View From The Cab

By David Tollefson, Columnist

As I promised last week, here’s “the rest of the story.” I will quote from the very beginning for those that did not see the introduction last week. Here it is (from the handout I received at Farmfest in the MN Corn Growers tent, where the car was on display):

The goals of the future are being set, and oftentimes with a specific vehicle in mind: battery electric vehicles (BEV). As we all know, their penetration into the overall fleet will take decades as the vehicles are introduced and infrastructure is built, but that doesn’t mean the goals should wait. The combination of a flex fuel vehicle (FFV) and a BEV is possible today.

The Renewable Fuels Association recently purchased a new 2022 Ford Escape Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV) as our latest vehicle project. The concept is to use this vehicle to demonstrate that ethanol (E85) and electricity can jointly power our vehicles today. In fact, in some cases, the E85 portion has a lower carbon intensity, along with cost, than pure electric. 

Upon purchase, students at the University of Nebraska’s Husker Motorsports Team assisted RFA’s Robert White with the conversion to flex fuel. This process used a conversion kit from eFlexFuel. The process took under an hour to complete, and now the vehicle can run on any blend from regular unleaded (E10 or E15) to E30 or E85.

The vehicle was then transported to the university of California at Riverside for emissions testing on E10, E30 and E85. The emissions testing was completed at the Center of Environment Research & Technology. Research is now underway on a full lifecycle analysis that will compare full battery electric vehicles, regular internal combustion engines, and our new creation, the Flex Fuel PHEV.

EMISSIONS

The results of the emissions testing conducted by UCR were impressive:

*NOx

      FTP Cycle: E85 demonstrated a 48% reduction compared to E10 

     USO6 cycle: E85 demonstrated a 76% reduction compared to E10

*Particulate Matter (PM):

     FTP Cycle: E85 demonstrated a 76% reduction compared to E10

    USO6 Cycle: E85 demonstrated a 70% reduction compared to E10

FUEL ECONOMY

As most people know, ethanol has less energy per gallon than gasoline, which results in some level of fuel economy penalty. Unfortunately for those that have owned flex fuel (FFVs) in the past, the vehicles were optimized to run on gasoline, and allowed to run on ethanol. If these vehicles were optimized for higher blends of ethanol, the fuel economy outcome would be different. This Ford Escape PHEV has a unique engine setup, a 2.5L Atkinson Cycle engine with a compression ratio of 13:1. This setup is perfect to see some benefit from ethanol’s high octane and we have seen that firsthand.

Thus far, the following have been the real-world results on fuel economy after 15,000 miles:

*15,402 miles logged as of July 9, 2023

*3545 miles (23%) powered by electric motor

*11,427 miles (74%) powered by E85

*440 miles (3%) powered by E10/E15

*Vehicle fuel economy rated at 40.0 mpg on E10 (combined city/highway) by EPA/NHTSA

*Actual fuel economy averaged has been 37.8 mpg

OVERALL COST

Vehicle: Given the available tax credits for PHEVs, the cost is nearly equivalent to the ICE only option, and significantly cheaper than equivalent BEV. In this make and model, the Ford Escape PHEV also has an additional 40MPG of liquid fuel economy rating over the ICE only option and a MPGe of 105.

Fuel: The conversion to flex fuel was approximately $600. Depending on where you are located, the cost of E85 can e as much as a 50% discount to regular unleaded. Not only will you see a drastic reduction in overall emissions, but you should experience cost savings on fuel overall.

EV VS FLEX FUEL COMPARISON

The following chart outlines the best-case scenarios for EVs and ethanol, along with the average case for both. As you can see, when you compare an FFV operating on the best E85 available and approved today, the lifecycle carbon emissions are lower on E85 vs a BEV on the California grid. When you move to average case comparisons, E85 can again beat a BEV in all categories.

CONCLUSION

Not everyone will have the ability or budget to go full battery electric. This can vary tremendously by geography and includes the cost of the vehicle and available charging infrastructure, along with the cost to charge the vehicle. Plug-in Hybrids are a natural option that allows extended range and no concern of fuel availability.They can be converted to flex fuel vehicles to reduce emissions and lower the overall price of operation. They also allow tomorrow’s goals to be met today without significant new expense.

Learn more about this vehicle at www.FlexFuelEV.com. Learn more about ethanol at www.EthanolRFA.org.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

Before the conclusion above in the printed article, was a seven-column table including vehicle, vehicle fuel, lifecycle carbon emissions (in grams), carbon emissions reduction vs. gasoline, fossil fuel content of vehicle fuel, additional vehicle purchase cost vs. conventional gasoline engine model, and in conclusion, vehicles (in millions) of U.S. light-duty auto fleet.

Rather than print the entire table, (I’m not an engineer, obviously), I’ll try to give you my opinion of the highlights:

• In the vehicle fuel column, two comparisons are given, (both with E85, but one with corn kernel fiber ethanol and renewable naphtha; the other with corn starch ethanol and natural gasoline). The number of vehicles in both those categories in the U.S. was 23 million. And the carbon emissions from the corn starch ethanol and natural gasoline, was 31% less.

• The battery electric vehicle column compared California grid electricity versus Missouri grid electricity: the Missouri electricity had 34% less carbon emissions, but 40% more fossil fuel content than the California grid. Not sure how to interpret that.

• Total battery electric vehicles in the U.S-3 million, in the California grid and the Missouri grid.

• Again, for those seeking deeper information, refer to the two websites listed above.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

Please contact David Tollefson with thoughts or comments on this or future columns at: adtollef@hcinet.net