New biofuel petrol

[Freebird]

Hi Merv,
Saw you no the train on Monday night, was not sure it was you till you got up to get off. Sorry to the point 95, 96 and 98 are all available depending on the supplier.

[Bass]

Yeah - think about speedway bikes. They burn alcohol and run HUGE comperession ratios to do it..

You got that right but back to front - they run big compression ratios because methanol has an octane rating of about 130 and so they can.

[avgas]

You got that right but back to front - they run big compression ratios because methanol has an octane rating of about 130 and so they can.

When are we getting 104 here (as in at the servo)? that stuff is fantastic.

[merv]

Sorry to the point 95, 96 and 98 are all available depending on the supplier.

You sure, I thought it was a Marsden Point thing that all 96 became 95 while 91 is still available and some 98, or do Gull or someone still do a 96? Certainly the big 3 don't.

[klingon]

Not quite Ferg - Gull is offering a 10% ethanol mix as an option at some of their outlets (two in Auckland, also maybe in Wellington?). Nothing really to do with the government, or the 'greenies', except that the E10 does have a much lower rate of carbon emissions so is a good thing in that respect. Most late model Japanese / Euro cars will run it with no problem - it is commonly available in lots of countries already. For other cars check out the AA website - they are on a bit of a mission to get clarity about the risks / benefits for 'older' vehicles. I haven't a clue about its suitability for bikes, so will be sticking to 95 / 98 for the SV. Keep the shiny side up...

[DISCLAIMER: This post was made by an SV1000 rider who was accidentally logged in as me. I know nothing about ethanol as a fuel! - klingon]

just heard the govt is planning on changing the composition of petrol to keep the greenies happy. i think they are going to increase the amount of ethanol( i could be wrong here) up to 10%



cheers

ferg

[davereid]

Just don't breathe anywhere near a vehicle using ethanol as a fuel.

When ethanol is burned, it emits acetylaldehide — considered a probable human carcinogen by the EPA.

And don't count on it saving the planet, as another byproduct is peroxyacetyl nitrate, which damages plants...

Of course you could catch the bus.. but it produces twice the carbon as your car.

Or you could walk, but if you use steak as a meal to provide your fuel it produces 4 times the carbon emmisions of using your car for the same trip.

Its not easy being green.

[NSR-Dan]

im working for honda now (that accord euro aunty helen filled up is in our show room) and as far as i know there is no problem with the E10 fuel in the engine but its the fuel lines that suffer as ethanol is corosive to rubber and its only the new cars with teflon fuel lines seals etc that can use it.

any way its not to much different in price, (i think its 3c cheaper than regular 98 but still more expensive than 96)

at the end of the day its a politicle ploy that its got less CO2 emissions. but the forget to tell us about the other harmful gasses that are emitted.

[Pancakes]

If they were really serious and not just building up to the election (yep, that bullshit time again folks!) They would have solar and wind farms to turn water into Hydrogen (about 140 octane for those that care) and have several harbours around the country dammed up with turbines in them so the tides could be used to power compressors for the gas. This would mean hydrogen fuel cells in electric cars or Hydrogen engines (have seen a hydrogen rotary, one gas valve for the Hydrogen and something like a normal injector for water mist. If you use straight gas it burns too fast, almost like detonation. The gas/water mix uses the gas to turn the water to steam and makes it all run like an internal combustion steam engine with a great elastic power stroke).

None of our present vehicles would run, the only real solution to that would be to have parts made elsewhere (counties with ore deposits) and assembled here. Heaps of new jobs for NZ and the only real clean fuel there is as Hydrogen burns to leave water and oxygen traces. No waste is produced from the compression part of the process either.

Pity telling people that their beloved vehicles have to go out the window to be replaced by one or two models (at the start anyway) of Govt built hydrogen cars and someone in Parliment would have to find the balls to tell the oil co's their profits in this country will be slashed!

PS, I'm serious about this stuff but know peoples ego's won't make the sacrifice needed to see perfect clean fuel take off.

[rwh]

If they were really serious and not just building up to the election (yep, that bullshit time again folks!) They would have solar and wind farms to turn water into Hydrogen

I'm not convinced you could realistically fit enough solar and wind power stations in NZ to power our vehicle fleet ... possibly workable (solar) in Australia or Africa though?

and have several harbours around the country dammed up with turbines in them so the tides could be used to power compressors for the gas.

I've heard there are problems with extracting tidal energy - most of the water movement is 'slosh', so that when you start damping it by extracting the energy, it doesn't go nearly as far as it otherwise would, and there's bugger all left to extract. Plus of course you probably destroy a bunch of wetlands and other environments that rely on either or both the changing level and the changing salinity of the water.

This would mean hydrogen fuel cells in electric cars or Hydrogen engines (have seen a hydrogen rotary, one gas valve for the Hydrogen and something like a normal injector for water mist. If you use straight gas it burns too fast, almost like detonation. The gas/water mix uses the gas to turn the water to steam and makes it all run like an internal combustion steam engine with a great elastic power stroke).

None of our present vehicles would run, the only real solution to that would be to have parts made elsewhere (counties with ore deposits) and assembled here. Heaps of new jobs for NZ and the only real clean fuel there is as Hydrogen burns to leave water and oxygen traces. No waste is produced from the compression part of the process either.

Pity telling people that their beloved vehicles have to go out the window to be replaced by one or two models (at the start anyway) of Govt built hydrogen cars

Better and cheaper in the interim perhaps to build a few models of engine with more wonderful opportunities for engineering shops to offer mounting kits for various existing cars? You could also melt down those old engines to build more new ones. Otherwise you're replacing exhaust pollution with dead-vehicle pollution :-(

PS, I'm serious about this stuff but know peoples ego's won't make the sacrifice needed to see perfect clean fuel take off.

Unfortunately I think clean fuel (while a worthy challenge) is only a small part of a huge problem. Better of course would be to change our lifestyles so we don't need to burn the stuff at all - work closer to home and walk there, travel or ship goods internationally by sailing ship if at all, etc etc.

I certainly have large internal conflicts on my ideas of going racing - thinking of all that wasted fuel and piles of useless tyres

My feeling is the world is somewhat screwed without a large reduction in population - just waiting to see how painful that is

Richard

[Pancakes]

Yeah rwh,

Whatever the answer is I don't think it will be able to produce the enery needed to sustain our current lifestyles, pity governments are voted in and telling people they are gonna have to pay more for a less comfortable life doesn't get many votes eh?

Reversing tidal area's doesn't have to ruin that area (ie, salmon flows an industry works alongside power generation dams in Canada) but the state the world is in now we may just have to pick some spots to get sacrificed for the greater good.

Not just population size but standards of living too, I assume people reading this may have environmental intersests. "Collapse" by Jared Diamond is an entertaining and realistic view of todays environmantal situation of the global village we live in, I highly reccomend a visit to the library to get that or any of his other books.

[avgas]

Just don't breathe anywhere near a vehicle using ethanol as a fuel.

When ethanol is burned, it emits acetylaldehide — considered a probable human carcinogen by the EPA.

And don't count on it saving the planet, as another byproduct is peroxyacetyl nitrate, which damages plants...

Of course you could catch the bus.. but it produces twice the carbon as your car.

Or you could walk, but if you use steak as a meal to provide your fuel it produces 4 times the carbon emmisions of using your car for the same trip.

Its not easy being green.

When was carbon bad? It must be easy being green - as 4th form science exam tells you that all things living are carbon based. So if you state that carbon is bad - 4th form science out the window.
Im not a big chemisty person, but as someone who has actually evaluated the whole greenhouse things i do see alot of marketing going on this 'carbon' thing.
Don't even get me started on dioxide and monoxide. As we all know only 1 of these actually is unatural.

[rwh]

"Collapse" by Jared Diamond is an entertaining and realistic view of todays environmantal situation of the global village we live in, I highly reccomend a visit to the library to get that or any of his other books.

Ha! I'm nearly finished it right now (second time through). Recently finished rereading "Guns, Germs and Steel", too.

Good reading all right - I'll second the recommendation. Was thinking of making it myself in that last post

Richard

[rwh]

When was carbon bad? It must be easy being green - as 4th form science exam tells you that all things living are carbon based. So if you state that carbon is bad - 4th form science out the window.
Im not a big chemisty person, but as someone who has actually evaluated the whole greenhouse things i do see alot of marketing going on this 'carbon' thing.
Don't even get me started on dioxide and monoxide. As we all know only 1 of these actually is unatural.

Both occur naturally; both occur unnaturally. And like all things, they're only bad when the levels are too high/low.

Richard

[What?]

You got that right but back to front - they run big compression ratios because methanol has an octane rating of about 130 and so they can.

True - it's a sort of chicken-and-egg argument.
I note that Gull are saying the E10 blend is more suitable to high-compresssion engines, and those that are designed to run on 91RON petrol should stay with it.

[avgas]

I got some in the bike, its nice.
Not mega super horsepower or anything - just nice.
Just had to tweak the carbs a little and i was away.
May be ok on EFI bikes if they have a oxy sensor or a PC3.
Would be better if it was a 80/20 mix though. 90/10 is almost a waste of time.