Plan to SECRETLY add ethanol to fuel

Submitted: Friday, Sep 23, 2005 at 09:03
ThreadID: 26693 Views:3235 Replies:10 FollowUps:12
This Thread has been Archived
For those of you who KNOW that your older vehicles (fuel pump diaphragms, etc) will suffer - this can only be bad news.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Plan to secretly add ethanol
From:
By Steve Lewis and Katharine Murphy

September 23, 2005

MOTORISTS could unwittingly fill their cars with ethanol-blended petrol under Howard government plans to relax strict labelling conditions on biofuels.

The push to secretly mix up to five per cent of ethanol with normal petrol would be extended to all types of fuel, including the high-octane blends used by top-range vehicles.
The Government is on a mission to encourage a viable biofuels industry to help offset the commercial power of the big oil companies.

The push comes as the Government faces a consumer backlash over soaring fuel prices, with yesterday's special petrol summit in Sydney urging Canberra to take on the oil majors over claims of profiteering.

Nationals leader Mark Vaile has warned the big oil companies they might face a mandated blend of 10 per cent ethanol if they do not voluntarily sign up to industry action plans to encourage the use of biofuels made from sugarcane waste and other agricultural by-products.

"We've not taken it off the table," the Deputy Prime Minister said.

Prime Minister John Howard and Mr Vaile will discuss the contentious ethanol issue - and the problems of soaring petrol prices - when they meet oil industry executives next week.
Releasing a report from a Government-appointed Biofuels Taskforce, the Prime Minister conceded a slump in consumer confidence had crippled the fledgling biofuels industry.

Motorists have resisted using petrol blended with ethanol after claims that biofuels damaged vehicle engines.

Despite new research showing potentially greater health benefits than previously believed, Mr Howard said the biofuels industry faced "considerable market barriers", including low consumer confidence and high commercial risk.

The Government has previously set an annual production target of 350 million litres of biofuels by 2010 - lifting biofuels' share of the total fuel market from 0.1 per cent to 0.7 per cent.

But Mr Howard said it would fall well short of that target "in the absence of further policy initiatives".

The Nationals have been pushing to mandate the use of ethanol, claiming it would provide a sensible alternative to petroleum and assist many regional communities. But Liberal Party ministers have stridently resisted the push.

Mr Howard announced a range of measures yesterday to promote biofuels.

The Commonwealth's vehicle fleet will be encouraged to use an E10 blend - of 10 per cent ethanol - while present labelling for E10 will be simplified to deliver a more positive message about the use of biofuels.

The Government will test the usage of E5 in motor vehicles before allowing the oil industry to sell the product - without any specific labelling.

But motor vehicle manufacturers and the oil industry responded cautiously to the Government's announcement, questioning whether it would lead to any increase in ethanol use.

"It is difficult to see how some of these measures will address underlying consumer resistance to ethanol as an additive in petrol," Federated Chamber of Automotive Industries chief executive Peter Sturrock said.

However, Queensland Nationals senator Barnaby Joyce branded the package "disappointing".

"Promoting ethanol is a core part of why we won that extra Senate seat," he said.

"If we can't fulfil this one, we really have to question the contract (with the Liberal Party). It gives credence to our argument that we shouldn't support the Liberals' core policies if they don't support ours."

Senior Nationals figure Ron Boswell said the package was "not as good as I would have liked".

The Nationals were waiting on the outcome of next week's showdown with the oil companies, he said.

"If the oil companies don't respond, there will be tremendous pressure on Mark Vaile to do something." Co

nservationists also expressed disappointment with the biofuels package, warning that the clean fuels industry had little chance of success without mandatory targets and long-term support.

World Wildlife Fund chief Greg Bourne welcomed the Government's undertaking to address the scare campaign against biofuels but said the Government had missed the point that the biofuels industry needed long-term support.

He called on the Government to phase out subsidies to greenhouse-gas-intensive fossil fuels in favour of longer-term excise concessions to biofuels producers beyond the current six-year time frame.

The Australian Medical Association backed calls for binding targets, calling for a mandated 10 per cent ethanol blend in petrol and 20 per cent bio-diesel in diesel.

AMA President Mukesh Haikerwal said that adding 10 per cent ethanol to petrol would "benefit our health without damaging our cars". Additional reporting: Amanda Hodge
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Gerhardp1 - Friday, Sep 23, 2005 at 09:51

Friday, Sep 23, 2005 at 09:51
John Howard's brother is the MD or Chairman or someone high up in Australia's biggest ethanol producer.

That's why he didn't do anything to protect taxpayers when service stations were putting 30% ethanol and more into fuel - the states had to act first.

John Howard still remembers all the taunts he suffered as a nerd in high school and he is still getting revenge.
AnswerID: 131472

Follow Up By: Member - JohnR (Vic)&Moses - Friday, Sep 23, 2005 at 10:36

Friday, Sep 23, 2005 at 10:36
I think you should try to get your facts right on the relationship right Gephardp1 before libelling the Howard family.......... Dick Honan - note different spelling and name heads Manildra an Australian ethanol company is said to be associated and trying to get some legislation on getting ethanol into Australian fuels.
0
FollowupID: 385801

Reply By: Robert - Friday, Sep 23, 2005 at 10:50

Friday, Sep 23, 2005 at 10:50
What secret about it?

Heard they were quite openly going to force motorist to use it and not only that, but had the gall to say it would be cheaper because it would reduce fuel by a lousy 4 cents a litre!

They know what they can do with their 4 cents a litre!

As to saying it won't wreck car engines - isn't that what they said about using unleaded in leaded engines when it was first introduced!
AnswerID: 131479

Reply By: Robert - Friday, Sep 23, 2005 at 10:51

Friday, Sep 23, 2005 at 10:51
What secret about it?

Heard they were quite openly going to force motorist to use it, and not only that but had the gall to say it would be cheaper because it would reduce fuel by a lousy 4 cents a litre!

They know what they can do with their 4 cents a litre!

As to saying it won't wreck car engines - isn't that what they said about using unleaded in leaded engines when it was first introduced?
AnswerID: 131480

Reply By: chump_boy - Friday, Sep 23, 2005 at 10:53

Friday, Sep 23, 2005 at 10:53
This is just my take on the whole ethanol / bio fuel thing. Take it with a grain of salt (or a few shots of *insert favourite liquor here*)...

Over the past 50 years, all the shots have been called by the big fuel companies. They have know oil prices will rise, and eventually oil run out.

Thats why they have invested so heavily in solar panel production, for example.

From what I understand, ethanol came out of nowhere, and they were unprepared. It was them that used their marketing departments and political contacts to say how bad ethanol was. It would ruin all our engines, and be terrible for the economy.

They are quiet at the moment, but will soon introduce 5% and 10% mixes. Suddenly, ethanol is OK

Remember all the hype about how bad ethanol was? There are still heaps of servos in Sydney with the "Guaranteed 100% fuel - no ethanol" signs up.

We will see in about 2 years time 50% ethanol blends, but with the fuel companies controling production and distribution.

I have a contact in a major refineries sales department in Sydney, who keeps me informed as to what is coming up in the future. Aquarious diesel is something we will see soon as well (diesel with water added, or something like that..)......

Cheers,

Chump
AnswerID: 131481

Follow Up By: Footloose - Friday, Sep 23, 2005 at 11:43

Friday, Sep 23, 2005 at 11:43
This is the dawning of the Age of Aquarious.........again ? :)))))))))
0
FollowupID: 385821

Follow Up By: chump_boy - Friday, Sep 23, 2005 at 11:54

Friday, Sep 23, 2005 at 11:54
Nothing like a good, anti-establishment conspiracy, hey?

LMFAO....

Chump
0
FollowupID: 385824

Reply By: Scubaroo - Friday, Sep 23, 2005 at 11:45

Friday, Sep 23, 2005 at 11:45
Most cars in Brazil run quite happily on E85 - that's 85% ethanol. They are modified of course to handle this.

Funny how biodiesel is ooh-ed and aah-ed, yet ethanol is booed down. Biodiesel has similar corrosive risks to engine components like fuel lines as ethanol. However when it comes to biodiesel, this is simply dismissed as "change your fuel hoses, and your fuel filter may clog up and need replacing as gunk is cleared out". In other words, an accepted side effect. The flow-on effects of the industy taking off will hopefully throw a lifeline to our sugar cane farmers who got screwed over during the US FTA negotiations, not to mention help reduce emissions and reliance on fossil fuels.

Holden, Mitsubishi, and Toyota all have statements on their websites stating that E10 is suitable for use in most or all of their vehicles:

Holden - http://tinyurl.com/7bw3y
Mitsubishi - http://tinyurl.com/8j3yn
Toyota - http://tinyurl.com/csexx

Obviously there is concern if your vehicle is one of those NOT okay'd for ethanol use though! I for one will be using E10 where available.
AnswerID: 131494

Follow Up By: Member - Jeff M (WA) - Thursday, Sep 29, 2005 at 12:14

Thursday, Sep 29, 2005 at 12:14
The only reason you get clogged fuel filters with Biodisel is because it's a solvent and actually clean out all the CRAP that the oil based diesel has left in the system. Once you've cleaned it out you will no longer have this issue. It is also important to not that Biodiesel has more than 3 times the lubricating properties of normal oil based deisel and produces almost 0 carbondioxide. In fact Biodisel is cleaner burning than LPG.

The only problem with Biodeisel is that it corrodes Rubber. Rubber hasn't been used in fuel system since the mid to late 80's. If your diesel is running fine on ULS diesel (pretty much any BP diesel) then you won't have a problem running it on Biodiesel as it has the same corrosive properties towards rubber.
0
FollowupID: 386583

Reply By: Member - Steve (ACT) - Friday, Sep 23, 2005 at 17:16

Friday, Sep 23, 2005 at 17:16
Can't guarantee accuracy but found this listing

http://www.abc.net.au/brisbane/stories/s1056358.htm

Sandy
AnswerID: 131539

Reply By: Tuff60 - Friday, Sep 23, 2005 at 19:25

Friday, Sep 23, 2005 at 19:25
I'm in NY USA at the moment, and if the pump doesn't say 10% ethanol, people won't buy it. Talking to a mechanic today, he tells me it was the same here ten years ago, hoo ahh ethanol will kill your engine, now the more (ethanol) the better.
People just know not to run it in 2 strokes, as it is a degreaser. And remember the engines here are the same, give or take as the engines at home in AUST, ie, 5.4 ford, 5.7 chev, 4.5 toyota, sorry nobody drives nissans, so I can't say.
AnswerID: 131560

Reply By: Bob of KAOS - Friday, Sep 23, 2005 at 20:21

Friday, Sep 23, 2005 at 20:21
Lets start using ethanol and move on. All the stories about engine damage are BS. If we could cut oil imports by 10% and use local sunshine (ethanol) for fuel we would be vastly better off. I couldn't care less whose friend is up who - just do it.
AnswerID: 131567

Follow Up By: Robert - Saturday, Sep 24, 2005 at 20:20

Saturday, Sep 24, 2005 at 20:20
" All the stories about engine damage are BS."

Perhaps we should have a national register, where all those in favour of ethanol being forced onto us (whether we want it or not) sign up, and then they can pay for anyone who suffers engine damage from ethanol.

And no doubt Bob, you will be the first to register your name!

Do this I will be happy to use ethanol!
0
FollowupID: 386019

Follow Up By: Bob of KAOS - Sunday, Sep 25, 2005 at 20:33

Sunday, Sep 25, 2005 at 20:33
As long as we get the divdend from the savings accruing from the use of ethanol too.

Ethanol is used in every state in the USA except for California, and it is about to change over too. We don't hear too many stories about 'engine damage'.
0
FollowupID: 386096

Follow Up By: Truckster (Vic) - Thursday, Sep 29, 2005 at 14:56

Thursday, Sep 29, 2005 at 14:56
" All the stories about engine damage are BS."
You know this for 100% fact?

yes bob you would be jumping for joy if your $15,000 engine failed because of it?
0
FollowupID: 386604

Follow Up By: Member - Chrispy (NSW) - Thursday, Sep 29, 2005 at 15:11

Thursday, Sep 29, 2005 at 15:11
Don't know about newer cars. My little brother has a 1943 Willys Jeep. He CANNOT run fuel that has even a WHIFF of ethanol in it as it does corrode the fuel pump diaphragm. If the diaphragm goes, then fuel starts leaking into the crankcase through the pump internals.... and into the oil.... and then the motor siezes because it's not being lubricated.

Many older classic cars have this problem - so please don't say that it's "BS". It isn't. It's a big problem for collectors.

If they go "secretly" adding ethanol to fuel, then where do you go for fuel without knowing who has and hasn't included ethanol in their blend?
0
FollowupID: 386605

Follow Up By: Bob of KAOS - Friday, Sep 30, 2005 at 07:30

Friday, Sep 30, 2005 at 07:30
OK. Perhaps we could establish a special fund to replace all the diaphragms in old Wyllis Jeeps. You're not seriously suggesting that billions of dollars in foreign exchange savings should be forfeited because one car in a million can't tolerate 10% ethanol?
I tend to place more reliance on the opinion of the NRMA, and the other credidle organisations involved in the 1999 study, than scaremongers on this forum.
0
FollowupID: 386757

Follow Up By: Member - Chrispy (NSW) - Friday, Sep 30, 2005 at 07:44

Friday, Sep 30, 2005 at 07:44
Absolutely not. That wasn't my point at all, and I'm a bit dissapointed in your inference. Oh... who is "scaremongering"? I'm stating a fact that some older cars will NOT tolerate ethanol - that's all. For every modern car - GO FOR IT! I'd like to see us more like Brazil - where cars run on nearly pure ethanol. Screw petroleum... if I can get cheaper AUSTRALIAN-produced ethanol for less then I'm IN.

What I am saying is that the addition of ethanol should not be done "secretly", and without disclosure - that's all. If a petrol pump has an "ethanol blend" sticker on it then we have the knowledge to avoind it if it's known to hurt our engines.
0
FollowupID: 386759

Follow Up By: Truckster (Vic) - Friday, Sep 30, 2005 at 16:59

Friday, Sep 30, 2005 at 16:59
dont bring logic into it crispy! its beyond some.
0
FollowupID: 386849

Follow Up By: Bob of KAOS - Friday, Sep 30, 2005 at 18:09

Friday, Sep 30, 2005 at 18:09
Using this logic we'd still be driving around on leaded fuel.
0
FollowupID: 386858

Reply By: Tanka - Tuesday, Sep 27, 2005 at 21:53

Tuesday, Sep 27, 2005 at 21:53
The negative effects of ethanol on motor vehicle engines is grossly overstated by the media and especially fuel companies. Of course they are going to tell you it is bad, it cuts into their bottom line. As a previous poster pointed out, South american countries run their yank tanks on a very strong ethanol mix, and have done so for quite some time. Vehicles that are less tolerant to ethanol, are only suffering from the manufacturers use of poor quality plastics and rubbers. I personally believe that all new vehicles should be designed with a 25% ethanol consumption in mind. It is a much cheaper excercise than setting up a vehicle to run on LPG which most people are more than happy to do, and does not require an extra lubrication system to prevent valve seat recesssion and/or overheating. The people that complain about the possible health effects of ethanol are usually the people that also complain of the damage that it is going to do to their 1984 XD Falcon with 600,000kms which is just a mobile health risk anyway. As for the big secret inclusion of 10% ethanol in fuel, if this product is as bad as the fuel companies make it out to be, then it would be no secret, as any car that filled up with the "secret mix" would blow up 5k's down the road. It is absoulte twaddle. I run my 2002 VXII Bommodore wagon on E10 and there is absouteley no difference in any facet of its performance, economy or reliability. Just to clear up something before it is asked. I am not affiliated in any way shape or form to ethanol sales or production. I am a Prison Officer that used to be a diesel mechanic. I just feel strongly on this issue as its the same people that accuse the fuel companies of ripping off motorists, that swallow all the hyperbole that same fuel companies put out in regards to ethanol.
AnswerID: 132074

Reply By: Truckster (Vic) - Wednesday, Sep 28, 2005 at 23:31

Wednesday, Sep 28, 2005 at 23:31
no secret about it, they admitted it on the news...

howard standing up for his people.
Hutt River Province still going?
AnswerID: 132263

Sponsored Links