• Welcome, Guest! We hope you enjoy the excellent technical knowledge, event information and discussions that the BMW MOA forum provides. Some forum content will be hidden from you if you remain logged out. If you want to view all content, please click the 'Log in' button above and enter your BMW MOA username and password.

    If you are not an MOA member, why not take the time to join the club, so you can enjoy posting on the forum, the BMW Owners News magazine, and all of the discounts and benefits the BMW MOA offers?

E15

Agreed they are all over the place and for the most part go on day after day, week after week year after year just fine.

" still they are a fact of life so why not build another that does promote commerce now?"

For me it is not a question of build or not but where and how. The Keystone project will add another layer of spur pipelines. Is it unreasonable to have taken time to look at where they will go, how they are built (specs, actually built and the infrastructure to maintain and inspect)?

Commerce? For who? So that...What?

E15 thread? Perhaps it is more of an E15 thread than you give it credit for. Taken as a whole the topic covers a variety of issues and can be approached from various angles.
 
Not much of an E15 thread when the main discussion point is about raw materials from which ethanol isn't produced. Regardless, I have no issues with going off topic, so I'm not complaining. If you do want to think about E15 directly:

__________________________________________________

Congress to hold hearing on E15
More Info: http://capwiz.com/amacycle/utr/1/CPMTSTBCGI/ADTYSTBCMT/9293225141

AMA will be a witness!

On Feb. 26, at 2 p.m. (EST), the U.S. House Subcommittee on Environment, chaired by Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.), will hold a hearing on ÔÇ£Mid-Level Ethanol Blends: Consumer and Technical Research Needs.ÔÇØ Former U.S. Sen. Wayne Allard, American Motorcyclist Association vice president for government relations, will be a witness at the hearing.

The AMA focus will be on the need for an independent and scientific study of the use of E15 -- a gasoline formulation that contains up to 15 percent ethanol by volume -- in motorcycle and all-terrain vehicle engines. Additionally, we will raise concerns of misfueling and the U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyÔÇÖs mitigation plan, which initially included a senseless mandated four-gallon minimum fuel purchase.

To view a live webcast of the hearing, click here: http://capwiz.com/amacycle/utr/1/CPMTSTBCGI/GOMGSTBCMX/9293225141

The AMA believes extensive independent testing needs to be done before E15 becomes more widely available. The key for the AMA and our members is that E15 must be proven safe for motorcycle and ATV engines. To the best of our knowledge, E15 isnÔÇÖt approved for use in any original-equipment motorcycles or ATVs. In fact, its use can void many manufacturersÔÇÖ warranties.

We applaud U.S. Rep. Harris for holding this hearing to help make our nationÔÇÖs fuel supply safer for all users.

AmericanMotorcyclist.com
Alert Center
 
Science Versus Politics and then there is Reality

.........Or build the pipeline from Canada, and drill for the oil we have under our country and offshore.
Some Refineries and dismantling the EPA would dramatically help the situation too!
Ken
Without getting into the science which "IF" you are interested in you can look up yourself because there is more than enough data on the web to verify, there is WAY more than enough oil in North America from a whole bunch of sources. We the people (isn't there a movement afoot to remove such phrases from the Constitution?) have been manipulated by our politicians, media and the oil industry to believe we will run out of oil in then next week to ten days. There is NO, NADA, ZILCH logical or scientific reason to use ethanol in vehicles other than politics. Since several car manufacturers have voided their new car warranties if E15 is used, you are finally seeing the media jump on board the anti-ethanol bandwagon.
 
Ken F, your Wikipedia information indicates the Athabasca oil sands as being in NE Canada instead of NE Alberta which is in the western part of Canada and your text indicates 830,000 million barrels a day which is flattering but I think 830,000 would be more accurate.

Facts are that USA consumes about 18.5 million barrels of oil a day and has the opportunity to reduce its dependence on foreign oil from unfriendly nations by buying from Canada and at a significant discount to Venezuelan and OPEC prices. Check with your congressman, in addition to paying world prices to the OPEC nations, the US spends some $60 billion a year keeping middle east oil shipping lanes open. The Keystone alternative is aided by the refining capability that is already in place in the USA. Currently, oil sands bitumen is being transported by rail through US cities and towns to southern refineries at a risk of 16 to1 when compared to a pipeline.

Everyone wants a greener planet, at the moment Canada contributes less than 2% to the worlds greenhouse gas. The US is reputed to have reduced greenhouse gas by 30%, how one asks? By shipping employment and manufacturing to Mexico, Brazil and China, unfortunately, that is how.

Ethanol is a "farm aid" program that is becoming so lucrative that other needed crops are being replaced by cash crops destined to become ethanol. Ethanol has already proven itself to damage engines and fuel systems, lessen engine life, it lowers octane ratings and offers less milage per gallon. Where is the gain when measured against the costs of physical damage, the loss of other food crops not to mention the cost of government incentives and subsidies to develop the product and the grains being grown for it.

Recently there was a demonstration in front of the White House while President Obama was playing golf with Tiger Woods, did the demonstrators arrive on bicycles, on skate boards, on roller skates? I'm guessing that many arrived in gas guzzling Suburbans and SUV's.

Just because a dissident group (protest groups are often recipients of government funding) shows up to demonstrate for clean air doesn't mean that the air is unfit or about to become unfit, often there is another agenda, i.e. past vice-president Al Gore, the man has become a billionaire with his unsubstantiated "inconvenient truth". Watch for Mr. Gore to seek the presidential nomination, it's coming.

For those of you old enough to remember the Vietnam war, a most tragic event that likely deserved anti-war demonstration but did you also know that in the USA, the Russian Embassy was responsible for paying people $25.00/day to demonstrate against the war.

As well meaning as lowering emissions and developing alternate fuels might be, rarely are the motivations truly altruistic, there is usually a capital gain in there somewhere. And if your thinking battery power you are thinking lithium. Where are the main deposits of lithium, Bolivia and China, and if you have concerns about oil sands tailing ponds, do some research into lithium brine pools.

Bottom line for this blog - there is no place for ethanol, regardless of percentage, in the internal combustion engine and especially in my BMW.
 
Ken F, your Wikipedia information indicates the Athabasca oil sands as being in NE Canada instead of NE Alberta which is in the western part of Canada and your text indicates 830,000 million barrels a day which is flattering but I think 830,000 would be more accurate.

Facts are that USA consumes about 18.5 million barrels of oil a day and has the opportunity to reduce its dependence on foreign oil from unfriendly nations by buying from Canada and at a significant discount to Venezuelan and OPEC prices. Check with your congressman, in addition to paying world prices to the OPEC nations, the US spends some $60 billion a year keeping middle east oil shipping lanes open. The Keystone alternative is aided by the refining capability that is already in place in the USA. Currently, oil sands bitumen is being transported by rail through US cities and towns to southern refineries at a risk of 16 to1 when compared to a pipeline.

Everyone wants a greener planet, at the moment Canada contributes less than 2% to the worlds greenhouse gas. The US is reputed to have reduced greenhouse gas by 30%, how one asks? By shipping employment and manufacturing to Mexico, Brazil and China, unfortunately, that is how.

Ethanol is a "farm aid" program that is becoming so lucrative that other needed crops are being replaced by cash crops destined to become ethanol. Ethanol has already proven itself to damage engines and fuel systems, lessen engine life, it lowers octane ratings and offers less milage per gallon. Where is the gain when measured against the costs of physical damage, the loss of other food crops not to mention the cost of government incentives and subsidies to develop the product and the grains being grown for it.

Recently there was a demonstration in front of the White House while President Obama was playing golf with Tiger Woods, did the demonstrators arrive on bicycles, on skate boards, on roller skates? I'm guessing that many arrived in gas guzzling Suburbans and SUV's.

Just because a dissident group (protest groups are often recipients of government funding) shows up to demonstrate for clean air doesn't mean that the air is unfit or about to become unfit, often there is another agenda, i.e. past vice-president Al Gore, the man has become a billionaire with his unsubstantiated "inconvenient truth". Watch for Mr. Gore to seek the presidential nomination, it's coming.

For those of you old enough to remember the Vietnam war, a most tragic event that likely deserved anti-war demonstration but did you also know that in the USA, the Russian Embassy was responsible for paying people $25.00/day to demonstrate against the war.

As well meaning as lowering emissions and developing alternate fuels might be, rarely are the motivations truly altruistic, there is usually a capital gain in there somewhere. And if your thinking battery power you are thinking lithium. Where are the main deposits of lithium, Bolivia and China, and if you have concerns about oil sands tailing ponds, do some research into lithium brine pools.

Bottom line for this blog - there is no place for ethanol, regardless of percentage, in the internal combustion engine and especially in my BMW.

Why pray tell would the canadians want to sell their oil at prices below the world market? It's their oil and their stock holders are entitled to the profits.
 
Sometimes it is curse to have a good memory. In 1971, give or take a year, the USA was importing approximately 6% of its petroleum. Now that you have the wonderful internet, that number has risen to who know what, but that IS what I remember from being alive at the time. At the height (1972-73) of the first major Arab Oil Embargo (which was run from NYC by American oil men) the USA was importing approximately 14% of its oil. During the Bush II Presidency, prior to the economy taking the nose dive, when gas was at $5 a gallon and climbing, ALL, that is every oil expert that was employed by the media was telling the American people we were out of oil and Indian and China were grabbing what was left. They said $200 a barrel was coming soon and it was likely it would even going higher. How is it we are awash in oil now. Where did it come from. I could say that the Bush boys were oil men but that might be conceived as political. It is true but every President in my memory has been bought and paid for by Big Oil, Congress too. So if you hear ANYTHING being said on TV about oil, chances are it isn't true. One thing is true, oil prices drive our economy up and down, and they are manipulate. We do not live in a free market society, especially with oil. Oil is just about a monopoly. Oil speculators drive the market, not storms, not refineries, not wars, speculators. Wanna see our economy explode. Knock about 25% off of diesel prices. Tell me something that doesn't come in truck someway, somehow. Now to E15. Screw the farmers. They got tobacco subsidies when it was the best paid cash crop short of opium poppies AND it was killing off the population. Give us pure gas, do away with speed limits on all two lane country roads, remove all double yellow lines and let us ride alcohol free. :wave

The following was from a Consumer's Report Article on E15:
"In response to the release of the labels, nine automakersÔÇöincluding Chrysler, General Motors, and ToyotaÔÇöwasted no time writing letters to Congress criticizing the proposal and noting that they will not honor warranties for older cars running on E15. The automakers say they are concerned about the effects of E15 on engines, fuel pumps, and other fuel-system components in cars that were not designed for it." Another article said "five car companiesÔÇöBMW, Chrysler, Nissan, Toyota and VolkswagenÔÇöstated they would not cover any E15-related damage claim. Here in early 2013, itÔÇÖs now up to 10 (including Ford, Honda and Mercedes-Benz). Worse than that, some of those car companies have now stated that E15 will void your warranty."
 
Last edited:
The absence of a coherent national, science/Eco based, economically rational energy policy since forever, has led us to where we are today. E15 will solve no more or less than E10. More of the same, is more of the same. We got the gas, burn it. As it reaches its demise of supply, let our inventors do their thing. Putting E10 or E15 in motorcycles cannot even infinitesimally effect the environment, there simply aren't enough ov'em on the road. Cats on bikes cracks me up, IMO, two cents, this not a political statement, rather a musing about E15.
 
The absence of a coherent national, science/Eco based, economically rational energy policy since forever, has led us to where we are today. E15 will solve no more or less than E10. More of the same, is more of the same. We got the gas, burn it. As it reaches its demise of supply, let our inventors do their thing. Putting E10 or E15 in motorcycles cannot even infinitesimally effect the environment, there simply aren't enough ov'em on the road. Cats on bikes cracks me up, IMO, two cents, this not a political statement, rather a musing about E15.

Well, I can only agree that we don't have a real energy policy and our only "energy" crisis is, and always has been transportation fuels. On that note, did read the news report that Warren Buffet is going to have BNSF do a NG demonstration? Of course, Mr. Buffet owns the railroad and the NG supplier, but that's in keeping with Rockefeller and the PRR.
 
Why pray tell would the canadians want to sell their oil at prices below the world market? It's their oil and their stock holders are entitled to the profits.

The benchmark for oil pricing is West Texas Intermediate with a specific gravity approaching 40. All other crude suffers a differential in price to WTI (even production within the USA) and in the case of heavy oil (oil sands) the specific gravity is going to be less than 20 and can be less than 10. Oil sands production has a higher density and a higher sulpher content and therfore costs more than light crude to refine. The US has the refining capability and the capacity to handle heavy oil and therefore can realize a better margin than it would from offshore conventional production. Canadian producers benefit because the US is a realizable purchaser for its product and all transactions are done in $US. Whether Canada likes to acknowledge it or not, its currency is a petro dollar, the closer oil is to $100/bbl the closer the Canadian dollar is to the US dollar. The US is and always has been a preferred trading partner for your cousins to the north.
 
The benchmark for oil pricing is West Texas Intermediate with a specific gravity approaching 40. All other crude suffers a differential in price to WTI (even production within the USA) and in the case of heavy oil (oil sands) the specific gravity is going to be less than 20 and can be less than 10. Oil sands production has a higher density and a higher sulpher content and therfore costs more than light crude to refine. The US has the refining capability and the capacity to handle heavy oil and therefore can realize a better margin than it would from offshore conventional production. Canadian producers benefit because the US is a realizable purchaser for its product and all transactions are done in $US. Whether Canada likes to acknowledge it or not, its currency is a petro dollar, the closer oil is to $100/bbl the closer the Canadian dollar is to the US dollar. The US is and always has been a preferred trading partner for your cousins to the north.

You need several barrels of water to produce one barrel of bitumen or tar sand oil. Where's that water going to come from? What are you going to do with the sulfur and other non-desirable stuff produced in the refining process? The low specific gravity is due to your future waste problem.

The Canadian dollar has been at or above par for a decade
 
Last edited:
While the discussion about energy policy (and the lack thereof) is interesting, it really has little to do with this specific discussion. What you have are private sector groups on the opposite sides of the argument lobbying government to get their way. The EPA is somewhat stuck in the middle.

E15 is NOT an EPA mandate. Never has been. It started in 2009 when an ethanol promoting industry group petitioned the EPA to allow a waiver to the current rules so they could sell E15. The EPA granted a partial waiver. Should they have? :dunno They were screwed regardless. If they didn't they would have been accused of blocking the free market. Instead they are being accused of forcing the use of ethanol.

If you want to bitch about the push for ethanol you need to direct your attention to this group: http://growthenergy.org/
That is the ethanol industry group that is promoting the use of ethanol and the ones who asked the EPA for waivers.

See http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/fuels/additive/e15/ for details on this subject.
 
Thus our attention should be towards those we DON'T elect to office, such as industry trade groups? Makes the whole scenario seem like we are the powerless pawns we probably happen to be?:banghead I understand the power of money but my only power is my spending habits & my vote.
 
Today's NYT ... More ethanol in our future.

Ethanol Surplus May Lift Gas Prices
By MATTHEW L. WALD
WASHINGTON ÔÇö A glut of ethanol in the gasoline supply is threatening to push up prices at the pump and may have exacerbated the growing cost gap between regular gasoline and premium, some oil experts say.

Refiners have been trading so-called ethanol credits furiously in an effort to meet federal environmental mandates, helping to significantly push up the cost of those credits ÔÇö a jump to more than $1 from a few pennies in the last several days, and drivers are feeling the effects, experts say.

Prices for premium gas are now about 30.2 cents over the price of regular, according to Trilby Lundberg of the Lundberg Survey. That is up from 24.1 cents in 2010 and 18.2 cents in 2000. Any increases could affect about a third of this yearÔÇÖs car models, because premium fuel is required or recommended for them, according to Edmunds.com. ...

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/16/b...gasoline-prices.html?hp&_r=0&pagewanted=print
 
Today's NYT ... More ethanol in our future.

Ethanol Surplus May Lift Gas Prices
By MATTHEW L. WALD
WASHINGTON ÔÇö A glut of ethanol in the gasoline supply is threatening to push up prices at the pump and may have exacerbated the growing cost gap between regular gasoline and premium, some oil experts say.

Refiners have been trading so-called ethanol credits furiously in an effort to meet federal environmental mandates, helping to significantly push up the cost of those credits ÔÇö a jump to more than $1 from a few pennies in the last several days, and drivers are feeling the effects, experts say.

Prices for premium gas are now about 30.2 cents over the price of regular, according to Trilby Lundberg of the Lundberg Survey. That is up from 24.1 cents in 2010 and 18.2 cents in 2000. Any increases could affect about a third of this yearÔÇÖs car models, because premium fuel is required or recommended for them, according to Edmunds.com. ...

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/16/b...gasoline-prices.html?hp&_r=0&pagewanted=print

Interesting article, but somewhat confusing. At the end, the discussion centers on the ethanol and oil industries trading accusations about speculating on credit exchanges. Remember Enron and the NG market scam.
 
Just imagine for a minute, that all the boutique blending differing from coast to coast, city to city, sometimes county to county, all the cooking of grains, all the draining of our great underground aquifers, all of the corporate co-op start ups, all of this wouldn't amount to jack, just imagine what the true market cost of regular old gas would be to our economy. Probably about a buck a gallon. Just sayin, two cents.
 
Just imagine for a minute, that all the boutique blending differing from coast to coast, city to city, sometimes county to county, all the cooking of grains, all the draining of our great underground aquifers, all of the corporate co-op start ups, all of this wouldn't amount to jack, just imagine what the true market cost of regular old gas would be to our economy. Probably about a buck a gallon. Just sayin, two cents.

And then what? What would change?
 
Well, it would cost about five bucks to fill up the bike with gas, swing yer leg over the saddle, and things would be no worse off for the effort. Now if that proved unachievable, then at the least exempt all motorcycles/scooters and any other vastly more environmentally friendly, high mileage, low impact vehicles from burning E15 or E10 as the costs involved both in vehicle development and technical complexity isn't worth the negligible environmental payback. Just trying to think critically, outside the box. Two cents on the use of E anything.
 
Read the lead article in the latest National Geographic about the oil sands in ND,MT , SK & Manitoba. It takes lots of water(as much as 2million gals per well plus lots of chemicals & other stuff) in a water short area to keep up the production of that oil & ND is now #2 in US petro.
 
Last edited:
Well, it would cost about five bucks to fill up the bike with gas, swing yer leg over the saddle, and things would be no worse off for the effort. Now if that proved unachievable, then at the least exempt all motorcycles/scooters and any other vastly more environmentally friendly, high mileage, low impact vehicles from burning E15 or E10 as the costs involved both in vehicle development and technical complexity isn't worth the negligible environmental payback. Just trying to think critically, outside the box. Two cents on the use of E anything.

In other words, the products you use would remain unchanged. No need for improved efficiency, but larger size would be good? Yes? It seems like things would be pretty stable.

Sounds a lot like the "Detroit" world prior to 1973.
 
Read the lead article in the latest National Geographic about the oil sands in ND,MT , SK & Alberta. It takes lots of water in a water short area to keep up the production of that oil & ND is now #2 in US petro.

There's a interesting article on the businessweek website about Eastern Canada not authorizing pipelines to carry the oil east. Instead, the eastern provinces import Algerian oil refined in TX.
 
Back
Top