Modern Vespa

Some of us, especially sustainable growers don't consider GMO corn to be food! I'm not saying I support ethanol. I also find it interesting that Europe wants nothing to do with those modified crops.

I'd love to see this on a dyno....Three of us think we percieve a difference in performance. Anecdotal but I'm glad to have the option.

How much of Italy and the rest of Europe uses ethanol?

Is the mapping for the US different on ie models? No conspiracies or whipping boys here, just concerns over the sense in using potential food crop land for financially upside down technologies.

Exactly!
"The federal motor fuel excise tax on gasohol, a blended fuel of 10-percent ethanol and 90-percent gasoline, is 5.4 cents less per gallon than the tax on straight gasoline. In other words, the federal subsidy is 54 cents per gallon of ethanol when the ethanol is blended with gasoline. The subsidy makes ethanol-blended fuel competitive in the marketplace and stimulates the growth of an ethanol production and distribution infrastructure." from http://www.oregon.gov/ENERGY/RENEW/Biomass/Cost.shtml

The article does not address what you are questioning, but the issues of damage to given categories of engines/fuel systems. That's what I was posting about. My point is that from a "safety" or EtOH related damage/malfunction in land vehicle internal combustion engines, the article has no relevance, and I explained why.

As far as the issues you wish to address, that's a whole other ball of wax, and you can feel free to dabate that to your heart's content. It just has no relevence to what the WSJ article was specifically talking about or whether the issues the WSJ was addressing pertained to "Some ethanol concerns may apply to scooters".

Thanks Al,

I'm really not looking to debate. It's really more of a curiosity. It only costs me $0.20/gallon more to use unoxygenated fuel in my GTS and lawn equipment.

Regards,
Doubting Thomas

okay, let me preface this by saying i am from iowa, i grew up on a corn farm, i understand how corn works, and i am 100% against gmo foods.

i understand how gmo crops pretty much take over and contaminate any non gmo strain. i've also seen firsthand how this can let monsanto, etc. file lawsuits against farmers for said contamination. i have personal family friends it has happened to.

so, i'm not arguing politics of the issue in that regard.

my question is, has there ever been any evidence that eating gmo food is really bad for you? i've read the 10,000 conspiracy websites claiming gloom and doom, but has anyone ever without a doubt, clinically, been proven to have gotten cancer, etc. from gmo foods?

all i ever see is speculation, not any clinical facts. i'd be interested to know.

Yu won't get any alarmist reactions from me, I just have what I consider a healthy amount of mistrust. As a kid I sat on the front lawn when the DDT trucks fogged on by. I'm just supporting reasonable science. Unfortunately even science has been mired in politics. I don't understand what the big hurry is. Lets get some data. I doubt the EU is basing their import decision on hysteria! But then you'll find a fair number that will refer to me as one of those Euro types.

A good friend has an organic/sustainable lawn care business and current or past council for Monsanto (not sure which?) insists on a chemical free yard and garden. I found that interesting.

thanks for the conversation. your story reminds of the story cell phone ceo who went nuts when they treid to put up a tower next to his house.

did you ever see food, inc. or the future of food? both good movies. i think food, inc is on hulu if you haven't seen it.

Sorry my friend.

Politics will always trump reality.

My body has been using food for fuel for 32 years !

you don't look a day over 30, cha-chi.

Yes I have both, thanks! I'm rather passionate about the issues, so this is a good exercise in shutting TFU for me.

But I'd rather have my corn on the cob, not in my gas tank...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This topic is one of the reasons the internet is annoying. There is so much misinformation.

California is about 5.7 percent ethanol in gas (at least) by law and no station sells more than 10 because that would void warranties, check your cars owners manual and post if it say otherwise. I believe the national average is 5%.

They still use benzene in gas, that is one of the major components.

You can't run a carb'ed engine on ethanol (E85)for a long period. From personal experience, in my scoot, my truck and a small generator, the ethanol dissolves the aluminum then when the fuel evaporates is leaves this behind and makes a thick white paste/jello which clogs the carb. I drove 3000 miles on my scoot on ethanol and 7000 miles in my '71 ford pickup on ethanol.
If you want to do this, you need to protect the aluminum, which I have not figured out how to do...yet.

Three years, over 50 different cars, 10,000 gallons of ethanol. I have not seen a problem with water. I have even used a 50/50 mix of gas and 193 proof ethanol (ends up around 2%) water, no problems.

If you are worried about food vs fuel check this out
http://www.instructables.com/id/How-to-save-the-world_1

There are more than 2 stations in CA that sell E85
http://e85prices.com/e85map.php

I was wondering why my Petcock was going bad!!!

i think they may be bad, but there would not be enough food without the gmo strains. norman borlaug saved a lot of people with those rice strains. maybe it will bit us in the ass (i don't know) but right now i think the world needs them.

Personally I've no problem with GM foods. Lets face it, most of our food is genetically selected (bred for the job) anyway. Directly modifying merely speeds up the process to get the result *now* rather than in 100 years time.

What I do not want is meat with traces of growth hormones in it.

Beleive me, after carefully reading the data you'd not want to eat GM foods either.

I pretty much eat anything that dosent eat me first

I was genetically selected.
Maybe the reason I ride a Vespa.

But guys!
We can make pure gasoline from air water and a small nuclear plant.
No corn or McDonalds needed.
Takes C02 out of the atmosphere too. (Don't tell Oily Owl Whore)
No sulfur either.

Check it out from Los Alamos National Laboratory
http://www.lanl.gov/news/newsbulletin/pdf/Green_Freedom_Overview.pdf

http://www.lanl.gov/news/index.php/fuseaction/home.story/story_id/12554

quick question regarding the ethanol issue...

I found a gas station in Charleston, SC that sells ethanol-free fuel. However, the twist as far as MV's go is that it is not premium ... it is 89 (US octane rating).

Anyone have an opinion on whether it is best to go lower octane w/no ethanol OR don't worry about ethanol and continue w/higher octane (93 available in my area)?

But is it better to go with no ethanol lower octane (89 US rating), or 10% ehtanol higher octane (93 US rating).

Here's a site that I use to get just pure gas:

http://pure-gas.org/index.jsp

If you know of any others let me know.

Cheers,
Tross

MARCO the head Piaggio tech says 89 is just fine (ethanol and non ethanol) and since he has over 40yrs experience i would go with him rather than what's in the manuals or what anyone says.

I'd go the 89 w/o ethanol.

Grazie!

Gas in USA is limited to 10 % ethanol, there are very good techical reasons for this. Ethanol has much less energy content than gasoline, and requires a much richer mixture. Cars use oxygen sensors and a feedback loop to regulate the mixture, and can adapt somewhat. Small engines and nearly all bikes can't adjust the mixture on the fly like that. If they are calibrated to run on E0 (no ethanol gas) they will start to run too lean of used with more than 10% ethanol., and overheat or run poorly. Materials compatibilty is also an issue. Rubber and other elastomers tend to swell from ethanol exposure, the swelling is worst at about 20-25 % ethanol. some materials that are fine in E85 will fail when exposed to E25. The ethanol has a synergistic swelling effect when combined with gasoline in those ratios.

20% ethanol in Minnesota will never be approved. This was just a political stunt to appease the agribusiness lobby. For it to be a legal fuel for road use it needs to be shown to be "substantially similar" to gasoline, which it isn't. The EPA's substantially similar rule requres an alternative fuel to be shown to run ok in engines and vehicles without causing them to fail emissions standards. Running 20 % ethanol in a bike or small engine will cause it to run way too lean and not meet emissions regulations. Gas station fuel pumps are generally not certified to use anything more than 10% ethanol also.
Even if an engine was designed and calibrated to run ok on e20, it could not run on E0 gas without being way too rich. Small engines and biks are generally calibrated with 5-7% ethanol, so they will still run OK on E0 or E10. An engine with no oxygen sensor and automatic mixture control can only handle about a 10% variation in ethanol content.
E85 picks up a lot of moisture from the air, and would not be a good choice for a bike that isnt used during the winter. The E85 would turn to gel if it sat that long. I've seen a lawnmower modified to run on E85, and thats what happened to it over the winter.

There is some interest in using Butanol as a fuel instead of ethanol, it will not mix with water like ethanol does, and has an energy content more like gasoline. Butanol is an alcohol with more carbon atoms than ethanol, and can be made from biomass sources or existing ethanol plants can be modified to produce butanol instead of ethanol. Butanol was used for fuel during WWI and WWII, made from starch like potatoes via a fermentation process.

Refinery subsidies have been cut this week by congress. It will be interesting to watch and listen to where this goes.

About 10% in my highly unscientific experience of different tanks of gas.

FWIW, I am adamently against using food crops for ethanol. The economics are not there nor is the humanity. Food crops for people & animals not engines.

I agree. Government sponsored subsidies and encouragement for making ethanol out of a primary food source is obscene. I think most of us know it is to curry favor with mid-western votes. How stupid we have become...or how stupidly we let our elected politicians treat us. Brazil uses sugar beets grown specifically for ethanol production and there are many other materials that can be used to make ethanol, as terrible an engine fuel as it is...IMHO...ok...off the soapbox now.

Maybe some good news this year. Our local 76 station (Haleiwa) is getting a make over and were asking them to put in some REAL gas because the marina is across the street. Now that would be awesome. The one down the coast is always busy. Plus it's going to have a 24hr store and have the pumps open all nite. The first of it's kind out here (store and real gas). 8) 8)

Kewl

I came across this Piaggio Technical notice. Better read it. It looks like Piaggio has many scooter models that are NOT compatible with Ethanol.
The X9 500 is on the list. My X9 has had some starting issues for a month now. After extensive troubleshooting I narrowed it down to a leaky Fuel Injector.
It appears to be flooded when it sits for a while. I was fortunate to find ethanol free fuel but it's too late. The damage was done.

http://www.servicemotoguzzi.com/public/com_tech_X/comuGuzzi/Common/en/004-2011.pdf

http://www.acem.eu/cms/e10.php

In Italian
http://www.dsa.minambiente.it/DirettivaCarburanti/

This one has two PDF files. The one on the right is the list that are NOT compatible.

http://www.dsa.minambiente.it/DirettivaCarburanti/?s=comp&t=E10

http://www.fcai.com.au/environment/can-my-vehicle-operate-on-ethanol-blend-petrol-

Reads like 50, 125, 150, and 200 with carbs are not compatible?

Don't panic - the US never got the X9 500 - you got the X9 500 Evo, which *is* compatible.

I disagree. Read all the links. It is unlikely that Piaggio manufactured a different fuel system for the 500 and the 500 evo for ethanol compatibility.
Part numbers are similar on many fuel system components. Piaggio put out a blanket list of scooter models to protect themselves from being liable for component failures. I have one now with my fuel injector. I suspect the ethanol was the culprit.

If I remember right, the X9-500 had an older style injector while the X9-500 EVO had the new design of injector.
The X9-500 EVO is not on the list.

At least half of the South Dakota stations still offer non-ethanol gasoline in some grades, usually 'premium' (91 octane here) and 'regular' (85 octane) don't contain ethanol, with the mid-grade (87-88 octane) having 10%.

My poor brother in St. Paul owns about ten pre-1995 motorcycles and is in a constant fight to keep them running on Minnesota's shitty ethanol gasoline. He rebuilds the carbs on an annual basis.

Keep in mind that any motor vehicle made for the US market has to meet US standards, where the use of E10 has been in place for some 10 years or more. US market machines have to be made in discreet production runs specifically for the US market. The US does not receive "retread" EU market scooters.

EU market vehicles simply have to meet E5 standards, the max currently found here. That service bulletin is aimed towards what market? Wanna bet it's not the US? The vast majority of the vehicles are not US market. I would bet it's in prep for the introduction of E10 here in Europe. I had a US market Derbi GP1 in the US, ran it on E10 regularly for 3 years without problems, yet "All Derbi 50CC" is listed as "non-compliant".

As to whether manufacturer says a scooter is or is not "compatible with E10" is a matter of whether or not is had been specifically designed and tested for same. Lack of certification does not guarantee is will be damaged by E10. It is just that the manufacturer is not about to provide the OK for something it hasn't evaluated yet. It's called product liability, and any reputable, prudent firm measures twice and cuts once.