PDA

View Full Version : Ethanol to replace unleaded fuel by 2011


skulless
6th December 2008, 10:45 AM
OIL companies and petrol retailers in NSW will be forced by law to replace regular unleaded petrol with ethanol blends by 2011.
The move could lead to even cheaper fuel for motorists with E10 yesterday selling at up to 10c a litre less than regular unleaded in some western Sydney outlets.
The Daily Telegraph (http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/) has learned that State Cabinet (http://search.news.com.au/search//0/?us=ndmnews&sid=1242&as=news&ac=ninews2&q=State%20Cabinet) voted on Tuesday to legislate mandatory ethanol use for the first time in Australia, taking a stick to major players in the industry who have refused to co-operate with what was a weakly enforced mandate.
They plan to completely phase out regular unleaded within three years and replace it with the 10 per cent ethanol blend known as E10.
In a major crackdown on recalcitrant oil companies and the big petrol retailers Coles and Woolworths, 4 per cent of the total volume of regular unleaded petrol sold in NSW from next year must be E10 - a doubling of the current standard. This will rise to 6 per cent in 2010.
But the following year, regular unleaded will no longer be able to be sold in NSW and will be replaced at every bowser with E10. The more expensive premium unleaded will still be available, leaving motorists with just two choices.
The Government will also mandate 2 per cent bio-diesel for all diesel sold, creating an entirely new local industry for NSW. It is estimated the E10 policy will reduce total greenhouse emissions by around 2 per cent - or the equivalent of taking 77,000 cars and 1900 buses and trucks off the road.
An estimated 900 new jobs are expected to be created in regional and rural NSW from the expansion of independent ethanol producers.
The mandatory ethanol policy was an election promise of the Iemma Government (http://search.news.com.au/search//0/?us=ndmnews&sid=1242&as=news&ac=ninews2&q=Iemma%20Government) in 2007.
However, this was the fourth attempt by the Government to get an ethanol bill through Cabinet following objections by ministers including Joe Tripodi (http://search.news.com.au/search//0/?us=ndmnews&sid=1242&as=news&ac=ninews2&q=Joe%20Tripodi) and Treasurer Eric Roozendaal (http://search.news.com.au/search//0/?us=ndmnews&sid=1242&as=news&ac=ninews2&q=Treasurer%20Eric%20Roozendaal) to the proposal.
The Daily Telegraph has confirmed that Police and Lands (natural resources) Minister Tony Kelly (http://search.news.com.au/search//0/?us=ndmnews&sid=1242&as=news&ac=ninews2&q=Tony%20Kelly) re-introduced the policy to Cabinet on Tuesday and forced through its approval with the support of Climate Change Minister Carmel Tebbutt.
A Government source said Woolworths and Coles had been "dragging the chain" on ethanol. Fears that ethanol blends would affect the performance of some vehicles have been dismissed by most experts as myth.
Blacktown's crusading petrol warrior Marie El-Khoury (http://search.news.com.au/search//0/?us=ndmnews&sid=1242&as=news&ac=ninews2&q=Marie%20El-Khoury) has welcomed the Government's push to introduce compulsory ethanol in all petrol.
After a shaky start when it was avoided by fearful customers, 10 per cent ethanol fuel has taken hold, becoming Ms El-Khoury's top seller.I think this is outrageous. E10 replacing unleaded! Man, we should be using those corns and help out the poor and feed the world instead!
loopyASTRA
6th December 2008, 11:17 AM
who cares dont we all use 98ron here anyway?
chrissn89
6th December 2008, 11:28 AM
dont we all use 98ron here anyway?

+1
kilcoy
6th December 2008, 11:49 AM
chances are it will b a 10% blend in everything. im not a greeny but it should b a higher percentage.
MatsHolden
6th December 2008, 05:14 PM
I think this is outrageous. E10 replacing unleaded! Man, we should be using those corns and help out the poor and feed the world instead!

E10 is still unleaded. And ethanol can be made with any plant matter, including all the waste left over from harvesting. Holden are developing their own ethanol fuel with their own crops. Their fuel will be E85.
angus171
6th December 2008, 05:58 PM
Some older cars dont run well over time on e10 - so if you have a 20 year old car, for example, because you can't afford a newer one, you'll need to put more expensive 95/8 ron in it to avoid damaging your engine? Assuming of course that you normally run 91 ron.
Just playing devil's advocate, but that doesn't sound like very smart policy for people in that situation - I daresay there are a few !
tomburke7
6th December 2008, 06:11 PM
chances are it will b a 10% blend in everything. im not a greeny but it should b a higher percentage.

Ethanol has a lower energy value than petrol. At 10% ethanol you loose 3.5% of the energy in the fuel (according to the figures from Shell) so your fuel consumption is 3.5% higher. Now ethanol is 2c/L cheaper, that is only a 1.3 - 2% saving in cost. Guess what, the consumer is again the loser.

Next comes the question: does the ethanol damage the engine/lines/etc.
Ice
6th December 2008, 06:20 PM
Some older cars dont run well over time on e10 - so if you have a 20 year old car, for example, because you can't afford a newer one, you'll need to put more expensive 95/8 ron in it to avoid damaging your engine? Assuming of course that you normally run 91 ron.
Just playing devil's advocate, but that doesn't sound like very smart policy for people in that situation - I daresay there are a few !

not everyone can be made happy and most 20 y/o cars shouldnt be on the road anyway and those who are collectors etc can afford PULP. come on 10 cents a litre diff ? please thats one less pack of cigs a week.....

the positives far outweigh the negatives and those bloody oil companies need to be reigned in aswell.
USC
6th December 2008, 07:45 PM
I say wipe out Petrol completely. Lets use hydrogen:D
tomburke7
6th December 2008, 08:09 PM
I say wipe out Petrol completely. Lets use hydrogen:D

Sadly Hydrogen is a bit too much on the explosive side...
MatsHolden
6th December 2008, 08:11 PM
Sadly Hydrogen is a bit too much on the explosive side...

Can be done though. There's already production hydrogen vehicles. The main thing that holds hydrogen back is the infrastructure.
Senor Ed
6th December 2008, 10:27 PM
Hydrogen......Hindenburg anyone????
MatsHolden
6th December 2008, 10:40 PM
Hydrogen......Hindenburg anyone????

Hindenburg was Hydrogen in gas form, not liquid. And it was the highly flammable skin covering that caused the Hindenburg to go up so quickly, not the hydrogen ;).
MR VXR
7th December 2008, 01:01 AM
i got a big ass red sticker on the fuel cap of my vxr that says don't use fuel containing ethanol, there is also a warning in the owners manual that says it may damage your engine. guess i'm screwed. :(
Jerram
7th December 2008, 01:49 AM
Hindenburg was Hydrogen in gas form, not liquid. And it was the highly flammable skin covering that caused the Hindenburg to go up so quickly, not the hydrogen ;).

that's right.
Wraith
7th December 2008, 10:24 AM
As long as it dosn't stuff up engines and/or peripherals and it's going to mean cheaper fuel prices, that ain't such a bad thing is it ??

However if it represents a risk in engine reliability and other components, not so good...
Ice
7th December 2008, 10:32 AM
i got a big ass red sticker on the fuel cap of my vxr that says don't use fuel containing ethanol, there is also a warning in the owners manual that says it may damage your engine. guess i'm screwed. :(

PULP will still be available.....
gman
8th December 2008, 01:18 PM
Can be done though. There's already production hydrogen vehicles. The main thing that holds hydrogen back is the infrastructure.

The problem isn't that is explosive, (LPG is explosive and millions drive around with those strapped in their cars.) its storage and energy value, so therefore range and energy needed for production.

You can't store enough Hydrogen to get decent range so you need more infrastructure. It has a lower calorific content than LPG or petrol, so you need a bigger tank. Also, being a cryogenically stored fuel, the tanks are larger/heavier to start of with.

Also, it takes a lot of energy to produce, so your trading tailpipe emissions for production emissions...

There are also efficiency problems with Hydrogen in normal 4 stroke piston engine, mainly surrounding pre-ignition of the fuel on heated engine components, mainly the valves and seats (BMW have worked around this with a Direct injection model, but its still not 100%).

It's interesting that the most efficient current engine design for hydrogen seems to be the Wankle Rotary. Most Hydrogen vehicles are usually electric fuel cell types...

IMHO, ethanol and fuel cells are the way this should be heading. Brazil has been 85% ethanol powered for nearly 20 years. Also, in growing crops, your removing CO2 from the atmosphere. Use fast growing crops (sugar cane, bamboo etc) and you are making a HUGE CO2 recycling industry..
gman
8th December 2008, 01:21 PM
As long as it dosn't stuff up engines and/or peripherals and it's going to mean cheaper fuel prices, that ain't such a bad thing is it ??

However if it represents a risk in engine reliability and other components, not so good...

Lotus also made an E85 Exige in the UK. It made over 15% more power at the expense of less range due to increased fuel usage.

Ethanol has a higher "octane" value though less specific energy. So by injecting more it can stand more timing, has an inherent cooling effect and makes can make more power per stoke of the engine. Downside, you use more fuel by about 10 ot 15%..