In California, a ballot measure known as Prop 87 is coming up for vote in November 2006. This measure is essentially a tax on California oil resources, much like is done in Texas and Alaska. This measure funds a bureaucracy (mischaracterized as a new bureaucracy, it already exists) to use part of the revenue to fund alternative energy research. As with any legislation, there are pro’s, con’s, and special interests. I don’t intend to debate this here, so I’ll get directly to my questions:
1. Does anyone currently use Flex-Fuel, E85 or other ethanol/methanol/gas blends. I suspect you'd be in the midwest or the east. Accessibility is a large problem. There are two E85 stations within 30 miles of my house. Neither is a public facility, research only.
2. Is anyone interested in running E85 or other ethanol/methanol/gas blends either for the track or in everyday use? It's a well known fact ethanol is a less efficient fuel than straight gas (you use more of it). The octane rating is higher, which is more suitable for some performance engines.
3. How much money would you be willing to spend to become Flex-Fuel capable?
Thanks for your input!
1. Does anyone currently use Flex-Fuel, E85 or other ethanol/methanol/gas blends. I suspect you'd be in the midwest or the east. Accessibility is a large problem. There are two E85 stations within 30 miles of my house. Neither is a public facility, research only.
2. Is anyone interested in running E85 or other ethanol/methanol/gas blends either for the track or in everyday use? It's a well known fact ethanol is a less efficient fuel than straight gas (you use more of it). The octane rating is higher, which is more suitable for some performance engines.
3. How much money would you be willing to spend to become Flex-Fuel capable?
Thanks for your input!
