told me to start the engine  every
 couple of months. Later, I again let the generator sit unused for 
several months.  After that, I could get it to start using ether as a 
starting fluid, but only  for a few moments.
 
A visit to Moab Small Engines & Welding yielded the answer to my 
question. “It’s  the ethanol”, the proprietor told me. After he cleaned 
the carburetor and fuel  line, I  was on my way, but with a better set 
of instructions. He told me to keep a  minimum of fuel in the Honda 
EX1000.  After an RV trip, I was to drain the  tank and then run the 
engine dry. As extra insurance against ethanol residue, I was to  loosen
 the gas cap. That way, any remaining fuel would evaporate  before it 
varnished the fuel lines or carburetor.
 
 Regarding the biodiesel on   WindSong,
 I wish that the solution were as simple.  When I last ran the engine, a
 molasses-like sludge from the fuel tank pumped all  the way through the
 system, stopping just short of the delicate fuel injectors.  The sludge
 was like nothing that my  fuel specialist, Mr. Dwyn Hendrickson of  Marina del Rey,
 California had ever seen. With ten dollars per gallon disposal  fee, 
that alone cost one hundred dollars. His total bill was $850, but well  
worth it. With a broken electric fuel pump, two clogged fuel filters and
 sludge  in the fuel lines, my spotty engine usage and delayed oil 
change turned into a  complete cleaning and rebuilding of the fuel 
delivery system.
Regarding the biodiesel on   WindSong,
 I wish that the solution were as simple.  When I last ran the engine, a
 molasses-like sludge from the fuel tank pumped all  the way through the
 system, stopping just short of the delicate fuel injectors.  The sludge
 was like nothing that my  fuel specialist, Mr. Dwyn Hendrickson of  Marina del Rey,
 California had ever seen. With ten dollars per gallon disposal  fee, 
that alone cost one hundred dollars. His total bill was $850, but well  
worth it. With a broken electric fuel pump, two clogged fuel filters and
 sludge  in the fuel lines, my spotty engine usage and delayed oil 
change turned into a  complete cleaning and rebuilding of the fuel 
delivery system.
 
I do not wish to demonize either ethanol or biodiesel. Each has its 
place,  although I would rather pay Midwest farmers their ransom via my 
taxes than in my  engine maintenance costs. To this day, no one has the 
nerve to suggest that we  mix ethanol into our aviation fuel. Airplanes 
falling from the sky might make  this problem obvious to all. If each of
 us  burned quickly through our supply of biodiesel, rather than letting
 it rot in our tanks,  it could be a good fuel. With regular usage, it 
is an environmentally  friendly alternative to old-fashioned hydrocarbon
 diesel. If there were greater  transparency about hidden costs, 
motorists and casual boaters might demand  better alternatives to the 
“alternative fuels” now available.  I wonder if  clean  coal or  tar sands might hold the answers that we seek.
By James McGillis at 01:04 AM | Environment | Comments (0) | Link

No comments:
Post a Comment