BioDiesel risk
Submitted: Sunday, May 07, 2006 at 17:41
ThreadID:
33652
Views:
3462
Replies:
12
FollowUps:
17
This Thread has been Archived
Member - BANJO (WA)
A write-up in the Motoring pages of the West Australian has a spokesman from Toyota, Mike Breen, state that with a biodiesel blend over 5% you would not be covered by warranty.
Nissan spokesman, Karl Gehling, said that the company did not recommend the use of biodiesel in any of its models.
DaimlerChrysler, Mercedes and Volkswagon spokesmen also said up to 5% was OK with BMW stating that they do not recommend biodiesel at all. Land Rover said that their handbooks specifically stated that their engines were not compatible with biodiesel.
Peugot was the exception with their statement that bio to a maximum blend up to 30% would not void the warranty.
I was just getting interested in the Gull B20, but now, hmmm?
Banjo (WA)
Reply By: Member - Blue (VIC) - Sunday, May 07, 2006 at 18:58
Sunday, May 07, 2006 at 18:58
If I couldn't gaurantee the quality of the product the consumer was using, I wouldn't warranty it either...
An interesting thing has been going on with the trucking company that delivers all of our bulk products. They have been buying in bio-diesel for their fleet. Some of the drivers were unhappy with the way their trucks were running and the excessive fuel consumption, not least of all the subbies who were also using this fuel as part of their contract... So 2 subbies take samples and one is analysed by Cat Australia and the other by an independant lab. Both samples came back in spec in every way bar moisture content. With over 2500 parts per million(ppm) of water in the fuel, it was slightly over Cat's recommended maximum of 200ppm.
Surely that much water is going to do some long term damage with regard to injector pumps and the injectors them selves...
AnswerID:
171349
Reply By: Member - Andrew W (SA) - Sunday, May 07, 2006 at 21:09
Sunday, May 07, 2006 at 21:09
I've done 60,000k's to date mostly on Biodiesel.
The 1HZ's outa warranty anyways so what Toyota says doesn't matter.
Remember that 100% biodiesel is being sold in huge volume and used by many Mercedes, Volkswagens, Toyotas and Nissans in Europe and that this is absolute crap.
In the end, if there are ANY fuel-related problems, the fuel is warranted by the major Biodiesel suppliers in Australia (like SAFF in SA for instance) and there is a Biodiesel standard in Australia that is far more stringent than the standards applying to Diesel (eg. gel temp etc.).
Seriously - unless they happen to
test your fuel when you bring it in (like fun), they are NEVER going to know.
What day's paper was this in Banjo - I'd like to see it - could you scan and post it?
Kind rgds
Andrew.
AnswerID:
171401
Follow Up By: Member - Banjo (WA) - Monday, May 08, 2006 at 09:08
Monday, May 08, 2006 at 09:08
Andrew,
Sorry, no scanner. The paper is, as in the original post, the West Australian.
Inside there is a supplement called 'Motoring'.
Does the SA Saturday or Sunday paper have a similar supplement? If so the article possibly reproduced there.
Banjo (WA)
FollowupID:
426875
Follow Up By: Member - Andrew W (SA) - Monday, May 08, 2006 at 17:32
Monday, May 08, 2006 at 17:32
no probs Banjo - the News Ltd paper on Sat didn't have that article in the Motoring section damn it.
Ciao for now
Andrew.
FollowupID:
426980
Reply By: Slunnie - Monday, May 08, 2006 at 00:37
Monday, May 08, 2006 at 00:37
I did a bit of reading into it, and was about to try and start using it while my tanks were clean since installing newbies. With LandRover TD5's at least, it seems they run ok on the Biodiesel for a while (as in about 6 months), but although all of the specifications of the Biodiesel are better in most areas that regular dino diesel, the Bio apparently reacts differently under the 20,000psi of pressure from the unit injectors and solids or something can fall out which fouls the injectors. I assume that the cleaning power of Bio cant undo this.
Based purely on this, be it right or wrong, I don't run the bio.
AnswerID:
171455
Reply By: Barnesy - Monday, May 08, 2006 at 01:01
Monday, May 08, 2006 at 01:01
I don't understand this argument. The first diesels over 100 years ago were designed and built to run on PEANUT OIL!
Rudolf Diesel himself stated at the World's Fair in Paris in 1900 (where the diesel engine won gold) that "the value of running an engine on vegetable oil won't be appreciated for a long time, but it will be appreciated".
Seems like that time is now.
Unless the design of the diesel engine has changed marketedly since then, then you have to take what you read in newspapers with a grain of salt.
Barnesy
AnswerID:
171457
Follow Up By: tex1972 - Monday, May 08, 2006 at 15:08
Monday, May 08, 2006 at 15:08
Of course the design of the diesel engine has changed since then, his first engines did not have an injector pump and weighed 250 kg to make 1 hp. It wasn't untill a system of metered fuel delivery was introduced (about 1920) that the diesel engine became useful. About 1926 it was used quite a lot in "lorries". About the only things todays engines have in common with his is the operating principle and the basic piston and
bore design.
Tex
FollowupID:
426947
Follow Up By: Member - Andrew W (SA) - Monday, May 08, 2006 at 17:33
Monday, May 08, 2006 at 17:33
and the ability to run very efficiently on transesterified biomass - otherwise known as biodiesel.
FollowupID:
426981
Follow Up By: fisho64 - Monday, May 08, 2006 at 18:12
Monday, May 08, 2006 at 18:12
Actually the first diesels ran on coal dust.
FollowupID:
426991
Reply By: RupertDog - Monday, May 08, 2006 at 16:56
Monday, May 08, 2006 at 16:56
Banjo
Read the same article with interest.
Don't know if it was just me, but the comments against Biodiesel seemed to be directed towards the "backyard DIY" bio, and not the GULL bio. Didn't exactly spell this out in the article, but most comments were "can't guarentee the quality", "inconsistent", etc, etc. GULL claimed their bio met the Govt standard (?) for diesel, not just bio.
I would tend towards the "give it try brigade" (GULL) and less towards the "don't try anything new" brigade (Manufacturers). Good one for the conspiracy hounds !! May even lead to another Engel v Waeco, Nissan v Toyota, ongoing series of discussions.
Unfortunately this is a purely acedemic arguement, as currently run petrol, and not able to upgrade to diesel until the lotto numbers come in!
RD
AnswerID:
171536
Follow Up By: Member - Andrew W (SA) - Monday, May 08, 2006 at 17:43
Monday, May 08, 2006 at 17:43
the gov't standard for diesel is never going to be met by biodiesel, but then neither is fossil fuel diesel ever going to meet the standard for Biodiesel.
Even the parts of it that would matter for fossil fuel, Australian Standard Biodiesel is a much better product.
Certainly,
home made biodiesel (which WA is famous for) is unlikely to have been standards tested (certainly not every batch as you have with commercial biodiesel - a requirement in order for the industry to get a rebate!), and could be prone to microbial contamination, high gel point (depending on the feedstock), other contaminants from the reaction or other sources, but for all that, the process of making Biodiesel ensures a high level of quality - if the reaction has occured to completion, the biodiesel naturally separates from the other products (and for that matter unreacted fatty acids) so that there are little contaminants likely to be found after combustion in the engine that the big car companies could notice anyways.
Ciao for now
Andrew.
FollowupID:
426985