Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=216.240.18.37; envelope-from=echristley@att.net
Message-ID: <4DCD4338.2030605@att.net>
Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 10:42:00 -0400
From: Ernest Christley <echristley@att.net>
Reply-To: echristley@att.net
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20100623)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: 100LL in California
References: <list-4981987@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-4981987@logan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Bill Schertz wrote:
> Charlie is right, you can extract the ethanol with water. Best practice 
> would be multiple small washings to reduce it to a negligible level, but 
> octane would suffer. Also, your price of auto fuel just went up, because 
> you are sending some down the drain.
> 
> Basically there is a partition coefficient for alcohol between gasoline 
> and water.  Each time you add water, x% moves to the water.
> 

Thanks, Bill.  That chemistry class in college was a LONG time ago for me.

So, how long will it be before someone starts selling a system that allows you to put contaminated gasoline in one end, 
have it add water and then centrifugally separate it, let the clean gasoline go out the other end, and distill the water 
to reuse it?  The ethanol would drive the distillation, and the left-over could be mailed to the stupid politicians and 
lobbiest that keep adulterating our gasoline.  ("Here!  You like it so much, you can have it!")