The Ethanol Papers - Paperturn manuscript - Flipbook - Page 581
typically) is used in place of regular gasoline (E10 or gasoline without any ethanol, if you can find it). As I’ve reported many times in print and during speaking
engagements, I have field-tested a wide variety of vehicles with many different
ethanol-gasoline blend levels. I purchased a 2002 non-flex fuel Ford Taurus for
the express purpose of gaining long-term hands-on experience and knowledge
in the use of ethanol. I have never experienced an MPG loss that wasn’t offset
by the savings in the price of E85 compared to regular gasoline.
Somewhere along the way, a long time ago, someone concocted the BTU gasoline vs. ethanol story, and this made-up workhorse has been ridden hard, too
hard. I would say it’s time to put the entire issue to pasture, except that it is such
an excellent example of the horse manure that the oil industry and all of its
lackeys have used to lie about ethanol. It boggles the mind to think of all the
trumped-up BTU comparisons and graphs and charts and diagrams that have
been used thousands of times to prove an un-provable, and hoodwink the public.
I think it’s unconscionable for anyone, particularly someone who is called an
“energy expert,” to use the BTU argument to denigrate ethanol. In all the research that Bryce claims to have conducted; in all the books and articles he’s
written, and with all the public appearances he has made, how has he never
worked this issue through his head and arrived at the only logical conclusion –
a conclusion, as I indicated above, that has been recognized since the invention
of gasoline?
UPDATE - March 25, 2016: A few days ago, I sent an email to the Dept. of
Energy and suggested that they make a change to their Alternative Fuels
Data Center webpage. I pointed out that the information related to ethanol's energy content is being misused to incorrectly state MPG results in
passenger vehicles, and that it should be changed.
The basis of my argument to the DOE is as set forth above: that BTU rating has
no relationship to performance characteristics of an internal combustion engine,
and that using a "blind" mathematical formula that uses BTU ratings to calculate
mileage is as fallacious as an automobile manufacturer simply inventing MPG
figures.
I received a response today from DOE, in which they have agreed to make a
change to the website. Effective sometime in April 2016, their website will state
will no longer utilize the irrelevant 33% less energy content calculation. Instead,
they will state that MPG is dependent upon engine optimization of the fuel used,
and that engines optimized to run on ethanol can produce equal results to
