RE: Government ponders E10 petrol for 2021

[rainmakerraw]

mstrbkr said:

speedhunter1992 said:

As I read this article, the ad on the page informed me I can have a brand new KIA Picanto for £139/month with 0% APR. Annual road tax for one of these is £145. Fuel consumption on WLTP is listed at 50.4mpg for the 1.25-litre version so, with unleaded at £1.30/litre for argument's sake, fuel cost for 6,000 miles (annual mileage I do in my main car) is £703.55, or £58.63/month. Total so far: £209.71. And that's not including the deposit or insurance or servicing. My main car is a 1997 Fiesta, also with a 1.25-litre engine. It only does an average of 39mpg these days (although that's only 2mpg less than the quoted combined figure) but last year it cost me £155/month to run, all-in. That's £165 VED, insurance, fuel (Shell V-Power), servicing, repairs and an MOT. Old cars no longer being economically viable? I don't think so!

The advert you saw on this page bears no relation to the subject of the article. It's served to you personally based on your browsing data/cookies. It wasn't put there by PH and wasn't seen by all who are reading this news story. Not sure what this has to do with E10!

Then perhaps re-read and reconsider. The chap was presumably responding to this in the OP, by stating his old car is still very economically viable to him, let alone one built 10 years later (but still E10 incompatible):

PH said:

The government breezily dismisses this fact, and says that most of these cars will soon be economically unviable anyway.

[DanielSan]

mstrbkr said:

Nice and simple for Hondas. All fuel injected models work with E10. Job done

I wonder if there's any power gains to be had with a map tweak to run the E10?

[anonymous-user]

rainmakerraw said:

mstrbkr said:

speedhunter1992 said:

As I read this article, the ad on the page informed me I can have a brand new KIA Picanto for £139/month with 0% APR. Annual road tax for one of these is £145. Fuel consumption on WLTP is listed at 50.4mpg for the 1.25-litre version so, with unleaded at £1.30/litre for argument's sake, fuel cost for 6,000 miles (annual mileage I do in my main car) is £703.55, or £58.63/month. Total so far: £209.71. And that's not including the deposit or insurance or servicing. My main car is a 1997 Fiesta, also with a 1.25-litre engine. It only does an average of 39mpg these days (although that's only 2mpg less than the quoted combined figure) but last year it cost me £155/month to run, all-in. That's £165 VED, insurance, fuel (Shell V-Power), servicing, repairs and an MOT. Old cars no longer being economically viable? I don't think so!

The advert you saw on this page bears no relation to the subject of the article. It's served to you personally based on your browsing data/cookies. It wasn't put there by PH and wasn't seen by all who are reading this news story. Not sure what this has to do with E10!

Then perhaps re-read and reconsider. The chap was presumably responding to this in the OP, by stating his old car is still very economically viable to him, let alone one built 10 years later (but still E10 incompatible):

PH said:

The government breezily dismisses this fact, and says that most of these cars will soon be economically unviable anyway.

Ah okay, I see the point now but that particular fiesta happens to run on E10 just fine, so the government is not singling out cars such as that 1997 Fiesta. However apparently they are saying a 2003-2007 Mondeo is just about ready to be scrapped!

Edited by mstrbkr on Wednesday 4th March 17:46

[ZX10R NIN]

Just another ill thought out policy.

[BogBeast]

Sod E10. Bring on E85....

[unsprung]

cuprabob said:

can't remember said:

Misread that as Government ponders £10 petrol for 2021.

Me too

At first glance, I, too, thought the same.

Maybe in 20 years, with cost inflation as well as the rise of BEVs, perhaps petrol will cost this much. At least: In those countries where it's still available for sale.

[ShampooEfficient]

mstrbkr said:

The advert you saw on this page bears no relation to the subject of the article. It's served to you personally based on your browsing data/cookies. It wasn't put there by PH and wasn't seen by all who are reading this news story. Not sure what this has to do with E10!

Is anyone else seeing adverts for leather gimp masks and shackles?

[unsprung]

E10 is not an unknown, right? The dominant blend in the US and in other countries?

Wouldn't the issue be simply a matter of spark timing -- and therefore something of little consequence on late-model cars with "intelligent" ECUs?

If you have an older car, you add an additive. Or simply go without and see only a minor difference in output?

I'm not second-guessing the Germans, here. I'm just asking if, for the majority of keepers, the topic of E10 is not a great burden.

[IforB]

unsprung said:

E10 is not an unknown, right? The dominant blend in the US and in other countries?

Wouldn't the issue be simply a matter of spark timing -- and therefore something of little consequence on late-model cars with "intelligent" ECUs?

If you have an older car, you add an additive. Or simply go without and see only a minor difference in output?

I'm not second-guessing the Germans, here. I'm just asking if, for the majority of keepers, the topic of E10 is not a great burden.

It is not an issue with how it burns, but how it interacts with rubber or plastic parts.

Unless they are able to take it, fuel lines and tanks for example start to breakdown.

No Ecu flash in the world is going to fix a physical problem.

[LeoSayer]

My 993 is meant to be run on 97 ron or above and no more than E5 I believe.

So I assume I'll just need to run on 95 ron and suffer a slight performance drop.

[unsprung]

IforB said:

It is not an issue with how it burns, but how it interacts with rubber or plastic parts.

Unless they are able to take it, fuel lines and tanks for example start to breakdown.

No Ecu flash in the world is going to fix a physical problem.

thanks for that

So: for late-model vehicles that are also sold in the US and/or in other E10 markets, it's unlikely to be an issue. I would imagine. It's not like the UK and US version of a Jaguar XF use different rubber hoses. Non?

So then we get to older vehicles and to vehicles that may be somewhat limited in distribution. Would an additive help to preserve rubber and plastic? Or is the presence of ethanol pretty much an endgame?

Jay Leno talks about this problem. I recall now that he complains how US gasoline, being E10, eats away, over time, at plastic and rubber elements in his old cars. IIRC, his staff now upgrade (when and where possible) the plastic and rubber fittings on these older machines. I imagine that affordable 3D printing might be / become helpful in some of those situations.

[9k rpm]

LeoSayer said:

My 993 is meant to be run on 97 ron or above and no more than E5 I believe.

So I assume I'll just need to run on 95 ron and suffer a slight performance drop.

I may have misread but the article seemed to state high octane E5 will still be available.

“ The question of whether or not older cars are safe to run on the higher mix is one of the reasons the fuel hasn't been fully rolled out in Germany, where E5 is still offered at the pumps.

This would continue in the UK - but only in super-unleaded grades.”

[sparks_190e]

My 190e might be getting 99 then, don't think it's E10 compatible.

[airsport1]

Saving in CO2 emissions for most of the petrol fleet, the ability to dual supply fuels that support cars that were not made to take higher ethanol blends using existing infrastructure, the ability to manufacture locally using locally supplied crops that also produce animal feed for local use. I am struggling to understand why we have not done this ages ago.

[Starfighter]

How much carbon based fuel is required to make the bio ethanol part of the fuel?

[unsprung]

airsport1 said:

the ability to manufacture locally using locally supplied crops that also produce animal feed for local use.

That one item, alone, could bring about a major (positive) shift in domestic agriculture -- supporting overall employment, helping to minimise farm subsidies and, possibly, leading to a decently-sized export crop.

Toss in the ability to cultivate know-how in processes and related technologies, and there could be quite a lot more to this than just crops and ethanol.

[MikeM6]

As long as 99ron fuel is unaffected and available, this wont bother me too much, but I do wonder if super unleaded will follow suit...

[Gecko1978]

ShampooEfficient said:

mstrbkr said:

The advert you saw on this page bears no relation to the subject of the article. It's served to you personally based on your browsing data/cookies. It wasn't put there by PH and wasn't seen by all who are reading this news story. Not sure what this has to do with E10!

Is anyone else seeing adverts for leather gimp masks and shackles?

yeah

[anonymous-user]

DanielSan said:

I wonder if there's any power gains to be had with a map tweak to run the E10?

Doesn't add much power but you can see decent torque improvements with more alcohol.

I make my own E20 fuel mix when competing in sprints that allow unlimited fuels, using methanol rather than ethanol. I cant justify expensive race fuel and this is the cheapest good alternative.

Lets me add upto 6 degrees more ignition mid range which adds about 65 ftlb torque (from 435 to 500) and 20 BHP on a 2.1 litre.

I run a pretty high compression ratio so the Methanol makes a significant difference.

[airsport1]

Starfighter said:

How much carbon based fuel is required to make the bio ethanol part of the fuel?

Depends on the feedstock, process used and transportation but sugar beet derived can be over 70% carbon saving over the lifecycle grains can be similar.