DonAndersen Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 Have a happy read. A lot of problems that outboard motors have will be shared with gasoline engines that are not used often. Think lawnmowers/chainsaws/gen sets. http://www.floridaflyfishingmagazine.com/t...ol-dilemma.html And don't forget that ethanol converts food resources to gasoline additive. Another IDIOT Govt program. Don Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jusfloatin Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 Have a happy read. A lot of problems that outboard motors have will be shared with gasoline engines that are not used often. Think lawnmowers/chainsaws/gen sets. http://www.floridaflyfishingmagazine.com/t...ol-dilemma.html And don't forget that ethanol converts food resources to gasoline additive. Another IDIOT Govt program. Don Good day to all It can only be considered a food resource if it is deemed fit for human consumption, I doubt the "soy and cellulose, corn, sugar cane, sweet beets, algae, and pine trees" that are used is not what you would enjoy being used as a meal. I am not saying it could not be eaten but rather would you pay hard earned cash for it. A lot of what is used would be left to rot where it lay's or burnt in mass fires. I see it's use as a plus, non ethonal gas is still readily available it is just not at every corner gas pump. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricinus Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 You have to factor in how much land has been taken out of food production to grow corn for ethanol. Without government subsidies it wouldn't even be profitable and these aren't Ma and Pa farms receiving these handouts, but mega corporations. As for ethanol free gasoline, Shell Premium is ethanol free and I imagine the others are the same. Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jusfloatin Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 You have to factor in how much land has been taken out of food production to grow corn for ethanol. Without government subsidies it wouldn't even be profitable and these aren't Ma and Pa farms receiving these handouts, but mega corporations. As for ethanol free gasoline, Shell Premium is ethanol free and I imagine the others are the same. Mike No land has been taken out of food production it is a product that is deemed not fit for human consumption. Why would they pay and use Grade "A " product when they can get the unusable for consumption product for a much cheaper price and no doubt lots of it. You are lead to believe it is "at this time" non profitable so there is handouts to the corporations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonAndersen Posted November 3, 2011 Author Share Posted November 3, 2011 jusfloatin, Talked to some forest company guys the other day and they are leaving smaller pine trees in the bush. No market. Betcha they'd love to haul them. Not worth the diesel. The N. American farmer is the least energy efficient farmer in the world spending 15 barrels of diesel energy to recover 1 barrel of vegetation energy. Ethanol sounds like it only survives 'cause of Govt money. Makes no sense otherwise. Don Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firefrog Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Hey Any time you get fuel from 'natural' sources, it won't be efficient. It can't be - remember your laws of thermodynamics? Hopefully this is a step in a progression to better fuel production. As it is, it's not well-thought-out or planned. Once the government gets involved, you can bet there are people taking advantage of the situation. No doubt, someone is making money from ventures like this, just not the right ones. As far as the issues with fuel lines/parts/corrosion/condensation........... the scientist knew and told people of these concerns years ago. Nothing was done about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jusfloatin Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 jusfloatin, Talked to some forest company guys the other day and they are leaving smaller pine trees in the bush. No market. Betcha they'd love to haul them. Not worth the diesel. The N. American farmer is the least energy efficient farmer in the world spending 15 barrels of diesel energy to recover 1 barrel of vegetation energy. Ethanol sounds like it only survives 'cause of Govt money. Makes no sense otherwise. Don Don you are correct in the fact there is not a market for small pine trees and will probably stay that way unless you start making small pine tree fishing rods or are satisfied buying the small pine trees for your fire place. The price of diesel has nothing to do with the fact there is no market for small pine trees. Brazil is 100% self reliant when it comes to fuel using cane sugar and they also export it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonAndersen Posted November 5, 2011 Author Share Posted November 5, 2011 jusfloatin et al, Back to the original post. The use of ethanol gasoline in engines that are not used constantly will suffer some difficulties adding to the cost of using the product and of course the cost to the environment as the useable gasoline is poured "somewhere" + of course the cost of hauling the now broken equipment to the repair shop. At the end of day, you didn't get the job done that the engine was required to do, you swore and cussed, you had to haul the crapped out equipment to the repair shop and get it back. All 'cause some bonehead decided that you were negatively effecting the environment by using too much gas. You had best walk the broken engine to the repair shop unless you pile it all in your Smart Car. Boy, do I love stupid Govt programs! Don Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jusfloatin Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 jusfloatin et al, Back to the original post. The use of ethanol gasoline in engines that are not used constantly will suffer some difficulties adding to the cost of using the product and of course the cost to the environment as the useable gasoline is poured "somewhere" + of course the cost of hauling the now broken equipment to the repair shop. At the end of day, you didn't get the job done that the engine was required to do, you swore and cussed, you had to haul the crapped out equipment to the repair shop and get it back. All 'cause some bonehead decided that you were negatively effecting the environment by using too much gas. You had best walk the broken engine to the repair shop unless you pile it all in your Smart Car. Boy, do I love stupid Govt programs! Don Don it is a simple fix and you even have choices. 1-Buy non blended gasoline 2-If you are not going to use it again in the next 8 weeks drain it and put it in your Automobile. It only takes a second to do that which is probably just as long as it takes to hang up a set of waders to dry out or cleanup your fishing gear for your next trip. 3-Do not add water to the tank Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonAndersen Posted November 6, 2011 Author Share Posted November 6, 2011 jusfloatin, A second or two to drain a lawnmower. Ya' OK. Enough said. Don Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jusfloatin Posted November 6, 2011 Share Posted November 6, 2011 jusfloatin, A second or two to drain a lawnmower. Ya' OK. Enough said. Don Don I do not know how old your lawnmower is but newer ones all come with a inline gas shut off valve. With the gas valve in the off position, remove the hose that goes from the valve to the carb. Hook up another hose which will feed into a can big enough to hold what gas you have left in your lawnmower. Turn valve on to drain and make sure you shut it off when finished draining. Don in case yours is too old to have a shut off valve then I suggest if you are going to continue to purchase blended gas I would install one or at least install a long enough hose so the end that goes to the carb can be removed and put into a can to drain the blended fuel from your lawnmower. My apology for misleading you into thinking it only takes a second or two, I should have posted it could take up to 1 minute to do this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricinus Posted November 6, 2011 Share Posted November 6, 2011 Even Greenpeace thinks Ethanol is crap. http://www.greenpeace.org/canada/en/campai...-passed-in-par/ Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dryfly Posted November 6, 2011 Share Posted November 6, 2011 Don. The gov't folks are idiots because they are scared to be seen as being "anti green" and they are horribly influenced by radical eco groups such as Greenpeace, the Sierra Club, WWF and Suzukians. So we can blame the green weenies for biofuels and subsidized alternate energy sources, which have limited practical future in supplying energy to the masses. Don said, "The N. American farmer is the least energy efficient farmer in the world " Don we've discuss this before. Western Europe and North American producers use a lot of fuel BUT They produce more then anywhere else on earth so the input:output ratio is high... the best in the world. Briefly.... 2,000 acre Canadian farm - four people, three cars and trucks, a bunch of big machinery, ONE house...use a lot of fuel but relatively not much per unit of output. Fertilizer inputs are high as well..but so is production. LOTS of surplus production to feed several hundred others. Four people feeding (say), 1000 others (in food energy equivalents). A ratio of about 1:250 or more. 2,000 acres in Northern China - farmed by 2,000 people living in 500 houses that have to be built and heated .. spewing foul emissions from inefficient fire boxes burning coal and dung. (Photos available on request.) They use dozens of small diesel or gas tractors, fertilizers and pesticides, not necessarily applied according to the label. They produce just enough food for themselves and about 2,000 more people. A ratio of about 1:1. Just consider the "fuel" cost of just feeding and housing those 2,000 farm people! North American farmers do use more fuel, but the "use efficiency" and output is very high. justfloatin ... I mean no harm. You have a naive view of food production. Whereas Don has some errors of thought (I'll' cut him some slack because he's even older than me ), Don is correct. Here is some recent info on palm oil biofuel. Quote: A new study on greenhouse gas emissions from oil palm plantations has calculated a more than 50% increase in levels of CO2 emissions than previously thought – and warned that the demand for ‘green’ biofuels could be costing the earth. Same arguments against wind farms that have defiled our local environment, duplicate existing capacity, cost you and me when we pay our bills because we are forced to pay for new transmission lines AND we subside the kWs produced by wind power. And I've not even mentioned that they kill bats and birds. Wind probably kills more birds than have ever died in the "patch." AESO reports there is interest in TEN TIMES as many wind farms than already exist in Alberta. They are bad for the environment but for some demented reason they are seen as green. And so far wind turbines have not reduced carbon emissions one molecule .. despite the organic effluent (read, bullshit) you are fed from wind investment corporations...feeding on subsidies. When the wind is blowing the gas and coal plants are still running. The world is green mad run by biofools. And the madness costs us all while doing virtually nothing for environmental protection and detracts (time and money) for REAL issues on this planet such as clean water, health care and REAL environmental protection. EVERY ONE ON THIS BOARD COULD FIND 'real environmental protection" WAYS TO SPEND THE $2 BILLION WE ARE WASTING ON CARBON CAPTURE AND STORAGE IN ALBERTA. Yes, eco madness takes money away from real environmental protection. Environmental protection as seen by green weenies could ONLY happen If there were 500,000,000 people on this planet versus 7,000,000,000. We need responsible use of resources extracted reasonably well and used efficiently. I won't even mention energy costs of ridiculously wasteful conspicuous consumption in western society...that is now the goal of folks in developing countries. The answer is not driving a Prius to Starbucks for a $7 organic, fair-trade coffee ... to discuss those bastards in the oil and gas industry and agriculture .. while planning the next flight to stay at a spa in Cancun. End of my Sunday morning rant. Stay warm. Regards, Clive Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jusfloatin Posted November 6, 2011 Share Posted November 6, 2011 dryfly certainly no harm no foul my friend. Naive not as much after your post. No fair Don is older than dirt. "I say that with a smile Don" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironfly Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 Remember when they brought in unleaded gas? It was a little before my time, but didn't people say pretty much all the same things back then? At least as far as performance and maintenance goes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonAndersen Posted November 18, 2011 Author Share Posted November 18, 2011 Yes Junior, I do recall leaded vs unleaded. Ethanol poses larger troubles. Like peeling the liner out gasoline tanks, sucking up H20 causing rust, eating plastics [gas lines]. List goes on. Don Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.