Lawsuit regarding E15

[lostcause]

one of the many downsides to owning a truck with a large fuel tank is that you get to stand at the pump for a long time as it fills. boredom sets in, so my eyes wander. i think every pump i use (generally mom and pop stores) has a sticker on the pump saying that it contains 10% ethanol. the sticker isn't large - about the size of a belt buckle (normal belt buckle, not texas sized), so it could be missed.

in my experience, people don't bother putting a small sticker on a pump out of the goodness of their heart - i would guess that it has to be displayed by law, or else it wouldn't be there. if it's not there, i would guess that it's not law where you live. i wouldn't go waving the conspiracy theory gauntlet yet. i doubt that anyone is not displaying it in order to hide what it is.

a very tiny percentage of the population knows anything more than "gas goes in my car". if they introduce another (not a replacement for e-10) fuel then in a few years you can expect a new nozzle size, and vehicles will have fill pipes limiting what will go in them. if you are old enough to remember the days when "regular" meant leaded fuel, not non-premium unleaded, then you will remember that vehicles requiring unleaded went to a restrictor in the fill pipe so people couldn't put the wrong fuel in by accident.

 

[smstonypoint]

in my experience, people don't bother putting a small sticker on a pump out of the goodness of their heart - i would guess that it has to be displayed by law, or else it wouldn't be there. if it's not there, i would guess that it's not law where you live. i wouldn't go waving the conspiracy theory gauntlet yet. i doubt that anyone is not displaying it in order to hide what it is.

Here's a listing of ethanol-labeling requirements by state. I don't know whether the listing is current.

Ethanol Labeling Laws - State by State Guide.

Steve

 

[ModMech]

For the record, I have NO PROBLEM with ethanol as a fuel, it is a "good" fuel, when used as directed and intended in products for which it was designed. I include "bio-diesel" in this discussion because it has serious storage limitations.

The EMA (Engine Manufacturers Association) and engine owners (that's us), should IMO, file suit in FEDERAL COURT to FORCE the availability of "neat" gasoline ((R+M/2) 87) for "non-road" and pre-1980 on-road engines. Also, we should include bio-diesel in the discussion and legislation. I will use "Bio-fuel" below to expressly INCLUDE both Ethanol and Bio-diesel, regardless of the source of the renewal portion.

If you own a "modern" vehicle it will run E10 just fine and many will operate on E15 as well. They have been doing E15 in MN for many years, although few know it because the pumps say "up to 10% Ethanol" leading unsuspecting consumers to *assume* the fuel contains no more than 10% Ethanol, which is NOT the case from November to April.

The LAW should be:

The actual Bio-content of all fuels sold is to be displayed on the pump at every retail location and shall ACCURATELY reflect the "Bio" content of the fuel dispensed in an "NTE" format. That is, the fuel's "Bio" content is "Not To Exceede" the content displayed on the coorisponding dispensing pump by any measurable amount. The amount of "Bio-content" must be shown as a percentage of the total fuel volume in letters not less than 2" tall. Voilations of this rule will result in criminal fines and restitution for equipment damage if proven in a court of "small claims" before a Judge.

Additionally, retail fueling establishments choosing not to carry non-Biocontent fuel (neat gasoline and/or diesel, 0% bio-content) shall be REQUIRED to clearly post 5 nearby retail locations where such fuel can be purchased. Information on such location is to include the business name, address and phone number with a map indicating such location that can be easily located and viewed from the ground by persons looking for such information. One posting per retail pump unit is required.

All Government Legislative and Executive bodies are PROHIBITED from requiring the compulsory use of Bio-containing fuels in privately owned "non-road" engines regardless of date of manufacture, or those installed in gasoline powered vehicles built before 01 January 1980 or diesel powered vehicles built before 01 January 2004. Such bodies are expressly permitted to require compulsory use of Bio-containing fuels in PUBLICALLY owned equipment but not in any amount greater than permitted by the applicable OEM.

Now, that should "fix 'em"!

 

[tulenutn2o]

.

Wish they did this for E10:


Automakers Suing EPA



.

Why? Been burning for many, many years and absolutely no problems. Last vehicle(94 ranger, 250k I actually ran as high as 30%. I have converted to E85 in my race car and Old musclecar. Great low cost alternative to other fuels. 15% doesn't bother me a bit.

 

[unbidden]

E-85 will cost you money.

Just one of many articles here.

 

[Ken45101]

Why? Been burning for many, many years and absolutely no problems. Last vehicle(94 ranger, 250k I actually ran as high as 30%. I have converted to E85 in my race car and Old musclecar. Great low cost alternative to other fuels. 15% doesn't bother me a bit.

Talk to anyone who does small engine repair or marine engine repair.

Yes, it's probably not too big of an issue with cars that use up a tank of gas before it gets stale. But in the humid marine environment, the ethanol soaks up water vapor, which damages engines. Same for small engines (lawn mowers, chain saws, etc.) which may sit for longer periods of time. Ethanol is bad for carburerators, gaskets, etc.

Maybe you are such that you do not have any such engines.

Furthermore, the ethanol scam isn't doing anything to protect the environment. Even Al Gore has admitted his pushing it was for political purposes and had nothing to do with the environment.

 

[two_bit_score]

From the article:



Motorists "unknowingly" filling up with the wrong fuel? Gas pumps will be labeled. The vehicle's included literature will indicate what fuels are approved, and which are not.



Vehicle owners choosing to use the wrong fuel despite potential engine problems *kind of* deserve whatever they get.



disclaimer:

None of this should be interpreted as being "for" increased ethanol use. It's just kind of funny to me that in most situations, people get upset when others assume that they require babysitting. With the ethanol thing, it appears they want babysitting.

"What if I put the wrong fuel in my car?"

"What if the wrong fuel is cheaper, but I put it in anyway 'cause it will save me money on a fill-up?"

my take is that soon you won't be able to find anything BUT E-15. No matter how much you scrutinize the lables looking for the right fuel for your vehicle you won't be able to find it. Ever try to find ethanol free gas, nearly impossible now.

What should be troubling everyone, seems to me, is the subsidies that are going into ethanol production and the cost to the taxpayer and consumer to produce this stuff. That 'cheaper' fuel people are buying is really the most expensive stuff on the market.

 

[Milo]

Glad to see the industry challenging the EPA and the alcohol lobby. It's really all about money and subsidies, not *creating* energy. The energy spent to produce this alcohol is almost as much as is gained. It's to distributors advantage to err on the side of blending "a little extra" alcohol since it is cheaper.
In newer vehicles that are frequently run it's not a problem (other than a little less performance and mpg). But the 10% blend is creating a lot of problems for the rest. It wouldn't be so bad if we had a choice but most of us don't. For me and many others gasohol is all that is available. For example the gas stations in our our region are serviced out of Pittsburgh and it *all* is a 10% blend. I just wish stations were "mandated" to have at least one pump with straight gasoline. Or even blended pumps where we could select our alcohol percentage 0%, 10%, 15% or 85%.

 

[dcyrilc]

Perhaps it's best to not panic. If the vehicle in your driveway, or the lawn tractor in your garage came with literature that specifically says that fuel blends containing more than 10% cannot be used, do you believe that the "push" by certain individuals or agencies to increase ethanol levels to 15% will automatically mean that blends containing less than 15% will be unavailable?

If anyone has information from the EPA, the government, the current Washington administration, or anyone else for that matter that says they're going to require you to burn unapproved fuel by making approved fuel unavailable post it here with a link.



If they're currently selling blended fuel with up to 10% ethanol and not labeling the pump, that's not "forgivable" perhaps, but it's understandable because fuel blends of up to 10% are approved for just about everything and have been for years.

If they start selling 15% blends at your local station, it will be labeled, because a whole lot of what's out there specifically warns against using blends upwards of 10% in the included literature.

Once again, if you have information that contradicts any of this, post it here with a link. All of this, "The sky is falling" stuff that gets posted and repeated over and over accomplishes nothing.

I've got equipment and vehicles which were made before they started selling the blended crud all over the place. The manuals don't even address blended fuels. Does that mean that there's no issue??? Heck, some of my stuff was made before there was even unleaded gas. How's the manual supose to warn about something which didn't exist when the equipment was made?

 

[davygp38]

I think what we are forgetting, is that the guys on this site, are the type of people who are very conscious of our equipment, and what is required for good operation. The average consumer, however is not. That means, as a manufacturer, you need to ensure you do not over complicate your product. It was the reason, most military field manuals are written at a third grade level. You have to idiot proof products, especially expensive vehicles that people rely on for their daily bread. I do not think it would be that hard to put a unique opening on an e 85 fuel filler. Nor would it be that much of a hassle to have a special nozzle for E85 pumps. Even though I think ethanol is over rated as a fuel, I also understand it is at least a small step to wards energy Independence, and therefore a necessary back up when the Arabs finally have us so far over a barrel we can't get back up.