No. I still stand on my point that the advancement in calibration technology is THE reason for the recent expansion. The CAFE mileage issue you refer to is managed in the form of credits. GM and Ford can max out allowable credits with far less volume of FlexFuel vehicles than they are currently providing. In the past it made no sense to build one more FlexFuel vehicle beyond the point of maxxing out credits, because the cost of the HARDWARE to make a vehicle FlexFuel capable cost more than you could charge for the option. The advances in calibration, specifically the vehicle's ability to sample the fuel in the tank and communicate the mixture's ethanol content and adjust the vehicle engine calibration and performance to accomodate has removed a significant amount of hardware cost. As a result, GM in particular has expanded the number of vehicles that can / will use FlexFuel and eliminated the option price. Going forward the primary limitations on FlexFuel capable volume are derivative of engineering required to develop specific engine / fuel tank combinations and hardware suppliers' capability to provide FlexFuel versions of common hardware.

In instances where FlexFuel costs more than gasoline, using FlexFuel is not an economically wise option. It does, however make a wonderful hedge in the event that the price of gasoline reaches the $3 plus range again. Since E85 is only 15% gasoline, it should not see as large a climb in prices. Yesterday I filled my Tahoe with E85 at $2.03. Unleaded at the same station is $2.19. Still not the best economic decision. If gas prices climb to $3.00 for gas and $2.35 for E85, I'll be ahead. Since the buyer / lessee pays $0 for the FlexFuel option, they have absolutely NOTHING to lose by buying / leasing a FlexFuel vehicle and never using E85, but if the price of gas goes up, they have a built in, no cost hedge using a fuel that is renewable. Works for me.

Peace,

Martin

 

I ca see your points, and they sound great, but from what I have seen when the price of gas goes up E85 goes up and equal amount. This might be due to market factors such as supply and demand or the fact that E85 is still highly dependant on petrolium to produce it in the first place.

I do like E85, if we can produce it using little to no petrolium products. Heck, there are a lot of sugar cane farms that used to be around here in texas and lousiane that don't produce anymore. Those would be ideal to start back up and produce sugar cane for ethanol production.

 

Also, flexfuel cars were never really marketed to the U.S. it was an afterthought from the american car manufacturers once they realized they got caught with their pants down with the concept of going green (hybrid). The market was for countries like Brazil who use ethanol for their fuel because they have a surplus of sugar. Our manufacturers said, hey, we can get in on this "green" banwagon by going "yellow". And guess what, we have been selling the same car to the domestic market as those that require flexfuel. All we have to do is remind our market that you already own a flexfuel vehicle and will give you this yellow gas cap to remind you.

The public being pretty naive fell for this, hook, line and sinker.

 

I think what you are seeing on the pricing is a supply and demand thing. Here in southeeast Michigan there is a very visible increase in the number of E85 supplied stations. This is largely due to the governor getting firmly behind the building of refinery capacity and an aggressive move by one of the larger regional super-store chains that have their own gas pumps on property. Now I now that most places that I can find a Meijers store, I can find E85.

There has been and continues to be work done on development of fuel grade ethanol from sources other than corn stock. Now that automakers are committed to the idea of E85 as an economically feasible fuel source, I would expect that the development work will be even better supported.

Peace,
Martin

 

Hmmm... Let me guess. You filled up at the Meijers right across from the tech center? You should've called me, I would've gone out and watched you fill up!

As I've said before, it's that lack of a price gap that distrurbs me about E85. If it was cheap enough to offput the efficiency loss, I'd be quite for it. (Electricity if my personal favorite as an alternative fuel) As it is now, it's kind of a neat alternative, heck, if the FEH had FFV technology in her, I probably would've filled up there once or twice if for nothing else, than the novelty of it.

 

Yeah, a flex fuel hybrid. I think CAFE would give a flex fuel prius a rating of around 120 MPG or so.

 

Oddly enough, FlexFuel hybrids are technically feasible. One of the things that stands in the way is that under the California definition of ZEV, PZEV and AT-PZEV, they would not qualify for PZEV or AT-PZEV credits because of the evaporative qualities of ethanol / E85 as compared to gasoline. If somebody cracks that nut you might actually see FlexFuel hybrids.

Peace,

Martin

 

Actually, it wasn't there. It was a Citgo station. But I am headed to Meijer now

Peace,

Martin

 

Flex-fuel won't help at all with CO2 and global warming, unless it is burned in highly efficient (hybrid) cars. Substituting one fuel for another helps only with where future fuel comes from. To solve all relevent problems, you must have vehicles which use less fuel.

Harry

 

The idea behind burning an alternate fuel... (not a big fan of e85, i think this is the wrong direction) is that the amount of C02 emmited equals to that had the source just decayed naturally.... The problem with fossil fuels is that it's all NET NEW C02.

So it's not a substitution exactly.