Various Topics on Subaru

..c.. ..n

On May 22, 10:35*pm, clare at snyder dot ontario dot canada wrote:

...
> Also, methanol fire is invisible. EXTREMEly dangerous.

Can be fixed with an additive.
>
> This also means cold staring on neet methanol is extremely dicey.
> Ether starting is almost the standard for methanol engines (even for a
> hot restart in many cases)

The first alcohol-based FFVs used methanol.
The Indy cars run on methanol.
This problem also may be fixable. Maybe by another additive.

> The beauty of Methanol is it can be produced from CO2 and Hydrogen.
> Just think - combining hydrogen economy with greenhouse gas reduction
> (although burning Methanol produces CO2.)

At least it recycles the CO2 instead of increasing it in the
atmosphere.
...
> It mixes freely with water in any ratio, which can be good or bad.

Think of it as Dry Gas. The water goes out the exhaust. Better than
gasoline.

Thanks for the helpful post!

Ben

..amTHISb.. ..hoo.c..

On May 22, 8:36 pm, Uncle Ben <b...@greenba.com> wrote:
> On May 22, 5:46 pm, clare at snyder dot ontario dot canada wrote:
>
>
>
> > I just wish you didn't expect the rest of the country (and the world)
> > to pay for your "elixir" in higher food prices.
>
> The cost of food world-wide has risen mainly because of the cost of
> energy, mainly gasoline and diesel. These fuels have doubled in price
> in only a few years.
>
> The US Dept. of Agriculture estimates that diversion of corn to
> ethanol production is at most responsible for a 5% rise in the cost of
> food.
>
> Clare, look further ahead! The price of oil is not going to go back
> to where it was. The world is running out of cheap oil. We need
> alternative liquid fuels in order to mitigate the disaster that is
> approaching as production from the world's oil wells slow down. It
> may already be happening. What will happen to world food prices when
> gasoline is $15 per gallon?
>
> Ben


Speculation, too. The real estate money (well, a good bit of it) ran
to the commodities market.


Dave

.... ..urtrig..

Uncle Ben wrote:

> The cost of food world-wide has risen mainly because of the cost of
> energy, mainly gasoline and diesel. These fuels have doubled in price
> in only a few years.

Hi,

Politely, let me call BS on that...

Food prices respond to EXACTLY the same forces oil prices do: SUPPLY AND
DEMAND.

The world can only supply so much of either at a given time. Yet we
continue, in a manner totally contrary to most of nature, to breed
ourselves into an excessive demand situation despite our supply not
rising at the same rate. You're a retired physicist/teacher, right? So
it should be no surprise to you to find that if "x" units of "supply"
divided by "y" number of "demanders" allows "z" units of supply per
demander, whenever you reduce "x" or increase "y" then "z" goes down,
too. If "z" must remain static for the system to "work," any change in
"x" or "y" is problematic, now, isn't it?

I appreciate everyone's tiny little efforts to "clean up this" or "use a
little less of that" but I'm afraid I cannot accept ANY solution that
doesn't also include a population control element is anything if not
partially to totally off base.

Rick

.... ..urtrig..

Uncle Ben wrote:

> The Indy cars run on methanol.

Hi,

Might want to check on that. IIRC, Indy cars completed the switch to
ethanol either last year or two years ago.

Lots of reasons were involved, economic, safety and political being
among them.

Regardless, what works on a track w/ vehicles that involve the
conditions of use and maintenance these cars see doesn't always play
well on the street.

Rick

..c.. ..n

On May 23, 3:25*pm, Rick Courtright <rcourtri...@iname.com> wrote:
> Uncle Ben wrote:
> > The cost of food world-wide has risen mainly because of the cost of
> > energy, mainly gasoline and diesel. *These fuels have doubled in price
> > in only a few years.
>
> Hi,
>
> Politely, let me call BS on that...
>
> Food prices respond to EXACTLY the same forces oil prices do: SUPPLY AND
> DEMAND.
>
Of course, and I accept that diversion of corn from food to fuel
exerts an upward price pressure on food. But we can get
quantitative. How much pressure?

The US Dept. of Ag. has done this analysis and concludes that it
contributes 5% of the rise in world food prices.

But that is not the only input to the equation. The occurence of
drought in the world this year -- Australia is a good example -- also
contributes. Lesser supply of corn, again, higher price.

But the main contribution is the dramatic rise in the cost of energy
in the form of gasoline for farmers and of natural gas for fertilizer
manufacturers. You know about gasoline. Did you know that natural
gas -- widely used in fertilizer manufacturing -- has tripled in price
in the last year or so? Costs must be p***ed through.

You cite population pressure. That is quite true in China and India,
where not only has the population risen but also the wealth of that
population and their ability to command world resources has risen
sharply. There are traffic jams in Beijing and Calcutta! Greater
demand -- higher price.

So we can do more than just say "supply and demand." We can analyze
the problem further and find the coefficients of the input variables.

> I appreciate everyone's tiny little efforts to "clean up this" or "use a
> little less of that" but I'm afraid I cannot accept ANY solution that
> doesn't also include a population control element is anything if not
> partially to totally off base.
>
If we stay on topic and confine ourselves to the price of energy, I
would say that the success of capitalism in China and India has led
their populations not only to increase in numbers but, more
importantly, in wealth. The US demands lots of energy because it is
wealthy. China and India are becoming wealthy, and they want lots of
energy too.

But then there is the problem of peak oil. Whether it is now or in
twenty years, the oil wells of the world will start gradually to peter
out. A few large discoveries will postpone the day, but the day will
come when oil is just too scarce to burn for transportation. We will
use it for pharmaceuticals and other high value products.

So that is why we are starting to prepare for the future by exploring
biofuels. Some of us are eager to explore them now; others will be
dragged kicking and screaming into the game. When gasoline is $30 per
gallon, everybody will come on board.

Ben

..c.. ..n

On May 23, 3:33*pm, Rick Courtright <rcourtri...@iname.com> wrote:
> Uncle Ben wrote:
> > The Indy cars run on methanol.
>
> Hi,
>
> Might want to check on that. IIRC, Indy cars completed the switch to
> ethanol either last year or two years ago.
>
You may be right!

Ben

..p..

clare at snyder dot ontario dot canada May 22, 2008 at 10:13 PM wrote:


>On Thu, 22 May 2008 17:36:28 -0700 (PDT), Uncle Ben <ben@greenba.com>
wrote:

>>On May 22, 5:46 pm, clare at snyder dot ontario dot canada wrote:
>>>
>>> I just wish you didn't expect the rest of the country (and the world)
>>> to pay for your "elixir" in higher food prices.
>>>
>>
>>The cost of food world-wide has risen mainly because of the cost of
>>energy, mainly gasoline and diesel. These fuels have doubled in price
>>in only a few years.
>>
>>The US Dept. of Agriculture estimates that diversion of corn to
>>ethanol production is at most responsible for a 5% rise in the cost of
>>food.
>>
>>Clare, look further ahead! The price of oil is not going to go back
>>to where it was. The world is running out of cheap oil. We need
>>alternative liquid fuels in order to mitigate the disaster that is
>>approaching as production from the world's oil wells slow down. It
>>may already be happening. What will happen to world food prices when
>>gasoline is $15 per gallon?
>>
>>Ben
>If the price of Gasoline was $100 a gallon and we were producing
>ethanol from non-food crops, and particularly from low fertilizer
>intensive non-food crops(like legume straw) and waste, food prices
>would not be as high as they are today (***uming the cost of natural
>gas used to produce fertilizer did not follow the gasoline price)

>The USDA estimates re the cost of feedgrains due to ethanol production
>WILL be found to be grossly understated. I have farmer friends. The
>fuel price is not NEARLY the whole picture. The fertilizer price
>definitely comes into it - but vast increases in the production of
>corn means a LOT more fertilizer is required - which puts the price up
>even more than it would be just because of the oil price.

>Using foodgrains for fuel is criminally irrisponsible in today's
>world.Particularly as in-efficient a plant as corn.
>** Posted from http://www.teranews.com

Agree with all you both said. Here in Oz we're moving closer to mandatory
E10. Overall fuel prices have risen roughly 30% here YTD, however for
diesel and LPG it's more like 40%. Knock on effect for farmers is worse,
with urea, ammonium nitrate and other chemicals mostly rising 50-100% over
the last 12 months largely due to higher input and transport costs. Some
estimate that their total costs per hectare (or acre) have almost
*doubled* over the last two years with only a small increase in returns at
the farm gate. That's a real world scenario and food crop space lost to
ethanol isn't even a major factor here yet! Cheers



--
Message posted using http://www.talkaboutautos.com/group/alt.autos.subaru/
More information at http://www.talkaboutautos.com/faq.html

..

"clare at snyder dot ontario dot canada" wrote in message
news:f0qb34h0lpnlftfcei0c9i44qjoa5cp3c9@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 22 May 2008 13:53:34 -0700 (PDT), Uncle Ben <ben@greenba.com>
> wrote:
>
>>On May 22, 3:56 pm, "Aage M Hollander" <h...@localnet.com> wrote:
>>> My 1999 Sub legacy St.Wgn(4 cyl,Not an Outback),allows use of 10%
>>> Ethanol by
>>> the book.Allstations here have 15% ethanol,could I use this ??
>>
>>I don't know why the car manuals say that. Brazilian cars all use
>>ethanol up to 24% without a problem.
>>
>>My manual (1999 OBW) says the same thing, but I'm running E60 (60%
>>eth) after an after-market conversion and plan to go to E85. I think
>>the lawyers make them say that.
>>
>>Try it and watch your check-engine light. If it doesn't go on after
>>100 miles, forget about it and enjoy the improved acceleration. You
>>will probably get fewer mpg but more mpd (miles per dollar).
>>
>>Ben
> And without conversion most cars will NOT see any better
> accelleration. ANd with E15 being the only game in town, it will sell
> for the same price as any other gasoline-type fuel, so no improvement
> in miles per dollar.
>
> Here in Ontario E10 or E15 or E0 all sells for the same price, and in
> many cases you have no way (short of the phase separation test) to
> know WHAT you are buying.
>
>
> If burning Ethanol makes you feel good, fine - but in MOST cases in
> Canada and most of the states, expecting any fuel savings or improved
> performance is a pipe dream.
>
> I just wish you didn't expect the rest of the country (and the world)
> to pay for your "elixir" in higher food prices.
> ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

Not totally true. If you have a turbocharged car, some ethanol can improve
performance because it increases the AKI of the fuel.

..a.. .. ..yd.. ..t ..tar.. ..t ..na..

On Mon, 26 May 2008 23:48:07 GMT, "JD" <me@home.ca> wrote:

>
>"clare at snyder dot ontario dot canada" wrote in message
>news:f0qb34h0lpnlftfcei0c9i44qjoa5cp3c9@4ax.com.. .
>> On Thu, 22 May 2008 13:53:34 -0700 (PDT), Uncle Ben <ben@greenba.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On May 22, 3:56 pm, "Aage M Hollander" <h...@localnet.com> wrote:
>>>> My 1999 Sub legacy St.Wgn(4 cyl,Not an Outback),allows use of 10%
>>>> Ethanol by
>>>> the book.Allstations here have 15% ethanol,could I use this ??
>>>
>>>I don't know why the car manuals say that. Brazilian cars all use
>>>ethanol up to 24% without a problem.
>>>
>>>My manual (1999 OBW) says the same thing, but I'm running E60 (60%
>>>eth) after an after-market conversion and plan to go to E85. I think
>>>the lawyers make them say that.
>>>
>>>Try it and watch your check-engine light. If it doesn't go on after
>>>100 miles, forget about it and enjoy the improved acceleration. You
>>>will probably get fewer mpg but more mpd (miles per dollar).
>>>
>>>Ben
>> And without conversion most cars will NOT see any better
>> accelleration. ANd with E15 being the only game in town, it will sell
>> for the same price as any other gasoline-type fuel, so no improvement
>> in miles per dollar.
>>
>> Here in Ontario E10 or E15 or E0 all sells for the same price, and in
>> many cases you have no way (short of the phase separation test) to
>> know WHAT you are buying.
>>
>>
>> If burning Ethanol makes you feel good, fine - but in MOST cases in
>> Canada and most of the states, expecting any fuel savings or improved
>> performance is a pipe dream.
>>
>> I just wish you didn't expect the rest of the country (and the world)
>> to pay for your "elixir" in higher food prices.
>> ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
>
>Not totally true. If you have a turbocharged car, some ethanol can improve
>performance because it increases the AKI of the fuel.
The ethanol is used to bring the fuel TO the minimum octane rating. If
you buy 87 octane E0 or 87 Octane E15, your AKI is virtually the same.
If you are running a Turbo engine you will be running premium gas for
maximum performance and fuel economy - and again, 93 octane Eo, E10,
and E15 have the same AKI value.

I stand by my previous statement.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

..ul.. ..salaska.n..

On May 22, 11:56*am, "Aage M Hollander" <h...@localnet.com> wrote:
> My 1999 Sub legacy St.Wgn(4 cyl,Not an Outback),allows use of 10% Ethanol by
> the book.Allstations here have 15% ethanol,could I use this ??

URGENT CAUTION: fuel tank liner failure

My 83 and 87 Subaru wagons have both experienced failure of the fuel
tank liner. Tiny little white particles settle in the tank,
repeatedly clog up the fuel filters, resulting in bucking and kicking
under acceleration, hill climbing and high speeds. Runs fine when
standing still. Before I correctly diagnosed fuel contamination,
replacing the fuel filter solved the problem, but with decreasing
times between changes -- in the end, only a couple of days before the
fuel intake line sucked up more liner particles and clogged the
filter. The solution was a $600 steam cleaning of the fuel tank and
the 87 runs fine (the 83 went to junkyard heaven before I figured it
out).

A friend is experiencing the same symptoms with a 1999 Lexus which
used 10% ethanol for 5 years. He will check it out on return from
travel.

These problems coincided in time with EPA-required oxygenated gasoline
for Anchorage, Alaska from 1992 to 2004. MTBE was added from 1992-3,
and 10% ethanol from 1995-2004. Anchorage attained CO levels below
EPA maximums in 2004 and ethanol went away.

I cannot conclude definitively that fuel oxygenation caused my
gasoline tank liner failures. But manufacturers of 83 and 87 fuel
tanks could not, I think have anticipated mandatory oxy-fuels and test
for delayed chemical reactions in their tanks (and altered their
products if adverse reactions occurred). IF YOU EXPERIENCE THESE FUEL
STARVATION SYMPTOMS WHILE USING OXY-FUEL, HAVE THE FUEL FILTER
INSPECTED CLOSELY IMMEDIATELY, AND SIPHON SAMPLES FROM THE BOTTOM OF
THE TANK IF INDICATED.

Paul Todd, Anchorage AK