QLD To Consider Mandating Ethanol in all Petrol Bowsers

[pottery beige]

Originally Posted by jpd80

Exhaust valve seat recession or high temperature erosion only occurs on soft valve seats when you're running very lean mixtures.
I'd say, your combustion temperatures don't get visciously hot enough to cause problems. but if you were running a "27C emission compliant" Cleveland.....

more often than not it was always on the edge

cos dont like soggy poo poo

[noflac52]

I ran a lot of cars for a lot of years on e10 from bogas stations and none of them suffered any problems from the fuel.

[castellan]

Very bad stuff that unleaded you know, that's why the USA has gone to E10 as it had to.
Unleaded is very poisonous the ground water so they say, it's the worst ever environmentaly and it is that bad you do not wash your hands with it or it can get into your blood causing all types of problems, so they say but with E10 that's fine to do just as the old lead was.

[noosacuda]

I don't have sugar in my coffee and i'm sure as hell not putting any in my fuel tank.

[FPVS3]

Originally Posted by noosacuda

I don't have sugar in my coffee and i'm sure as hell not putting any in my fuel tank.

That's right!! I keep telling the greenies I'm putting all the wind and sunshine I can into my fuel tank but it just ain't working!! Dad Gum it!!
Oops!! Sorry 'bout the harsh language

[dl86]

Running United 100 octane which contains 10% ethanol and car runs really good. If they bring P100 to all servos then i'll be happy.

[Taily]

Originally Posted by Jallopy

E10 must be ok ...... but I always wonder why it is banned from Aircraft.
And boats it is also not recomended in also .
No good for my old trusty lawnmower too.

Whats wrong with a bowser that does not have E in it.

All those that want to use E10 use the other bowsers
Katter going off again without thinking this thru.

Because Ethanol is hygroscopic and carries any water it contains in suspension.

Bad for aircraft that climb to altitudes where this contained/absorbed water may freeze and block the maze of filters, flow dividers and injectors (aircraft for the most part run on 1950's tech mechanical injectors and carbies).

Bad for boats as they already operate in very humid environments which seem to be able to draw significant amounts of moisture from the warm surrounding air.

From what I understand there are issues with some older fuel injected cars fuel rails being treated or coated with a substance during mannufacture for corrosion protection that the ethanol in E10 (etc) will erode away, leaving those affected components free to corrode from any absorbed water content.

I also used to fill up on Ethanol at (in particular) a Bogas servo many years ago whenever I crossed the Hexham bridge over the Hunter River in my XD Fairmont Ghia. It may be a long bow to draw but when they went bust (and I stopped getting fuel there) I stopped needing to fix/replace the accel pump plunger every few months?

I wouldn't think it would be a huge issue for small engines such as lawn mowers though? Happy to be wrong.

Knowing Bob Katter personally many years ago (I used to fly him around Qld when I worked out of Mt Isa in the mid/late 2000's), his heart is in the right place but some of the ideas he has may not be all that well thought through....

[Jack91]

Originally Posted by GS608

Nothing wrong with ethanol..plan to put mine on E85 soon..lower temps, cleaner engine, more power..the majority of cars on the roads these days are newish and can run ethanol no probs..might take a few of those unroadworthy **** boxes off the roads as well!

Thats ridiculous. Majority? Maybe in your suburb. Come back down to the real world mate. And even if 75% of the cars on the road were capable of running e10 with no problems, which I highly doubt (be lucky to be 30%), what about the other 25%? Yeah, we'll just fork out for new heads, carby's and fuel systems so that all the do gooder idiots that think up this rubbish, can sip on their stupid mocha latte and think they are doing the environment a favour.

[BHDOGS]

I'm sick of the mocha latte bashings on this forums any coffee is a godsend and I will not see its good named drag through the mud being associated with greenies or polluters

[mechanic]

" Knowing Bob Katter personally many years ago (I used to fly him around Qld when I worked out of Mt Isa in the mid/late 2000's), his heart is in the right place but some of the ideas he has may not be all that well thought through... "

I live in his electorate and I'll agree with your statement 100%.

[GS608]

Originally Posted by DAVO_XR

Thats ridiculous. Majority? Maybe in your suburb. Come back down to the real world mate. And even if 75% of the cars on the road were capable of running e10 with no problems, which I highly doubt (be lucky to be 30%), what about the other 25%? Yeah, we'll just fork out for new heads, carby's and fuel systems so that all the do gooder idiots that think up this rubbish, can sip on their stupid mocha latte and think they are doing the environment a favour.

Majority of cars produced since 86 can run E10..don't know about you or where you live but up SEQ its a pretty rare site to see a car much older than 1986. Take a good look around next time you're driving to the shops 60-70% of cars you'll see will be late model a-b cars not 67 chevs or XA GTs

[phillyc]

http://theconversation.com/australia...ity-issue-7749

What the latest report reveals should cause some concern in Canberra. In 2011, Australia’s oil production declined by 14.5% compared to the previous year. At the same time, Australia’s oil consumption increased by 5.7%.

As recently as 2002/03, Australia enjoyed a trade surplus in oil and liquid fuels. Yet rising demand and falling production mean that in 2011 Australia had an estimated trade deficit in crude oil and refined petroleum products of $18 billion, which is likely to increase.

So, if you don't think $18B deficit which is sharply rising is reason enough for using ethanol then also consider / imagine $18B and how many people could be kept in jobs in rural areas.

[paule11]

This was one of Katters policies they wanted to refine the ethanol and generate electricity at the same time

[pottery beige]

another funny fred

[ebzery]

ethanol fuel you need to get a bigger tank to get the same distance.
v8 supercars went to ethanol they talked about components failing in the fuel system and 40% increases in fuel usages.
you wont see many pre 86 cars on the road because they got rid of leaded fuel which they were designed to run on

[pottery beige]

Originally Posted by ebzery

ethanol fuel you need to get a bigger tank to get the same distance.
v8 supercars went to ethanol they talked about components failing in the fuel system and 40% increases in fuel usages.
you wont see many pre 86 cars on the road because they got rid of leaded fuel which they were designed to run on

wait wot

i drive an 1983 bucket of **** every day

should i sell it now

[xxx000]

This same 'panic' and associated agro happened just prior to the introduction of unleaded fuel in cars in Australia.
We coped and will again if and when this legislation is passed.

[Nikked]

The Model T ford could run on pure ethanol...



...and we whinge about percentages of it in cars now?

[wookie836]

anyone care to post some real world figures comparing fuel consumption of 95RON and e10 [~94RON].

[pottery beige]

internertz

no proof

just sooking

[NAK302]

Originally Posted by xxx000

This same 'panic' and associated agro happened just prior to the introduction of unleaded fuel in cars in Australia.
We coped and will again if and when this legislation is passed.

we coped with the unleaded joke because, as usual, the general public forked out the necessary money to modify their engines or trade in to a newer car. if you didn't there was always that terrible additive that had to be added every time the tank was filled.

anyway, whinging on a supposedly car enthusiest forum won't change any of those minds that seem hell bent on change whether it's worthwhile or not. my argument isn't for "mandatory" change, it is for "choice". afterall, apparently it's a democracy, isn't it?

[cheap]

Originally Posted by wookie836

anyone care to post some real world figures comparing fuel consumption of 95RON and e10 [~94RON].

Based of 8 weeks travel when I needed to do Brisband-Sydney-Brisbane every week. Distance roughly 1000km's

E10 approx 16.5ltr/100

Straight unleaded (no ethanol) 91RON, 15.2ltr/100

Premium unleaded (no ethanol) 98RON, 14.6ltr/100

Best milage on 98RON, best bank balance 91RON

E10 V's straight 91RON, I get 8% worse milage using E10 and save a poultry 4cents/ltr at the cash register. Lets see that 4cent saving is really a 1-2% saving at the cash register I get 8% fewer kilometers per ltr - does anyone else see a problem here?

It shouldn't surprise anyone, the comic picture on post#4 illustrates the production costs and "green" stupidity of E10.

I'm not against E10 just price it accordingly, if E10 was say 10% cheaper there be fewer reasons for people to use it. Of course Bob Katter will probably read this post and insist the price of straight petrol be increased by 10%.

[Franco Cozzo]

Who cares about E10, I use that in my EL Falcon (United 100), we should really look at bringing at least 1 E85 outlet to every station.

That stuff is good for boosted and high comp cars, who cares if you get 30% less mileage on it its cheap and it has a real high octane rating.

What has to change on a modern car (such as an XR6T) to run E85? Injectors and any rubber lines and of course a tune to match?

[turboclown]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

I am angry...my old car cannot use it, my mothers little Mazda 121 cannot use it, the number of cars on the road which will suddenly become attractive garden ornaments which cannot use the fuel is staggering if you look up the list of vehicles that cannot use ethanol based fuels.

It's energy negative, taking more energy to produce than is contained in the final product. It only makes sense to use in a large scale in countries where one of two things are done. First, you can be like some South American countries and have so much sugar cane you could build mountains out of the stuff and have an economy where cheap labour means cost of production is low, or Second, you can heavily, and I do mean heavily, subsidise it with taxpayer funds.

Not to mention that no one has ever been able to explain exactly how deliberately making your car get worse economy is somehow good for the environment...

image

You need a clue desperately, you will use less fossil fuels for every km traveled, also I suggest you get some updated figures on the energy to drive a km using oil as opposed to ethanol including the whole process you will find ethanol with modern processes comes out on top.

[turboclown]

http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rc...mWT07Ng6v5FVqA

[NAK302]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

Who cares about E10, I use that in my EL Falcon (United 100), we should really look at bringing at least 1 E85 outlet to every station.

That stuff is good for boosted and high comp cars, who cares if you get 30% less mileage on it its cheap and it has a real high octane rating.

What has to change on a modern car (such as an XR6T) to run E85? Injectors and any rubber lines and of course a tune to match?

like i wrote earlier, the general public will feel the financial hit to either modify or upgrade(?), but we'll be made to feel better knowing it's absolutely better for the environment. just like my solar panels, huh?

http://www.motoring.com.au/news/2010...-ethanol-20281

[Jack91]

Originally Posted by GS608

Majority of cars produced since 86 can run E10..don't know about you or where you live but up SEQ its a pretty rare site to see a car much older than 1986. Take a good look around next time you're driving to the shops 60-70% of cars you'll see will be late model a-b cars not 67 chevs or XA GTs

Again, its that word "majority". "Majority" of 20+million people still leaves a lot of the "minority". Who will once again be left with a sore backside.

And I dont care if people think its good for the environment or not, personally I dont think it makes any difference, and I think its a rubbish product, so therefore I should still have a choice not to use it.

Its funny how people suport these ridiculous blanket solutions when they aren't affected directly by it, but when the one of THEIR freedoms gets taken away for no reason, with no proof, by an idiot, its whinge whinge whinge. Although, being a smoker, a drinker, a v8 owner, a car enthusiast, and a blue collar tax payer, sometimes it seems its only mine that get taken away!

[pottery beige]

Originally Posted by GT-0733

we coped with the unleaded joke because, as usual, the general public forked out the necessary money to modify their engines or trade in to a newer car. if you didn't there was always that terrible additive that had to be added every time the tank was filled.

anyway, whinging on a supposedly car enthusiest forum won't change any of those minds that seem hell bent on change whether it's worthwhile or not. my argument isn't for "mandatory" change, it is for "choice". afterall, apparently it's a democracy, isn't it?

can we bring back lead based paints

just so you can go back to licking fence palings

[NAK302]

Originally Posted by pottery beige

can we bring back lead based paints

just so you can go back to licking fence palings

if i choose to, why not?

[castellan]

E10 is coming regardless of what anyone says just as unleaded came.
People were complaining about unleaded when it came in but it's no big deal you just set the engine up to deal with it, the same thing with E10.

I found E10 to be rubbish when it first came out as my VY SS lost power under 1800 RPM and it sits on 1450 RPM at 100 KM/H
But shell made a better E10 some time down the track and it was a lot better and i have found that just crusing on the highway fuel was the same as 91 unleaded and this was tested time and time again on the same road using cruse control but when aircon was used E10 used more then 91 unleaded, so when under more load she will use more fuel.
I will not use caltex or WOOLWORTHS 91 or 95 unleaded as the SS does not like it lacks power but does like caltex E10.

I run a mate at times he has a SS like mine and i can always hose his off but i was using caltex 91 once and he had it all over mine that day. it splutters and backfires like when your flat to the boards, the timing must be retarting full on due to the rubbish fuel. my VS 179 kw V8 did the same and my V6 VS i could not get it over 205 KM/H but it would do 218 KM/H with BP and shell 91.

I wonder how good this imported fuels is going to be when australia stops making it's own.

Old mate Hitler made synthetic fuel maybe we should make that type of stuff.