# Will biodiesel become hard to avoid like ethanol blend gas?



## jalaner (Dec 28, 2013)

My state has recently expanded ethanol tax breaks to also cover biodiesel. The tax incentives include a 25% break for fuel retailers who invest in infrastructure for production and distribution of biofuels. My local Walmart has already taken advantage by switching to B20 only. I didn't notice the small decal stating the biodiesel content until I pumped about $10. It was just posted as diesel on the sign. The 3.5 page warning about the pitfalls of biodiesel in my 2014 CTD Owners Manual, Pages 9-59 to 9-62, has me convinced I will not use biodiesel if possible. Like ethanol, biodiesel does not protect the environment in any way. Special interest groups lobby for these laws so they can make an inferior product and shove it down the throats of consumers. I think that restaurants should dispose of grease in some useful way, just not through my nice new car.


----------



## Jim Frye (Mar 16, 2011)

The local public transportation authority (public buses) are running a bunch of their diesel units on biodiesel. They even have some new hybrid units that burn it. It's a bit strange following them in traffic. It's like following a McDonalds down the street. Diesel is consistantly $.70 a gallon more than 87 E10 here, but I don't know what biodiesel is going for.


----------



## hulkss (Jan 30, 2014)

Minnesota requires 5% biodiesel year round. I had no trouble finding fuel rated to -40F cold filter plug point this winter. I just had my used motor oil tested by Blackstone Labs after running through the winter months and there was no measurable fuel dilution of the oil (bio diesel has caused motor oil fuel dilution in some engine designs). In addition, 5% biodiesel has been proven to add lubricity to the fuel and increase fuel pump life - actually better lubricity than most aftermarket additives. Minnesota will be changing to 10% bio in the summer and staying at 5% bio in the winter. Should be a non-issue. More that 5% in the winter is a problem and I would not want higher than 10% in the summer so this looks good to me.


----------



## spacedout (Dec 7, 2010)

Straight Biodiesel does not run as well at low temperatures, it also can clog filters since it cleans crap just like ethanol does. Last I heard the Cruze deisel can run upto B20, so I suspect you will have no issues what so ever.


----------



## PanJet (Jun 18, 2013)

jalaner said:


> My state has recently expanded ethanol tax breaks to also cover biodiesel. The tax incentives include a 25% break for fuel retailers who invest in infrastructure for production and distribution of biofuels. My local Walmart has already taken advantage by switching to B20 only. I didn't notice the small decal stating the biodiesel content until I pumped about $10. It was just posted as diesel on the sign. The 3.5 page warning about the pitfalls of biodiesel in my 2014 CTD Owners Manual, Pages 9-59 to 9-62, has me convinced I will not use biodiesel if possible. Like ethanol, biodiesel does not protect the environment in any way. Special interest groups lobby for these laws so they can make an inferior product and shove it down the throats of consumers. I think that restaurants should dispose of grease in some useful way, just not through my nice new car.


The only real issue that I'm aware of with biodiesel is the increased potential for cylinder wash and subsequent oil dilution because of DPF regens. So far, however, no one who has done an oil analysis has shown any real issues with this on the Cruze diesel. 

If you're following your normal servicing schedule it should be fine. If you were using a full B20 all the time, I'd perhaps do an oil analysis on your used oil to see if there is any significant increase in oil dilution.


----------



## PanJet (Jun 18, 2013)

jalaner said:


> The 3.5 page warning about the pitfalls of biodiesel in my 2014 CTD Owners Manual, Pages 9-59 to 9-62, has me convinced I will not use biodiesel if possible.


I'm not sure how you read this to be a "3.5 page warning about the pitfalls of biodiesel." In fact, I can't find a single "pitfall" listed. There is about one paragraph in this section about it basically saying don't use higher than B20, most likely for the reasons I just described in the last post. The engine has been rated to B20, so that's all GM is going to stick their neck out to support in the owner's manual. How is that such a dire warning?


----------



## Luigi (Jun 16, 2013)

Personally, I dont trust B20 fuel, which is practically the only thing that Illinois sells. Thankfully I am close enough to the border that I can cross state lines to get my fuel without much hassle.


----------



## Zenturi (Jan 25, 2014)

PanJet said:


> There is about one paragraph in this section about it basically saying don't use higher than B20, most likely for the reasons I just described in the last post. The engine has been rated to B20, so that's all GM is going to stick their neck out to support in the owner's manual. How is that such a dire warning?


In a literal sense that's true. But I definately get the "feel" from how the owners manual discussed B20, that GM isn't enthusiastic about it.


----------



## jalaner (Dec 28, 2013)

Retailers do not even have to label biodiesel unless it exceeds 5% so it can be assumed that most unlabeled diesel will contain 5%. It's just cheaper, especially after the tax breaks. My CTD Owners Manual states that Biodiesel quality varies, goes rancid if left in the tank too long, gels sooner, > 5% should be avoided in cold temperatures, should not be alternated with non biodiesel, degrades the water separator and should be BQ 9000 certified. Perhaps my manual is different than PanJets'. South Carolina also has a new law that makes retailers immune from vehicle and equipment damage caused by biodiesel. All diesel sold in SC must be formulated so that biodiesel can be added later. Like ethanol, biodiesel contains less energy than fossil diesel. Some people may have no problems with special interest groups making their fuel choices, but I do. Ethanol was mandated after ADM and Monsanto needed and lobbied for a new market for their bioengineered crops. It requires 2 gallons of fossil fuels to grow the crops, process and distribute 1 gallon of ethanol. Its just a scam that requires taxpayer support to be cost effective. I have a BMW 740i, designed in the 1990s, that does not operate properly (frequent sensor burn out) on E10. This forces me to pay much for more for gas. I guess I will also have to pay more to have quality diesel.


----------



## Luigi (Jun 16, 2013)

jalaner said:


> I have a BMW 740i, designed in the 1990s, that does not operate properly (frequent sensor burn out) on E10. This forces me to pay much for more for gas. I guess I will also have to pay more to have quality diesel.


I wish it were that simple for diesel. But unfortunately you usually have to talk to a manager just to find out what kind of diesel it is, and what additives it has. 


Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App


----------



## BradHerr (Sep 29, 2013)

I had to put B5-B20 (the pump just had that range on it) in my CTD this morning at a Love's truck stop. I was at 796.3 miles on my tank and that was the only station for a while. 

It has affected my mileage negatively. I am at 48.4 mpg on my 25 mile Eco screen, on a stretch of road that consistently sees ~55 mpg. 
I can't wait to burn this crap out of my tank. 


-Brad


----------



## Edward (Apr 10, 2014)

I noticed absolutely no difference with B20. Maybe half a mpg difference with 2/3 tank.


----------



## Tomko (Jun 1, 2013)

Edward said:


> I noticed absolutely no difference with B20. Maybe half a mpg difference with 2/3 tank.


Where did you get B20?


----------



## BradHerr (Sep 29, 2013)

Edward said:


> I noticed absolutely no difference with B20. Maybe half a mpg difference with 2/3 tank.


 I think there may have been other circumstances that led to my initial low mileage. The rest of the tank recovered and fell right in line with my expectations. 


-Brad


----------



## danhr (Apr 19, 2014)

Comparing biodiesel to regular diesel like ethanol to non-ethanol gas really is an apples to oranges analogy.

If I could justify ditching my DPF, I'd run B100 as long as I could. I did in two previous diesel trucks. Especially with switching to ULS fuel, I will take all the lubricity I can get . Sure it cost me $10 in fuel filters


----------



## jalaner (Dec 28, 2013)

Biodiesel may increase engine lubrication and decrease wear in the short run but the water content causes increased corrosion in cast iron engine blocks and wear in the long term. Both biodiesel and ethanol contain less energy than gas or diesel, both increase the amount of water in the fuel system. Both are only cost effective after taxpayers subsidize their production. Both require more than 1 gallon of fuel to produce, refine, and distribute each gallon of biofuel. They are used in fuel only because the agribusiness lobby needed a captive market for their hard to sell bioengineered soybeans (biodiesel) and corn (ethanol). I don't like being forced to subsidize production of these fuels, and then forced to buy them just to increase profits for Cargill, ADM and Monsanto. If these biofuels were not harmful to cars why would the fuel retailers need to lobby state legislatures to pass laws that immunize them from the equipment damage liability?


----------



## danhr (Apr 19, 2014)

jalaner said:


> Biodiesel may increase engine lubrication and decrease wear in the short run but the water content causes increased corrosion in cast iron engine blocks and wear in the long term. Both biodiesel and ethanol contain less energy than gas or diesel, both increase the amount of water in the fuel system. Both are only cost effective after taxpayers subsidize their production. Both require more than 1 gallon of fuel to produce, refine, and distribute each gallon of biofuel. They are used in fuel only because the agribusiness lobby needed a captive market for their hard to sell bioengineered soybeans (biodiesel) and corn (ethanol). I don't like being forced to subsidize production of these fuels, and then forced to buy them just to increase profits for Cargill, ADM and Monsanto. If these biofuels were not harmful to cars why would the fuel retailers need to lobby state legislatures to pass laws that immunize them from the equipment damage liability?


They increase the amount of water in the fuel tank. Not the fuel system. Readdress the fuel filter with something that actually works and you are in business.

And yes, if the only way you measure energy is the btu/gallon, than they do have less energy than their counterparts. but that's not the only way to determine a fuel's efficiency level, now is it? Biodiesel, when properly made, easily meets the minimum 40 cetane level (typically in the upper 40s-mid 50s), so it isn't any more harmful than what you can get at the pump. The only thing you have to pay attention to is the higher cloud/gel levels, but that is easily countered with blending with regular diesel.

As far as ethanol goes, yes, again it has a lower btu/gal rating, but it also has a 110 octane level, as opposed to 89-93, that you would typically get at the pump. This results in a ~20% gain in power, due to the ability to throw more timing without getting any knock. Look at the drag racers, like the new craze x275. Everyone and their mother is running corn. It's 2.xx/gal compared to 15/gallon for race fuel, and does the same thing. (and it even keeps the pistons and exhaust nice and clean, you don't even have any carbon). 

Pay attention all you want to the politics end of it, I will be the first to say I don't know .02 of that end of it, and frankly, I don't care to. All I care about is the end consumer, me. I want the best bang for my buck.


----------



## jalaner (Dec 28, 2013)

I spent $1500 on 4 new emissions sensors for my 67K mile, pampered, 2001 BMW 740i. According to my excellent BMW mechanic the premature failure was caused by ethanol gas. No further problems as long as I buy $4 plus E0. Also had to replace 2 lawn mowers. So combined with the reduced fuel economy E10 has not provided much bang for the buck for me. Buying a CTD only makes economic sense if it lasts longer than a gasser so I plan to avoid B20 for as long as possible. I can't avoid B5 because it is not labeled. I also object to fuels that increase my carbon footprint. Production of 1 gallon of ethanol uses more than 1 gallon of oil so the carbon emissions are doubled when the ethanol is burned for auto fuel. Only time will tell if I am correct about the folly of biodiesel.


----------



## DrKlahn (Feb 10, 2014)

danhr said:


> They increase the amount of water in the fuel tank. Not the fuel system. Readdress the fuel filter with something that actually works and you are in business.
> 
> And yes, if the only way you measure energy is the btu/gallon, than they do have less energy than their counterparts. but that's not the only way to determine a fuel's efficiency level, now is it? Biodiesel, when properly made, easily meets the minimum 40 cetane level (typically in the upper 40s-mid 50s), so it isn't any more harmful than what you can get at the pump. The only thing you have to pay attention to is the higher cloud/gel levels, but that is easily countered with blending with regular diesel.
> 
> ...


There is no way you are seeing a 20% increase in power with spark advance and ethanol on a normal car. You'd be lucky to see 5%. Even with good premium gas you'll hit a point on a naturally aspirated street car that more timing simply doesn't add power (and there still is no knock). To properly utilize ethanol you either need a higher compression ratio or a boosted application tuned to use it. The problem with compression ratio in a naturally aspirated application optimized for ethanol is that it would need to be increased enough that you would not be able to run pump gas. The boosted scenario increases boost pressure and fuel delivery according to E85's characteristics. These changes in boost and tuning are far more radical than what your flex fuel ECM does on a normal street car.


----------



## danhr (Apr 19, 2014)

20% is fairly common in the turbo cars I see on the dyno. On a n/a setup, it's usually 5-10%... depending on the setup. Pretty sure any modern ecm/pcm can handle it. If they can make carburetors work with e85, i'm pretty sure you can get just about anything to work with it. I never had a problem getting anything to switch over to e85. Maybe you just need a hand using your tuning software? Head over to yellowbullet or the hptuners forum. You would probably learn a thing or two over there.


----------



## DrKlahn (Feb 10, 2014)

danhr said:


> 20% is fairly common in the turbo cars I see on the dyno. On a n/a setup, it's usually 5-10%... depending on the setup. Pretty sure any modern ecm/pcm can handle it. If they can make carburetors work with e85, i'm pretty sure you can get just about anything to work with it. I never had a problem getting anything to switch over to e85. Maybe you just need a hand using your tuning software? Head over to yellowbullet or the hptuners forum. You would probably learn a thing or two over there.


If you tune a boosted application specifically for E85 you can see those numbers. The ECM parameters however will be changed to the point you can no longer run on gas. Guys that do this generally reflash to switch back and forth or run only E85. A normal car with a factory tune will be a *very* conservative tune that will allow it to run on everything under the sun and even a mixture of fuel.

You're not going to see a gain on an NA setup unless premium unleaded was causing a knock condition. E85 or even race gas isn't going to do squat if the engine wasn't pulling timing to begin with. And a few degrees of timing isn't going to see a huge gain.


----------



## danhr (Apr 19, 2014)

DrKlahn said:


> If you tune a boosted application specifically for E85 you can see those numbers. The ECM parameters however will be changed to the point you can no longer run on gas. Guys that do this generally reflash to switch back and forth or run only E85. A normal car with a factory tune will be a *very* conservative tune that will allow it to run on everything under the sun and even a mixture of fuel.
> 
> You're not going to see a gain on an NA setup unless premium unleaded was causing a knock condition. E85 or even race gas isn't going to do squat if the engine wasn't pulling timing to begin with. And a few degrees of timing isn't going to see a huge gain.


You do realize there are multiple tables, right?

And here. +32rwhp/+21rwtq going from premium to e85. Car is a mild heads/cam ls1. E85 pull even had some false knock in it and it pulled some timing, so there still could be a little more in it, but you get the jist of it.


----------



## DrKlahn (Feb 10, 2014)

danhr said:


> You do realize there are multiple tables, right?
> 
> And here. +32rwhp/+21rwtq going from premium to e85. Car is a mild heads/cam ls1. E85 pull even had some false knock in it and it pulled some timing, so there still could be a little more in it, but you get the jist of it.
> 
> ...


Yes I do realize there are multiple tables for spark. If you are seeing knock on premium you will see power from E85 or race gas. The main point is that E10/E15/E85 will have a significant mileage penalty that is not offset by extra power in the cars we're talking about. The cars we're discussing are designed to run 87 on up. They're everyday cars running the factory tune.

Sure a heads/cam LSx can see compression high enough to benefit from E85 depending on the setup, but a modified LSx is not what you drive off the lot. A normal sedan is not going to see a power increase even close to what you're seeing there. The compression isn't high enough to see much, if any, benefit. A normal sedan running a boosted engine won't be running a tune, fuel system or be built to see the numbers you see from a modified E85 setup. 

Let's not lose sight of the main discussion, which is the economy impact of bio-fuels. You can probably engineer a motor with high enough compression to gain back the fuel efficiency lost with ethanol, but you would lose the ability to run lower octane fuels. Which is why this isn't being done. If you want to talk about the merits of E85 as something to add power to a modified setup, that's great. I own an LS1 running milled TFS 215's and have entertained switching to E85 and going with a centrifugal supercharger (along with a blower cam). But again in the context of the Cruze and the impact of fuel economy, ethanol is loss and it's octane benefits aren't there.


----------



## danhr (Apr 19, 2014)

DrKlahn said:


> Yes I do realize there are multiple tables for spark. If you are seeing knock on premium you will see power from E85 or race gas. The main point is that E10/E15/E85 will have a significant mileage penalty that is not offset by extra power in the cars we're talking about. The cars we're discussing are designed to run 87 on up. They're everyday cars running the factory tune.
> 
> Sure a heads/cam LSx can see compression high enough to benefit from E85 depending on the setup, but a modified LSx is not what you drive off the lot. A normal sedan is not going to see a power increase even close to what you're seeing there. The compression isn't high enough to see much, if any, benefit. A normal sedan running a boosted engine won't be running a tune, fuel system or be built to see the numbers you see from a modified E85 setup.
> 
> Let's not lose sight of the main discussion, which is the economy impact of bio-fuels. You can probably engineer a motor with high enough compression to gain back the fuel efficiency lost with ethanol, but you would lose the ability to run lower octane fuels. Which is why this isn't being done. If you want to talk about the merits of E85 as something to add power to a modified setup, that's great. I own an LS1 running milled TFS 215's and have entertained switching to E85 and going with a centrifugal supercharger (along with a blower cam). But again in the context of the Cruze and the impact of fuel economy, ethanol is loss and it's octane benefits aren't there.


The first dyno chart, there was no knock. And it still gained power. So that throws out your first statement

second off, the car had stock cc heads, so it was stock compression. That is stock, off the show room floor, every day car compression. so you can null your second statement there

3rd, if you actually go back to what I originally said, before you decided to attempt to make it look like you knew what you were talking about, I never once said everyday economy cars, like the cruze, should run e85. You just decided to put that into my mouth. I said, comparing biodiesel to diesel like ethanol to gas is an apples to oranges comparison. Each one of those fuels has their own place/purpose. Condemning biodiesel or ethanol because you think they add water or they are against your political beliefs is just plain ignorance. Like why do they even make dpf/urea systems for "clean diesels" when an unfiltered "dirty" diesel still puts out a little more than half the hydrocarbons per mile as gasoline. Why is e85 considered the "clean and green" fuel when it produces more hydrocarbons than diesel or gasoline per mile.


----------



## jalaner (Dec 28, 2013)

E85 is considered clean and green because the biofuel industry propaganda states that it is to obtain taxpayer subsidies. They have tricked the poorly informed public into believing it. Ethanol and other oxygenated fuels have reduced emissions for only one pollutant, carbon monoxide, and it is adequately controlled by the catalytic converter which converts it to carbon dioxide. The CTD urea system reduces nitrogen oxides which are very toxic at low levels in air. Diesel engines produce more nitrogen oxides because diesel fuel contains a lot of nitrogen which is oxidized in the combustion chamber. Diesels produce much less hydrocarbon emissions because diesel fuel contains much lower levels of volatile hydrocarbons than gas or alcohol. The negative information that I included about biofuels is science, not a political belief. I'm simply using my chemistry background to inform the forum about the long term damage biodiesel use will cause. GM also has similar warnings in the CTD Owners Manual. I plan to heed these warnings.


----------



## DrKlahn (Feb 10, 2014)

danhr said:


> The first dyno chart, there was no knock. And it still gained power. So that throws out your first statement
> 
> second off, the car had stock cc heads, so it was stock compression. That is stock, off the show room floor, every day car compression. so you can null your second statement there
> 
> 3rd, if you actually go back to what I originally said, before you decided to attempt to make it look like you knew what you were talking about, I never once said everyday economy cars, like the cruze, should run e85. You just decided to put that into my mouth. I said, comparing biodiesel to diesel like ethanol to gas is an apples to oranges comparison. Each one of those fuels has their own place/purpose. Condemning biodiesel or ethanol because you think they add water or they are against your political beliefs is just plain ignorance. Like why do they even make dpf/urea systems for "clean diesels" when an unfiltered "dirty" diesel still puts out a little more than half the hydrocarbons per mile as gasoline. Why is e85 considered the "clean and green" fuel when it produces more hydrocarbons than diesel or gasoline per mile.


I don't see any reason for the rude tone. There is no log or data in what you posted showing the spark advance or knock. So I have no way of knowing if there was or wasn't knock. Nor do I know what the spark tables looked like before and after the tuning. You mentioned it was a heads/cam car. In the majority of cases where the heads get swapped compression gets bumped for the power increase. So I made an assumption with no data that this was probably the case here. 

Ethanol has less energy per volume than gas. Ethanol has higher octane. Higher octane by itself does not create more power. Octane in a practical sense indicates a fuels resistance to detonation under pressure. So if you are gaining power from a higher octane fuel, you were losing it because of knock/detonation with lower octane fuel. Just because the cylinder heads have the stock chamber size, does not mean this example is analogous to a normal sedan running a factory tune. The camshaft alone will change the dynamic compression.

What I was originally responding to was the statement that ethanol simply makes more power (I think you said 20%). In a normal car running a normal tune it doesn't make any substantial impact. I agree with you that it can make power when you are specifically changing the car to better utilize it. I don't have a political bent for or against bio fuels. It just has to make sense from a production and efficiency standpoint. In my experience ethanol doesn't. I haven't noticed any deficiencies with a biodiesel blend yet.


----------

