Ethanol Fuel forces Lexus to recall over 214,000 cars

[The Monty]

FACT: used nothing but ethanol for 3 years now, and 120 000k's or something, and not once had a problem at all. I also manage 650-750k's to a tank (68L) out of a modified AU 6.
FACT: I have a nail in my tyre. Wasnt there before I started using Ethanol, doesnt mean that the ethanol put it there.

[Bill M]

Originally Posted by Jondalar

Fact: ethanol absorbs water from the atmosphere
Fact: more energy is used in producing the ethanol than you get out of it by burning it
Fact: if fuel containing ethanol sits for long enough the water absorbed will be enough to separate out from the immiscible petroleum products and takes the ethanol with it, significantly lowering octane.

I'd be very happy for someone to provide scientific argument proving me wrong.

You'll be waiting a long time for anything vaguely intelligent here!

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by vztrt

No they have 3% as a cleaning agent.

I have seen info from both shell and caltex that state they may contain up to 5% ethanol. They probably average 3%.

Fact: ethanol absorbs water from the atmosphere
Fact: more energy is used in producing the ethanol than you get out of it by burning it
Fact: if fuel containing ethanol sits for long enough the water absorbed will be enough to separate out from the immiscible petroleum products and takes the ethanol with it, significantly lowering octane.

Fact- ethanol is a renewable energy source, fossil fuels are not.
Fact- Fossil fuels will run out and this will spell the end of the dinosaur blood burners (but hey, the GT will make a great cubby house for kids).
Fact- Fossil fuel production was very inefficient back when they decided to replace the horse on carriages, good thing they did not give up and keep the horse (it would look funny with a intercooled blower set up and lowered legs with bling horse shoes).
Fact- The average person does not have a car that lives in a garage and goes out on a drive only on sunny weekends, therefore they don't care about moisture absorption on rarely used cars.

Not denying your points but nothing is insurmountable with further development and research.

[vztrt]

From the BP website:

http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarti...025307#7087623

e10
BP e10 is Regular Unleaded Petrol to which 10% ethanol has been added. It is designed for use in most applications where Regular Unleaded Petrol is recommended and it meets the Fuel Quality Standards Act of 2000 Petrol Determination of 2001.

Applications and Benefits


Incorporates ethanol made from natural products and so does not add fossil carbon to the atmosphere and it is a renewable source

It provides an additional outlet for the Australia Sugar Industry

The ethanol used typically increases the octane of the product by 2-3 octane numbers above that for Regular Unleaded Petrol which serves to reduce the incidence of pinging and knock

The ethanol used burns cleaner and reduces the level of toxic compounds in the exhaust to improve air quality

Reduces greenhouse gas emissions considered a contributor to global warming

BP e10 contains a corrosion inhibitor to protect fuel systems and a detergent additive to keep inlet valves and fuel injectors clean

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Santa Clause. The Easter Bunny. Ethanol fuel and Toyota Prius's being good for the environment.

What do they have in common.

Ummm, they all have capital letters?

[Jondalar]

Originally Posted by The Monty

FACT: used nothing but ethanol for 3 years now, and 120 000k's or something, and not once had a problem at all. I also manage 650-750k's to a tank (68L) out of a modified AU 6.
FACT: I have a nail in my tyre. Wasnt there before I started using Ethanol, doesnt mean that the ethanol put it there.

Nothing but Ethanol hey? So does the Government know about your still? Since you're running 100% ethanol according to your claim.

To those that say water only effects cars rarely driven, you are forgetting that some servo's are only delivered to once a month, there's nothing to say that the fuel in their tanks will remain dry as it has to be vented to the atmosphere, same with tankers, so from the moment it's produced it's absorbing water.

Also ethanol separated into water in your tank will oxidise to become acetic acid and this definitely corrode things.

Simply put ethanol in fuel is there for political reasons, to APPEAR to be doing something positive for the environment, but not actually doing anything. It's also there because canegrowers here have lost huge market share to Brazil and want a new market.

[The Monty]

Originally Posted by Jondalar

Nothing but Ethanol hey? So does the Government know about your still? Since you're running 100% ethanol according to your claim.

To those that say water only effects cars rarely driven, you are forgetting that some servo's are only delivered to once a month, there's nothing to say that the fuel in their tanks will remain dry as it has to be vented to the atmosphere, same with tankers, so from the moment it's produced it's absorbing water.

Also ethanol separated into water in your tank will oxidise to become acetic acid and this definitely corrode things.

Simply put ethanol in fuel is there for political reasons, to APPEAR to be doing something positive for the environment, but not actually doing anything. It's also there because canegrowers here have lost huge market share to Brazil and want a new market.

Mate, I think you need to wake up a bit. You dont like it, thats fine. Ive used nothing but an Ethanol BLEND, to better suit your intellectual genius. So why hasnt my car broken down yet? After three years? Why does it still go? Isnt everything corroded now? I guess we are just better off burning the stuff. Gee it must be so bad to use that now nearly all the servos stock it, its in most fuel, and the majority dont complain, and have no idea that they are getting 10% less fuel economy, yada yada yada.
Looks like youll be driving a steam train soon, seeing as your not going to use any ethanol as its such the demon fuel.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by The Monty

Mate, I think you need to wake up a bit. You dont like it, thats fine. Ive used nothing but an Ethanol BLEND, to better suit your intellectual genius. So why hasnt my car broken down yet? After three years? Why does it still go? Isnt everything corroded now? I guess we are just better off burning the stuff. Gee it must be so bad to use that now nearly all the servos stock it, its in most fuel, and the majority dont complain, and have no idea that they are getting 10% less fuel economy, yada yada yada.
Looks like youll be driving a steam train soon, seeing as your not going to use any ethanol as its such the demon fuel.

Nah, he won't be able to drive a steam train as he will have no way to heat the water.

Yes , water could collect in the servo tanks but most servo's cycle the fuel in their tanks in under a week. The one down the road from us gets a delivery every 2-3 days and it is not even in a high traffic area. As for in the tanker , how long do you think it stays in there? Must collect a lot of water in a couple of hours. Good old dinosaur blood also has potential to collect water in the tanks at the servo and in fact I have a couple of freinds that have in their time copped fuel from a servo that has been contaminated with water. Guess we all should empty the brake fluid out of our cars as that absorbs water at a higher rate.

Personally, if you all want to support some arab in getting his new gold plated rolls royce and buy his 19 year old son a veyron, excellent it is your choice. Personally I would prefer to put some money in the pocket of australian primary industry operators, create jobs for australians in secondary industry and keep our money in our economy. I guess I am just biased as my parents are farmers.

All my cars are regularly fed fuels with up to 10% ethanol. They all run sweet, fuel systems have not fallen off, roof has not rusted and tyres have not gone flat, and show fuel economy that is similar to all those insisting on dinosaur blood pure fuels.

[Romulus]

Right. So no one can provide evidence to the contrary that ethonol has a carbon positive footprint on the environment.

[Jondalar]

Monty I didn't get personal, don't see why you have to. I am in fact an industrial chemist but don't let that influence anything you want to believe of the hot air coming from politicians and greenies mouths.

TVS Super Pursuit, nobody will be able to provide that evidence as it doesn't exist.

GeckoGT I have zero problem with anyone chosing to run their cars on whatever they want, but don't go sprouting stuff about it being better for the environment or better for the cars, because it's simply not.

[ayeyew]

What about Mobil 8000? Is there the 3-5% Ethanol in that?

I usually fill up with either BP or Mobil, as they are the closest to my place

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by TVS Super Pursuit

Right. So no one can provide evidence to the contrary that ethonol has a carbon positive footprint on the environment.

At his stage it appears no, but this is an issue that will be resolved with research and development. Lets not forget that the producers of the ethanol will have strict guidelines on CO2 emissions that their plant produces.

Besides this, I am confused how so many here can slam ethanol, stating it is the devil fuel because the CO2 emissions of its use is in question, when these people also spend $1000's increasing power, supercharging, upping boost and all sorts of other modifications that seriously increase the CO2 emissions of their own car. Obviously it is not that much of a personal concern for them.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by Jondalar

GeckoGT I have zero problem with anyone chosing to run their cars on whatever they want, but don't go sprouting stuff about it being better for the environment or better for the cars, because it's simply not.

I actually never have in this thread stated it is so much better for the environment, except my comment that it is renewable and fossil fuels aren't (unless you have a couple of million years to wait), a point that I am sure you can not dispute.

I have also not said it is better for cars, I have purely said in my experience, it does not damge them at E10 levels, again something that can not be disputed as it is in my experience with my vehicles (Super Pursuit, turbo Mini and an AU).

My attraction to using ethanol blend fuels is mostly from a support to australian industry and looking after our own ecenomy, an advantage that you also can not possibly dispute.

[Jondalar]

GeckoGT I am sorry I wasn't meaning to say you had stated that but I guess the implication was there.

The main reason I am opposed to using Ethanol blends is that fuel consumption is considerably worse in my experience. I went from using 17 L /100km when towing in my XR8 to 22, that's a 29% increase. It's not as pronounced when unladen but still at least 10%.

While it's good to support Australian industry for sure, it's also been pointed out that the NSW governments mandated addition of ethanol will consume grain that would otherwise have been used for food production, so you can expect flour based items to increase in cost thanks to them.

Yes crude oil reserves are finite, but nobody REALLY knows how much there is. There's a lot more than the oil companies admit to in my opinion. It's in their financial interests to understate reserves and push prices up.

[RG]

I love these ethanol threads, everyone gets so excited

On the subject though I can't even run E10 in the XR8, with my compression and tune all I get is a massive flat spot and silly consumption.

[flappist]

I want an ethanol blended LPG fueled single turbo clevo powered T3 wagon with GT stripes and badges........

It would be very collectable

[Bill M]

People fill their cars with whatever they want but I do object to ill informed blanket statements about ethanol being good for everyone. The best result is for those that want it and can use it without problems use it and those who cannot (check the FCAI website at http://www.fcai.com.au/publications/...l-blend-petrol ) have the choice of non ethanol fuel. If I owned a vehicle that could run on it with no ambiguous utterances from the maker I would.
There is nothing worse than useless half baked statements put forward in the guise of factual information on a motoring enthusiasts forum.
Bill.

[fordAU]

The ethanol debate continues on, to and fro, back and forth lol.

I guess it depends on the vehicle and engine.
That sweet little windsor of mine does not like ethanol blends at all, pings, backfires and more tempremental than usual which is saying something, she only gets the best : which is non ethanol, mainly Ultimate.

On the other hand my BF6 seems to run on anything, ethanol, 92, 95 makes no difference to it, I wouldnt be surprised if the damn thing ran on vegemite.
It gets the cheapest and if that is an ethanol blend that what it gets.

[GT0132]

Originally Posted by Jondalar

I am in fact an industrial chemist

makes Viagra in larger quantities than a "suburban" chemist

[fordAU]

Originally Posted by GT0132

makes Viagra in larger quantities

Group buy perhaps.

[Jondalar]

Originally Posted by GT0132

makes Viagra in larger quantities than a "suburban" chemist

LOL good one, but do you know what a chemist is? Not a pharmacist that's for sure.

[GT0132]

Originally Posted by Jondalar

LOL good one, but do you know what a chemist is? Not a pharmacist that's for sure.

I have a rough idea but won't say in case I'm totally off the mark, so spit it out....A mate of mine's wife is a Bio-Chemist

By the way no offence intended from my last post..

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by Bill M

People fill their cars with whatever they want but I do object to ill informed blanket statements about ethanol being good for everyone. The best result is for those that want it and can use it without problems use it and those who cannot (check the FCAI website at http://www.fcai.com.au/publications/...l-blend-petrol ) have the choice of non ethanol fuel. If I owned a vehicle that could run on it with no ambiguous utterances from the maker I would.
There is nothing worse than useless half baked statements put forward in the guise of factual information on a motoring enthusiasts forum.
Bill.

Agreed completely!

GeckoGT I am sorry I wasn't meaning to say you had stated that but I guess the implication was there.

The main reason I am opposed to using Ethanol blends is that fuel consumption is considerably worse in my experience. I went from using 17 L /100km when towing in my XR8 to 22, that's a 29% increase. It's not as pronounced when unladen but still at least 10%.

While it's good to support Australian industry for sure, it's also been pointed out that the NSW governments mandated addition of ethanol will consume grain that would otherwise have been used for food production, so you can expect flour based items to increase in cost thanks to them.

Yes crude oil reserves are finite, but nobody REALLY knows how much there is. There's a lot more than the oil companies admit to in my opinion. It's in their financial interests to understate reserves and push prices up.

Cool, implication was there but no worries. In essence in a lot of areas, I agree with you. I have not personally seen a large increase in fuel consumption, cretainly nothing that is not offset by the fact that I am paying less for it. For example, The Super Pursuit requires 95 octane, today vortex 95 is 98c/L, Independents (freedom, united etc) is 92c/L, with an increase of <1L/100km on E10 (this is what I have seen over months of use, yes I am a fuel consumption technoweenie that has a spreadsheet to keep track), this increase in consuption is offset by the price.

As for the increase in food prices, my parents are wheat farmers. For more years than not they have struggled with low wheat prices because production exceeds demand. This situation has caused them to reduce their cropping program as they can not get a good price for what they aready produce, why produce more? There have even been years where they have only cropped for next years seed as the wheat price is so crap it costs more to grow than what they get for it. With more demand, they could quite easily increase production. WA has surplus wheat that can not be sold on the world market, simple. The future of ethanol as a fuel now means this unused resource can be used with reasonable efficiency.

Lets have a look at the earlier quote regarding CO2 emissions of ethanol production. Not 1 hard fact in it, all theories and opinion. In their calculation do they consider that oil is not turned into petrol in a carbon neutral manner? Do they consider the emmisions of all the exploration finding the dinosaur blood (exploration rigs are not carbon neutral). Do they consider emissions of the tankers moving the product half way around the world (super tankers are not carbon neutral) let alone if they break open, the list goes on? My point is although their theory may have merit, they have not demonstrated enough evidence for it to be considered conclusive.

At the end of the day, I can not decide which fuel is more efficient in terms of reducing emissions, from a "in the ground through to out my tail pipe" spectrum, I do not have the knowledge, expertise or information to do that. I can however look at what I am putting out the tail pipe and leave the rest to the experts. Think of it this way, I am a Paramedic, when you have chest pain do I have to demonstrate to you with hard evidence that the medications I wish to give you will be of benefit. Of course not, you listen to my advice as you rely on my expertise in my field to give the correct advice. Similarly, it is my choice which fuels I use in regards to the emissions out my tail pipe, it is up to the manufacturers to produce those products within the legislation and guidelines (which are getting more stringent) regarding CO2, particulate and other elements of emmision control. In the end they have to convince a lot smarter people than me to achieve those targets.


Fuel (or is that food) for thought.

[flappist]

Hmmmm....

Ethanol is made from sugars and starches obtained from various plants that would normally be used as food (which is good because no one is starving)

To grow these plants water is required (which is luckily not in short supply) that has to be pumped by electric motors. This electricity is made by burning fossil fuels.

The sugars and starches must then be converted to alcohol in various processes that require electricity. This is the same electricity as above. The quantity of fossil fuel used and CO2 created is actually greater than that saved by burning the alcohol.

This could be resolved by using nuclear power instead of fossil fuel but I suspect the greeny socialists would not like that idea.

If ALL of the wheat, sugar, barley etc grown in Australia was used to make E10 and there was no other petrol types there would only be enough to cover less than 10 percent of the fuel used every year. This does not count diesel, LPG, Avtur, Avgas etc etc.

And of course there would be no more beer, rum, cornflakes, bread etc etc...

The whole ethanol program is a political smokescreen designed to allow gullible do gooders feel better about themselves.

Like airport security, speed cameras, internet censorship, alcopop tax, xmas plasma bonus, council amalgamation and any of the plethora of "feelgood" scams that have been shoved down our throats over the last 10 years, ethanol is a joke.

The solution is technically simple. There is nothing more efficient than petrol for powering our cars.
Either develop artificial petrol or develop motors to replace internal combustion engines outright. (No more V8s or T6s ever)

Of course politically it is very complex because there is always a group of whingers who do not like any technical solution and of course there is LOTS OF MONEY in the current system.

And really MONEY is what it is all about..........

[-lynel-]

to the guys insisting its going to wreck the V8 supercars....

A pure alcohol fuel will produce signicant more power then any petrol based high octane fuel. There are a few guys getting around now with over 50rwkw increases on cars that did have 320rwkw, by running E85 and obviously tuning for it (in one case i saw he also ran 2psi less boost for the same gain), not just whacking it in the tank. Most of these cars used BP Ultimate for many of the reasons stated in this discussion. Now time will tell what this does to components (its been 5months now) and its obvious that at just over half the weight of fuel, nearly twice as much of it is needed when compared to 100octanePULP. At the moment i couldnt give a hoot about pollution outputs, since no matter what road we take its all bad, but at least investing money into ethanol blended fuels at least keeps australia's economy strong. No offence intended but the arabs and yanks, what they have done to petrol/oil prices over the decades borders illegal and immoral.

[mongoloid]

Originally Posted by Jondalar

Fact: more energy is used in producing the ethanol than you get out of it by burning it

I'd be interested to know if petrol also requires more energy per unit to produce than you get out of burning it?

I suspect it is cash flow positive rather than "energy positive"...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_content_of_biofuel

if you scroll down there is a table representing energy content of various fuels, however the last column (Energy per CO2(MJ/kg)) is quite interesting if you look at gasoline vs ethanol.

[Jondalar]

flappist I agree totally, very well said.

[Jondalar]

Originally Posted by mongoloid

I'd be interested to know if petrol also requires more energy per unit to produce than you get out of burning it?

I suspect it is cash flow positive rather than "energy positive"...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_content_of_biofuel

if you scroll down there is a table representing energy content of various fuels, however the last column (Energy per CO2(MJ/kg)) is quite interesting if you look at gasoline vs ethanol.

I can't say with certainty but I'd guess you get a lot more energy out than goes into producing it as it's very energy dense.

According to that table gasoline gives more energy per kg of CO2, so the greenies and politicians lied to us, what a surprise!

[chevypower]

Toyotas never break down... it's just when they do, it's never their fault! Wouldn't want to ruin their reputation by just announcing a recall!

[geckoGT]

Ethanol is made from sugars and starches obtained from various plants that would normally be used as food (which is good because no one is starving)

No one in australia is starving from a lack of grain, not the case in Ethiopia but then again, they don't have cars either.

To grow these plants water is required (which is luckily not in short supply) that has to be pumped by electric motors. This electricity is made by burning fossil fuels.

No wheat farmer in WA (the largest wheat producing state Australia) pumps water for wheat. So what is your point?

This could be resolved by using nuclear power instead of fossil fuel but I suspect the greeny socialists would not like that idea.

Many environmental activists are behind nuclear power, ever watched An Inconvenient Truth? This is because it causes no greenhouse or particulate pollution. Australia would laugh all the way to the bank if nuclear power was more acceptable as we have one of the worlds largest reserves of uranium.

If ALL of the wheat, sugar, barley etc grown in Australia was used to make E10 and there was no other petrol types there would only be enough to cover less than 10 percent of the fuel used every year. This does not count diesel, LPG, Avtur, Avgas etc etc.

No one has mentioned changing all fuels, just giving people a choice. As I have said, I know for a fact that my parents can produce more, as can many of their neighbours.

And of course there would be no more beer, rum, cornflakes, bread etc etc...

Rubbish!

The whole ethanol program is a political smokescreen designed to allow gullible do gooders feel better about themselves.

Like airport security, speed cameras, internet censorship, alcopop tax, xmas plasma bonus, council amalgamation and any of the plethora of "feelgood" scams that have been shoved down our throats over the last 10 years, ethanol is a joke.

By that reasoning pollies should just be paid to cuddle babies then?

Of course politically it is very complex because there is always a group of whingers who do not like any technical solution and of course there is LOTS OF MONEY in the current system.

Absolutely, in this case it is the anti ethanol group that are whingeing, the rest are quietly filling their tanks, supporting our economy and laughing at the ridiculous claims as to the evilness of ethanol.