Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=142.165.20.181; envelope-from=hjjohnson@sasktel.net
Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 11:42:46 -0600
From: H & J Johnson <hjjohnson@sasktel.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: 100LL in California
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Message-id: <ff17cd7b7f9b.4dcbc7b6@sasktel.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-language: en
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Content-disposition: inline
Priority: normal

Has anyone looked at methods to get the ethanol back out of gas?  I'm thinking there must be some type of process. I know 
in making bio-diesel they 'wash' the fluid and then run it through seperators [or let it settle] to get the water back out. It sounds 
crazy but would it not be possible to do something similar w/ gas? I'm thinking some kind of little contained setup that a guy 
could dump is 5Gal can into, it runs through and seperates off the two. The ethanol could get disposed [I dunno.. in the lawn 
mower?] and the gas is off to the plane?  IIRC [not tested personally] we are the same in Central Canada in that the higher 
octane stuff doesn't have ethanol in it.

Would misting water into gasoline allow it to combine w/ the ethanol [I know it sounds totally crazy :) ] ??

I know water will suspend in Jet fuel, is gasoline the same in that it can/will hold water in suspension? If you know how much
water you put in [vs volume of fuel] and you know the rated ethanol percentage, you can calculate if your getting all the water/ethanol
back out or not.

Just thinking out loud at this point... :)

Jarrett Johnson
www.innovention-tech.com 

----- Original Message -----
From: Steve Thomas <glasair2@me.com>
Date: Thursday, May 12, 2011 11:03 am
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: 100LL in California

> California controls the ethanol content of the mogas by law.  
> There are no retail outlets that offer ethanol-free gas.  I don't 
> know about this Pure Gas location in Carson, but all marinas, all 
> gas stations have ethanol laced gas.  I tried in vain to locate a 
> source for pure gasoline a year ago and discovered that the only 
> way to get any is to be classified as an organization that 
> experiments with gasoline formulations.  Even if one could get so 
> classified with an experimental aircraft, it would be near 
> impossible to have a flow rate that anyone would pay any attention 
> to.  
> 
> And speaking of screwed-up politicians, California has a near 
> monopoly on that commodity.  The state is bankrupt and the 
> populace reelected all the same people that got us there last 
> November.  The "gimmee" crowd rules supreme here.  
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Steve Thomas
> 
> _______________________________________________________
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On May 12, 2011, at 9:50 AM, Jeff Whaley wrote:
> 
> > Interestingly one of the 3 California sources is a Shell ... you 
> might want to check with your closest Shell dealer to see what 
> their pumps say and of course test the gas yourself ... up here, 
> all Shell stations offer V-Power (91 octane) premium with zero 
> ethanol ... it is possible that more of your Shell stations do as 
> well but just don't appear on the pure-gas website.
> > Shell's 87 has 10%, 89 has 5% and 91 has 0% - at least here in 
> Ontario Canada.
> > Jeff
> > 
> > From: "Al Gietzen" <ALVentures@cox.net>
> > Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: FW: 100LL in California
> > Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 07:29:13 -0800
> > To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
> > 
> > The pure-gas.org lists only 3 sources in all of California.  
> I've checked the local marinas around San Diego, and the response 
> I get is "all fuel in CA contains 10 % ethanol".
> > 
> > I've tested the fuel I've been buying at the local Chevron 
> stations, and it has 10% ethanol. I've been using that fuel almost 
> exclusively for 5 years in my Velocity (EZpoxy tanks), and am not 
> aware of any problems sp far.  It does cause me some anxiety, 
> however; so I'm considering more extensive use of 100LL.
> > 
> > Seems ironic - one good reason for using mogas is eliminating 
> the lead pollution; which the regulators are trying to achieve; 
> and then they regulate the requirement for ethanol in the fuel 
> which makes that a bad choice as well.  Typical bureaucratic lose-
> lose situation.
> > 
> > Al
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of 
> virus signature database 6116 (20110512) __________
> > 
> > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> > 
> > http://www.eset.com
> > 
> > 
> > This message, and the documents attached hereto, is intended 
> only for the addressee and may contain privileged or confidential 
> information. Any unauthorized disclosure is strictly prohibited. 
> If you have received this message in error, please notify us 
> immediately so that we may correct our internal records. Please 
> then delete the original message. Thank you.
> > 
> > --
> > Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
> > Archive and UnSub:   
> http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html
> 
> --
> Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
> Archive and UnSub:   
> http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html