E85 vs Gasoline - credible numbers?

On Thu, 07 Sep 06 13:55:26 GMT, (Lloyd Parker) wrote:

>........
>> Chances are it is not anywhere "half". The BTU
>>per pound may not be the total picture, a study of fuels
>>may show that oxygen is the indicator of power.
>
>You don't burn oxygen. Thus, it contributes zero to calories/joules/BTUs.

But it is required in specific amounts to achieve full
combustion and cleaner burning.

The nitrogen in the air inducted along with the
oxygen and fuel may reduce the expansion ratio of
the mixture.
I think the oxygen in ethanol is bound as OH,
isn't that hydrogen peroxide? A chemist might be
able to offer a lot of information on the chemical
reactions of ethanol burning in air, I think the
number of hydrogen atoms relative to carbon atoms
is 3X while in gasolines is 2X + 2.

The other chemical with the same elements
and number of atoms of each has completely different
properties, and the primary difference seems to be
the oxygen atom isn't bound to a hydrogen atom.

The low cost of oil may have caused chemists
to ignore study of all possible chemicals that could
be used as fuels, especially the renewable ones.

A chemist might be able to say the reason
for ethanol being a more powerful ICE fuel, he
might say the reason is that less air is needed to
burn ethanol, and that may mean that there is
more heat for the amount of gas to be expanded
to create the pressure to push the cylinder.

This may be the type of discussion useful
to examine all aspects of ethanol as a motor fuel,
and I feel the switch for the Indy 500 will bring
out the facts.

Joe Fischer

On Thu, "*" > wrote:

>"Adjusting the timing....." is a Model A Ford approach to space age
>technology.

Modern cars have always had centrifugal advance and
vacuum retardation at higher manifold pressure.

The proper way to time the ignition is to advance it,
drive the car, and advance some more until it pings (a little)
on the most aggressive throttle setting.
And that is how the factory setting is determined
in the first place.

So adjusting the timing is a constant thing, a chore
taken over by the computer on most cars.

Joe Fischer

Joe Fischer > wrote in
:

> On Fri, 08 Sep 2006 23:48:54 GMT, "Sponsored by OILY INC. Exxon-Koch"
>>Joe Fischer > wrote in
m:
>>> On Fri, 08 Sep 2006 23:13:14 GMT, "Sponsored by OILY INC. Exxon-Koch"
>>>>http://h2-pv.tripod.com/PV/solar_maps.html
>>>>
>>>>Raw solar power MEGAWATTS per acre per day.
>>>>8,863 MEGAWATTS per year per acre.
>>>
>>> Is that the corrected typo?
>>>
>>> Or the uncorrected typo?
>>
>>That's some new typo and wasn't even in the original. Did you change it
>>for laughs?
>
> I didn't change anything, can you post the corrected typo?
>
> Joe Fischer

Funny how a bunch of mechanics can figure out timing to a degree, figure
out fuel value in a cylinder residing for a few thousandths of a second
and have no idea how much energy has been falling on thier heads for their
entire lifetimes, isn't it?

Hydrogen Electrolysis from solar PV

26,282 kilograms per year per acre of scrubland in
sunny southwest USA sunbelt states.

http://h2-pv.tripod.com/PV/solar_maps.html

Raw solar power MEGAWATT-hours per acre per day.
8,863 MEGAWATT-Hours per year per acre.

How many gallons of your biofuels **** per acre per year?


http://h2-pv.us/H2/PDFs_Dloaded.html
http://h2-pv.tripod.com/PV/solar_maps.html
http://h2-pv.us/wind/Introduction_01.html
http://h2-pv.us/wind/Big_01.html
http://h2-pv.us/wind/strip_mining/strip_mining.html
http://h2-pv.us/wind/towers_prior_ar...prior_art.html
http://h2-pv.us/PV/DOE_Slides/Govt_PDFs_01.html
http://h2-pv.us/H2/h2_safety_swain/swain_safety.html
http://h2-pv.us/H2/H2_Basics.html
http://h2-pv.us/H2/H2-PV_Breeders.html

On 7 Sep 2006 11:02:47 -0700, "BobG" > wrote:

>Joe Fischer wrote:
>> If I were to build
>> a dragster, I would want to use pure oxygen instead
>> of air, allowing the use of more than three times as
>> much fuel, but the engine would probably need
>> beefed up crankshaft, connecting rods, and better
>> bearings.
>=================================
>The Don Garlits Drag Racing Museum in Ocala on I-75 has one of his
>experimental rail jobs with a huge compressed air tank... enough for
>about 1/4 mile I'd imagine. Was supposed to save the couple hundred HP
>needed to run the blower. I guess you could fill it up with O2 as well
>as air.....

The engine only turns a comparatively few RPM
in a quarter mile.
O2 might not be safe, but even 50-50 would be
better than 20 percent oxygen in air.

Joe Fischer

On Thu, 07 Sep 2006 13:02:50 -0500, "*" > wrote:

>Joe Fischer > wrote in article
>...
>> Gee, I wonder why I bothered with 130 octane
>> aviation fuel 60 years ago.
>
>There's your problem!
>
>You're still trying to apply post-war thinking to today's
>technology.......lost in the '50s, as it were.

It would not be good to have an airplane engine ping.

The gas I bought yesterday was 87 octane.

Joe Fischer

Joe Fischer > wrote in
:

> On Thu, 07 Sep 06 13:55:26 GMT, (Lloyd Parker) wrote:
>
>>........
>>> Chances are it is not anywhere "half". The BTU
>>>per pound may not be the total picture, a study of fuels
>>>may show that oxygen is the indicator of power.
>>
>>You don't burn oxygen. Thus, it contributes zero to
>>calories/joules/BTUs.
>
> But it is required in specific amounts to achieve full
> combustion and cleaner burning.
>
> The nitrogen in the air inducted along with the
> oxygen and fuel may reduce the expansion ratio of
> the mixture.
> I think the oxygen in ethanol is bound as OH,
> isn't that hydrogen peroxide? A chemist might be
> able to offer a lot of information on the chemical
> reactions of ethanol burning in air, I think the
> number of hydrogen atoms relative to carbon atoms
> is 3X while in gasolines is 2X + 2.
>
> The other chemical with the same elements
> and number of atoms of each has completely different
> properties, and the primary difference seems to be
> the oxygen atom isn't bound to a hydrogen atom.
>
> The low cost of oil may have caused chemists
> to ignore study of all possible chemicals that could
> be used as fuels, especially the renewable ones.
>
> A chemist might be able to say the reason
> for ethanol being a more powerful ICE fuel, he
> might say the reason is that less air is needed to
> burn ethanol, and that may mean that there is
> more heat for the amount of gas to be expanded
> to create the pressure to push the cylinder.
>
> This may be the type of discussion useful
> to examine all aspects of ethanol as a motor fuel,
> and I feel the switch for the Indy 500 will bring
> out the facts.
>
> Joe Fischer

Plus one more useful fact about Oxygen...

When you electrolyze H2O you get 8 kilograms of O2 per every kilogram of
H2. Catalytically made in H2O2 (Hydrogern Peroxide) it has a combustion
and explosive power far greater than the H2 or gasoline. Sometimes used as
torpedo propellent it also is used by amateur rocketeers.

The commercial value of the O2 product made into H2O2 is eight times the
commercial value of the O2 product on the bulk market prices of today.
Used as a bleaching gent for sewage treatment and pulp paper bleaching it
displaces the market niche of dioxin-producing chlorine chemicals, which
is why OLIN chlorine and munitions is shoulder-to-shoulder to badmouth
H2-PV right along with the carbon-pollution fossil fuels.

OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research =
$7,022,124
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding American Legislative Exchange Council = $215,000
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Americans for Tax Reform Foundation = $525,000
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Atlantic Legal Foundation = $210,000
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Atlas Economic Research Foundation = $5,000
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Brookings Institution = $1,217,000
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Capital Legal Foundation = $150,000
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Cato Institute = $832,500
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Center for Media and Public Affairs = $730,000
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Center for Security Policy = $261,000
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Center for Strategic and International Studies = $2,112,318
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Citizens for a Sound Economy Foundation = $1,375,000
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Competitive Enterprise Institute = $230,300
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Consumer Alert = $28,000
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies = $4,008,000
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding for ASCH = $865,500
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Foundation for Research on Economics and the Environment
(FREE) = $484,250
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Fraser Institute = $10,000
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding George C. Marshall Institute = $350,000
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding George Mason University = $6,665,824
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding George Mason University Institute for Humane Studies = $797,000
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Heartland Institute = $40,000
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Heritage Foundation = $8,320,835
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace = $5,015,660
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Hudson Institute, Inc. = $3,034,840
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Independent Institute = $65,000
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding John Locke Institute = $15,000
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Landmark Legal Foundation = $320,000
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Manhattan Institute for Policy Research = $4,899,500
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Media Institute = $148,750
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding National Center for Policy Analysis = $1,069,000
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding National Center for Public Policy Research, Inc = $100,000
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding National Legal Center for The Public Interest = $63,000
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding National Wilderness Institute =$25,000
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding New England Legal Foundation = $75,200
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Pacific Legal Foundation = $665,000
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy = $735,000
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Property and Environment Research Center (PERC) = $640,775
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Reason Foundation = $276,500
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Southeastern Legal Foundation = $145,000
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Washington Legal Foundation = $2,460,000
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Funding Weidenbaum Center = $94,650
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Media Research Center = $495,000
OLIN Munitions & Chlorine-DDT Mercatus Center, George Mason University = $80,000

On Thu, 07 Sep "*" > wrote:

>I also taught Vocational Automotive Technology for 10 years - mid-'70s to
>mid-'80s.
>
>In that time period, a lot of automotive electronics were introduced.

Electronic ignition works great, when it works.

If the points got pitted or the condensor shorted,
I could still get home, but if a sensor coil goes bad,
it means a tow truck.

But my favorite engine is the 4100 fuel injected,
even though it has a bad reputation.

And as soon as E85 is available here, I want to
convert at least one of the cars to use nothing else but.

Joe Fischer

On Fri, Gordon > wrote:

>.........
>One of my main concerns is that jet engines must fly and the
>combustion process must be reliable in the upper atmosphere where
>the temperature can be as low as -65ºF. I'm not sure ethanol
>would be useable under these conditions. Wouldn't it tend to gel
>in the tanks and fuel lines, and even if this didn't happen,
>would it ignite in the engines?

I haven't read anything about ethanol being used in
jet engines.

I did post what I read in Aviation Week about the
Air Force buying a large quantity of synthetic kerosene
to be mixed with JP-8 and run in B-52s.

I don't know where the mention of "gel" came
from previously, there was a time when I only used
alcohol in my car cooling system, and I don't remember
it ever "jelling" (have you been watching that commercial?). :-)

>But, if virtually unlimited quantities of ethanol could be
>harvested from the organic sludge in the deep oceans, then
>converted into JP-8, these problems (if such problems exist in
>the first place) would be resolved.
>Gordon

Apparently there is enough coal in the US to last
2000 years, so synthetic kerosene is not going to be a
problem, there was a time when I only used coal oil
in the lamp to do my homework.

Joe Fischer

In article 2>,
"Sponsored by OILY INC. Exxon-Koch"
> wrote:

> Joe Fischer > wrote in
> :
>
> > On Fri, 08 Sep 2006 23:48:54 GMT, "Sponsored by OILY INC. Exxon-Koch"
> >>Joe Fischer > wrote in
> m:
> >>> On Fri, 08 Sep 2006 23:13:14 GMT, "Sponsored by OILY INC. Exxon-Koch"
> >>>>http://h2-pv.tripod.com/PV/solar_maps.html
> >>>>
> >>>>Raw solar power MEGAWATTS per acre per day.
> >>>>8,863 MEGAWATTS per year per acre.
> >>>
> >>> Is that the corrected typo?
> >>>
> >>> Or the uncorrected typo?
> >>
> >>That's some new typo and wasn't even in the original. Did you change it
> >>for laughs?
> >
> > I didn't change anything, can you post the corrected typo?
> >
> > Joe Fischer
>
> Funny how a bunch of mechanics can figure out timing to a degree, figure
> out fuel value in a cylinder residing for a few thousandths of a second
> and have no idea how much energy has been falling on thier heads for their
> entire lifetimes, isn't it?
>
> Hydrogen Electrolysis from solar PV
>
> 26,282 kilograms per year per acre of scrubland in
> sunny southwest USA sunbelt states.
>
> http://h2-pv.tripod.com/PV/solar_maps.html
>
> Raw solar power MEGAWATT-hours per acre per day.
> 8,863 MEGAWATT-Hours per year per acre.
>
> How many gallons of your biofuels **** per acre per year?
>
>
> http://h2-pv.us/H2/PDFs_Dloaded.html
> http://h2-pv.tripod.com/PV/solar_maps.html
> http://h2-pv.us/wind/Introduction_01.html
> http://h2-pv.us/wind/Big_01.html
> http://h2-pv.us/wind/strip_mining/strip_mining.html
> http://h2-pv.us/wind/towers_prior_ar...prior_art.html
> http://h2-pv.us/PV/DOE_Slides/Govt_PDFs_01.html
> http://h2-pv.us/H2/h2_safety_swain/swain_safety.html
> http://h2-pv.us/H2/H2_Basics.html
> http://h2-pv.us/H2/H2-PV_Breeders.html

Does that pony do any other tricks?

"Sponsored by OILY INC. Exxon-Koch" >
wrote in message 7.102...
> Joe Fischer > wrote in
> :
>
>> On Fri, 08 Sep 2006 23:48:54 GMT, "Sponsored by OILY INC. Exxon-Koch"
>>>Joe Fischer > wrote in
:
>>>> On Fri, 08 Sep 2006 23:13:14 GMT, "Sponsored by OILY INC. Exxon-Koch"
>>>>>http://h2-pv.tripod.com/PV/solar_maps.html
>>>>>
>>>>>Raw solar power MEGAWATTS per acre per day.
>>>>>8,863 MEGAWATTS per year per acre.
>>>>
>>>> Is that the corrected typo?
>>>>
>>>> Or the uncorrected typo?
>>>
>>>That's some new typo and wasn't even in the original. Did you change it
>>>for laughs?
>>
>> I didn't change anything, can you post the corrected typo?
>>
>> Joe Fischer
>
> Funny how a bunch of mechanics can figure out timing to a degree, figure
> out fuel value in a cylinder residing for a few thousandths of a second
> and have no idea how much energy has been falling on thier heads for their
> entire lifetimes, isn't it?


You don't even have a clue what he's talking about, do you? Megawatts per
year is a meaningless unit. Moron troll.

Eric Lucas