THE DANGERS OF BIOFUELS
I wonder how many of our members are aware that at present, there is an EU Directive that authorises governments to set the level of biologically obtained fuels in petrol: the usual additive being Ethanol. There is no minimum level but until 2013 the specification is for “Ethanol5”. This contains up to 5% Ethanol- as well as Benzene, a known carcinogen!
From 2013 the mix may contain 10% Ethanol and that’s where the problems start. The British Government has commissioned a report on the known and expected effects of Ethanol10 on the internal combustion engine – not just for 2 & 4 wheeled vehicles but also Chain saws, generators, pleasure craft, motor mowers etc. The investigation was carried out by QinetiQ (the Govt. Defence organisation) and the Report (on their website but not released to the press) is Report 01/02/11: “Assessing Fuel System Compatibility with BioEthanol & Carburettor Icing” Effects expected, based on studies in other countries already using this mix, show heavy carbon deposits in the cylinder head, such that valves cease to rotate, stop inlet valves closing with loss of compression and, in addition, can fall off and become trapped in the cylinder, causing internal engine damage. In addition, E10 petrol blends severely corrode aluminium products, leading to catastrophic component failure. Carburettored vehicles suffer severe corrosion if water is present (and E10 is hygroscopic). Brass components are also corroded (carb.jets?).
Orbital Australia PTY LTD reported that all carburetted cars in their study contained materials that had doubtful compatibility, even with E5 and worsened with the presence of E10 petrol. Of particular concern here was tarnishing and corrosion of brass metering compounds (needle & main jets,etc.). The sole solution found by them was replacement of all brass components with more expensive alloys, such as nickel silver. In addition, this study found that corrosion rates in the presence of “wet” ethanol were up to 400 times greater than with the “dry” product. This increase was due to the impurities in the water generating electrochemical reactions (cases have been reported of extreme corrosion in steel underground storage tanks, caused by water seepage into the E10mix.).
QinetiQ reports aggressive attack on non-metals by E10 (examples included GRP fuel tanks, elastomer [rubber type] fuel lines, plastic fuel lines, pump seals, etc.). Resistance to E10 increases with increasing fluorine content, but 8 types of material are listed as at risk : 1) ABS; 2) Nylon 6; 3) Nylon 66; 4)PBT; 5)PET; 6) PEI; 7) PUR, 8) PVC (flexible). ABS failed after 1 week immersion, PUR, PVC & PBT all gave cause for concern, being seriously affected. An Indian report (Nihalani) reported increased failure of elastomers on motorcycles when E10 fuel was made available from pumps.
The report goes on to to state that in Europe 1st generation fuel-injected cars (roughly 2004-2006) had high pressure fuel pumps that are incompatible with the E10 mix (presumably due to high aluminium content of these). In France, pre-2000 cars are reportedly being damaged causing widespread breakdowns. So much so that in 2009 the French Government advised all owners of vehicles 9 years old or older(!) not to use E10 biofuel. This country is maintaining sales of grades of petrol with a much lower Ethanol content specifically for such vehicles (2 or 4 wheeled). Recently there has been a spate of reports of fuel hose failure after 6 months’ use of E10 biofuel, together with fuel pump failure due to debris from in-tank hose failure caused by material incompatibility.
Vintage vehicles are also reporting overheating problems, such that QinetiQ has “informally” requested that a “major UK motoring organisation” (my italics) report any increase in fuel-related breakdowns. A graph appears in the report with results that show on average 1,000 vehicle breakdowns /month from this cause: I feel this to be of major cause for concern for the MCC, many members do use the vehicles directly affected. Of particular concern to us is that after 2013 (less than 2 years time, remember! ) E5 will be phased out and replaced with this E10 bio-Ethanol: only two motorcycle manufacturers specifically state that their products are not affected . (These are at the upper end of the market).
The report estimates that around 4.5 of the 9 million vehicles on our roads will be 9 years old or older by 2013 and not able to run without problems, with thousands of motorcycles having “severe problems”. It goes on to write that the cost of overcoming these problems in these “elderly” (again, my italics) vehicles could prove prohibitive: apparently, the authors of the report have found that 27,000 people in the UK earn all or part of their living serving the historic vehicle movement and that many of these are already finding owners are experiencing significant problems, even using E5 fuel. This trade is found to be worth £3 billion annually to this country, with exports totally £300 million of this.
The remainder of the report is around the subject of carburettor icing (a phenomenon well–known to us Beetle owners, as well as VW engine powered light aircraft. As an aside, addition of ethanol (not E5 or E10 biofuel) to petrol is a known method of combating this problem .
So what does all this mean to us owners of historic & elderly vehicles?? Already there are well reported problems with fuel tank linings that have been trouble free for years, many just disintegrating or decomposing after using this biofuel. The situation worsens with stale fuel and has led to fires & total failures of glass fibre tanks (the resin dissolves). The recommendations of the report are several – one is the total ban on E5 and E10 for light aircraft (on safety grounds)as well as maintaining low or zero Ethanol content fuels for historic & vintage machinery. Before we all start jumping up & down with joy, look at the cost of the present stock of genuine 4-star leaded fuel – as well as the problems of finding it, not considering the cost per litre! How many small, country filling stations on the route of our long-distance events will stock this fuel?
Maybe it’s just me, but is this part of the green” movement’s hidden agenda to get rid of all “old” vehicles as well as us inconvenient philistines, who value production of food before that of biofuels? What can we do, then? Buttonhole your MP for a start, badger your Council to oppose this introduction – write/email the Dept. of Transport & your local radio TV station, point out the probable loss of a huge chunk of the national economy - need I go on ?? Start thinking about this – we’ve no time left!
Ron ButcherVice President The Motor Cycling Club