E10 petrol

[Seeker]

Here comes E10:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/mar/04/e10-petrol-uk-to-standardise-higher-ethanol-blend

there goes your best fuel consumption:

https://www.euractiv.com/section/transport/news/test-shows-e10-increases-fuel-consumption/

[embee]

As far as I'm aware there will still be the requirement for "protected" fuel to be made available (i.e. E5 such as we have now).
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/727547/e10-petrol-consumer-protection-fuel-pump-labelling.pdf

Note that the second link referenced in the post above dates from 2013.

I've used E10 along with 95RON E5 and 98RON (probably significantly less than 5% ethanol) when touring abroad. For all intents and purposes the fuel consumption has hardly varied, certainly nothing you'd notice. The conditions and use make a much greater difference than that from the fuels.

[SV650rules]

This article shows much bigger drop in MPG, and these are USA EPA figures....

Seems like for every 5% added it drops MPG by 2 to 3 %

https://itstillruns.com/effect-ethanol-gas-mileage-5882696.html

interesting quote from article.

'On the downside, growing, tending and treating plants to create ethanol uses up considerable amounts of energy. By some estimates the amount of energy used to produce ethanol is greater than the amount of energy the ethanol ultimately ends up making when it is burned. Critics of ethanol believe that more efficient methods must be employed to make ethanol worthwhile, and are especially skeptical about corn as a source of ethanol, since other types of plants, like sugarcane and switch grass, can yield much greater amounts of biomass (and therefore ethanol) per acre.'

One of the worst things about Ethanol is that it attracts water, when you leave it standing like in a bike over winter it not only causes extra corrosion but also separates out....

[johnnyrod]

Dear God, are we going round this again? Ethanol itself may be hygroscopic but that doesn't mean it is when blended, and that certainly doesn't mean it's going to separate out - it would be dissolved water if anything. One of the things though is more acidic exhaust emissions. As for carbon footprint, it's not news that corn starch ethanol saves pretty much nothing, but unfortunately most places outside of Brazil can't manage the same sort of ratio of sugar cane going to ethanol compared to the demand for fuel. Also important are the prices of food when they're taken and burned so creates a big demand. We need to stop burning stuff.

[Seeker]

and that certainly doesn't mean it's going to separate out - it would be dissolved water if anything.

... if left alone for a while ethanol undergoes phase separation if water is present. The ethanol binds to the water molecule and forms a discrete layer at the bottom of a tank. Not only will your engine not run on this mixture but it also forms a gel like residue clogging up small holes and attacking certain metals. Carbs are particularly susceptible to damage.

In daily use this isn't a problem because of the agitation from movement but if you have a vehicle that is only used occasionally it will cause a problem. There are additives that can help but it all pushes the cost up.

https://petroclear.com/resources/dont-be-phased.php

[SV650rules]

We need to stop burning stuff.

It is burning stuff that raised humans from subsistence level living to where we are today, if some people want to go back to stone age well good luck to them.


Quote from an 'equipment news' article from USA .. They have had much more time to see what mischief ethanol gets up to and some of the articles are pretty scary. Does this mean we have to drain our fuel tanks every year when bike gets laid up ? I would also worry about the effect on bores of later SV that are a composite plated onto aluminium bore, these used to fail with too much sulphur in the fuel, now maybe with the gunk from ethanol. I guess there will be a whole raft of additives to counteract the effects of ethanol, as if we needed any more costs. This E10, E15 stuff is another red herring foisted on us by eco-zealots vociferous lobby groups, with little research into the affects of it on the environment and our expensive vehicles... It used to be good advice to keep fuel tank full over winter to prevent corrosion, now that advice will guarantee corrosion...

'Ethanol attracts water. When the two get together, they create the perfect environment to grow a type of bacteria called acetobacter. After getting drunk on their EPA-sponsored alcohol in your gas tank, the acetobacter excrete acetic acid. And acetic acid is very corrosive.
If you’re refilling your gas tank every week or two, acetobacter don’t have time to grow a sufficient size colony to damage metal parts in your fuel system. But if your fuel sits for longer periods of time these microorganisms continue to multiply until your gas tank contains damaging levels of acetic acid'.-------------------------------

'Prior to E-10 you didn’t get the kind of corrosion that makes your fuel pump look like it was left out in the rain for 20 years. But that kind of corrosion is occurring all across the country to people who store their chainsaws, string trimmers, lawn mowers, motorcycles, and ATVs without ethanol-fighting gas stabilizers'.

[timwilky]

Am I right in thinking some people have had nasty experiences with fuel systems, tanks, seals, pipework dissolving as a result of E10?

[Craig380]

Am I right in thinking some people have had nasty experiences with fuel systems, tanks, seals, pipework dissolving as a result of E10?

It's really bad for glassfibre fuel tanks, and it can also dissolve some older types of fuel tank liners. Older types of rubber fuel hoses and o-rings can be affected too.

Having said that, my old GT380 was happy enough on E5. Its tank had been lined but I never had any problems with that, or any rubber component deteriorating in the carbs (the 380 carbs have lots of tubes linking the carb bodies).

[redtrummy]

I have some Briggs and Stratton Fuel additive that's supposed to preserve the petrol - is that any help anyone?

[johnnyrod]

http://www.biofuelsdigest.com/bdigest/2016/09/25/new-doe-study-gasoline-becomes-stale-before-ethanol-phase-separation-occurs/

[Seeker]

http://www.biofuelsdigest.com/bdigest/2016/09/25/new-doe-study-gasoline-becomes-stale-before-ethanol-phase-separation-occurs/

So phase separation does occur and the water/ethanol mix will form a layer with the petrol on top.

The article says: " it often took more than three months for phase separation to occur, meaning the fuel had already weathered to a point it was unusable".

I don't know how much climate affects the time for petrol to go stale - but most of the US has long, hot Summers.

I've left vehicles for much longer than three months and expected them to run but if phase separation had occurred that would not have been the case. My Kawasaki H1 (had it worked out) would have been a Summer only bike which would have meant removing and draining the carbs, draining the tank and storing it somewhere dry over the winter months.

I bought this:https://www.frost.co.uk/ethomix-corrosion-inhibitor-additive-ethanol-protection/
but never got the chance to evaluate it.

[johnnyrod]

Apparently so but at E15 it doesn't separate

[Seeker]

Apparently so but at E15 it doesn't separate

do you have a link for that because all the info I find indicates that any ethanol formulation will phase separate.

The next gen bio fuel will probably be butanol which does not separate.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/the-push-for-year-round-e15-is-upon-us-but-is-it-the-best-biofuel-option

[johnnyrod]

No link, something I read yesterday. With enough of a cosolvent i.e. the alcohol you won't get any separation. Butanol (either of them) or IPA are more lyophilic than ethanol, so will not want to separate. I wouldn't place any bets on what the next thing will be, it's an industry riddled with BS about energy balances and economics to support whatever your chosen point of view is.

[redtrummy]

Thanks J an interesting read. I do have some reservations about E petrol. My Cub on a couple of occasions, after winter, has failed to start. I Change the fuel and away it goes. I then put the fuel in the lawnmower and no problem. Petrol left in the Suzy carbs does appear to clog much more easily than it did. I will own up to being an 'occasional' rider - only when its dry as well!

[SV650rules]

I will own up to being an 'occasional' rider - only when its dry as well!

A good many bikers are like you, 'fair weather riders' - which makes Ethanol more of a problem than in other vehicles as the fuel can be left for longish periods.. Don't know how picky a basic lawnmower engine is about fuel, i used to leave a bit of redex in the fuel over winter and it seemed to cure the 'spring starting problem' but that was pre-ethanol, so not sure any more, do I drain the tank and run carb dry or what ? I did have a diaphragm in the Briggs and Stratton carb on our mower go bad towards end of last year ( which is about when the big 'E' started appearing in fuel by us, the mower had been fine for previous 7 years, turned out quicker and pretty cheap ( about £25 ) to buy a whole new carb and fit it, but may well get a repair kit for the old one and maybe keep it as a spare . USA has much more experience of Ethanol than we do, and some proper horror stories from there.

[Sir Trev]

Hugh has been in hibernation since the end of October. I did add some stabiliser to his tank which is pretty full so fingers crossed when he gets wheeled out of the garage in another few weeks (hopefully).

[SV650rules]

Hugh has been in hibernation since the end of October. I did add some stabiliser to his tank which is pretty full so fingers crossed when he gets wheeled out of the garage in another few weeks (hopefully).


Maybe a marmalade sandwich will tempt Hugh to start .......

[Sir Trev]

The bear is not allowed in my garage.

[Kenzie]

So by trying to reduce emissions they add more ethanol which increases fuel consumption which then means you burn more fuel to get the same distance so the net effect is emissions remain the same? Why bother?

[SV650rules]

You can raise objections to E10 fuel here
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/869814/introducing-e10-petrol-consultation.pdf


The crafty beggars split up the response form ( annex D ) from the rest - https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/introducing-e10-petrol
about halfway down page in link is 'ways to respond and a link to response form...it is a document you need to download and email separately
to the email given on form.... almost seems as though they don't want people to respond....

[SV650rules]

So by trying to reduce emissions they add more ethanol which increases fuel consumption which then means you burn more fuel to get the same distance so the net effect is emissions remain the same? Why bother?

Another eco-zealot box ticked, another green highlighted bit to put on the UK Powepoint presentation at the next climate change conference where all the delegates arrive by private jet... they do not expect people to question too deeply and unearth the large downsides to most ill-advised government policies..

[embee]

Oh dear.

Why object to the availability of E10 as long as E5 remains widely available ("protected grade")? They're not proposing that the only fuel available will be E10.

As per my earlier post, have a read through the section on E5 availability in the referred to 2020 document before getting too worked up about it.

The vast majority of vehicles built since the 1990's will be fine on E10, and if they are not then just keep using E5 or a premium grade (98RON typically) which will almost certainly have 5% or less ethanol anyway.
Pump fuel has been allowed to contain up to 5% ethanol (or equivalent from oxygenates) for donkey's years but hasn't been required to be labelled.

[Seeker]

Why object to the availability of E10 as long as E5 remains widely available ("protected grade")? They're not proposing that the only fuel available will be E10.

experience from other European countries shows that petrol stations are reluctant to stock E5 and E10 at regular grades, so you would have to buy the super to get E5.

The proposal is based on the average car being capable of accepting E10, bikes have lagged behind in the sophistication (or adoption) of fuel injection and the article below says that the average age of a bike in the UK is 14.7 years.

https://www.bennetts.co.uk/bikesocial/news-and-views/news/2020/march/what-is-e10-fuel-and-is-it-safe


So, if you have a modern bike, great, you can sit back smugly and enjoy schadenfreude. If you have an older, carb'd bike then "oh dear" is correct.

The proposals have not considered motorcycles at all, it mentions that older cars could have problems and says:

“While there are currently around 400,000 cars that fit the description, this figure is expected to halve by 2021. At that point, these vehicles will represent less than 1% of the total car parc.”

[embee]

I have several older carb bikes, the SV amongst them, so I'm well aware of the potential issues.
E5 will still be available even if it's at the premium grade. On paper the calorific value of the higher grades is usually a couple of percent higher than 95 E5, so in theory the bang-for-buck (MJ/£) isn't that much different. A similar effect applies with oxygenated fuels, complicated a little by those that don't have feedback/closed loop fuelling (to correct A/F for the oxygen in the fuel).
As said in my first post on this, I've used 95E5/95E10/98E5 in various bikes abroad, both FI (NC700) and carbs (650 Deauville) and to be honest the difference in economy has been pretty trivial in reality, and even allowing for the cost/L difference the actual total costs have been mainly down to the type of use (motorway cruising speed for example) and temperature etc rather than the actual fuel price.
Incidentally the NC700 uses 2/3 the amount of fuel that the Deauville uses ridden like for like.

I suppose objecting will make folk feel a bit better, but it's going to happen the way the grubbiment want to do it (remember the outcome of the general election? That's what we get, they want to do something it will happen, tough, "we" voted for it).

[SV650rules]

Higher octane fuel actually has 'less bang for more bucks' - but it allows fuel / air mixture to be ignited earlier for a more complete burn without the rising pressure of burning fuel causing pockets to ignite themselves. The knock sensors on modern engines will detect signature sound of knocking and retard ignition until it stops, but retarded ignition means less power, high octane has less energy but engine can make more efficient use of it. I have tried higher octane 97 and 99 in older carbed bikes and they ran worse, could have been made to run better by advancing ignition timing but that would mean i was then committed to use higher octane.

[embee]

OK, I must be wrong then. My 40yrs in engine design/development was possibly a waste of time.

Seriously though, each to their own, whatever makes people feel happier.

[SV650rules]

Ethanol is used as an octane booster and has less energy than the gasoline it replaces, but it will cool the combustion and reduce NOx - which I guess is the reason for using it, although NOx from petrol engines is already a small fraction of NOx output of diesels

https://global.etsracingfuels.com/blogs/blog/guide_to_racing_fuels_the_octane_factor?loc=global

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1364032113002050

[embee]

We're wandering off topic rather, but there's a lot of incorrect statements in that first link https://global.etsracingfuels.com/blogs/blog/guide_to_racing_fuels_the_octane_factor?loc=global

Just for example, higher octane pump petrol/gasoline is usually slightly higher calorific value, their use of the term "more powerful" is rather odd, it doesn't really mean much. 98RON might be around 43.5MJ/kg, 95RON might be something like 42.7MJ/kg (ref. Bosch Automotive Handbook) but precise numbers are almost impossible to come by, it can vary depending what actual constituents are used.
93RON fuel is not made up of 93% iso-octane and 7% n-heptane, rather it behaves like such a mixture (in a specific test engine at specific conditions). The iso-octane (by definition 100 octane)and n-heptane (by definition zero octane) fuels are the reference fuels against which pump fuel is compared, they are not necessarily or normally the constituents.
Describing the higher octane fuel as behaving more "predictably" is not correct, both or either are usually very predictable in what they do.
Fuel does not "detonate" before the spark occurs. Detonation or knock and pre-ignition are totally different phenomena. Knock occurs in end gas.
Normal combustion is not an "explosion", it is a progressive burn, it takes a few tens of degrees of crank rotation (depending on speed/load etc).

The article is sort of vaguely along the right lines, but rather inaccurate in detail.

[johnnyrod]

Embee is not someone one would waste time arguing with on this subject, to be honest.

[embee]

I apologise for being a bit argumentative, I really shouldn't.

The bottom line I think we all have to come to terms with is that this is indicative of what "taking back control" will be like with a government which has a substantial working majority and no external tempering forces to moderate what they do regards rules/regulations/standards. Taking back control doesn't necessarily equate to doing what the people want or prefer. They'll do what suits their agenda, who is to stop them? Could be fuel, could be food, could be medicines, working conditions, human rights, whatever.