Fuel Additives

[Lubrown]

Tbh along with that the elephant in the room is the governments eco targets. You won't see much of it in the news but they are constantly increasing the amount of eco fuel in your forecourt fuel. Whilst this in theory is a good thing, but it increases the number of biocides in the fuel, which contribute greatly to sludge in your fuel system.
Petrol stations have filters at the pumps to filter biocides, but with age etc they deteriorate.
If I were to add an additive, it would be a biocide...

Independent testing doesn’t support your hypothesis.
“Constantly increasing the amount of eco fuel…” - what are you calling ‘eco fuel’ and if they are constantly increasing it it’d be at 100% by now.
I assume you are referring to the 5 and 10% maximum (there is a clue in the word maximum) limits for ethanol? Independent tests even this year have found e10 fuels with nowhere near 10% ethanol.

Also worth noting that despite Porsche and Shell throwing millions at developing bio fuels (because it’s easier and far more profitable for them to stick to current business models rather than spend money going down the EV route) the consensus was that adding more ethanol is unsustainable as to scale it up would mean diverting crops (and field space) for fuel rather than food. It doesn’t work so pretty much gave up on that one.

 

[DXX]

Brazil has been adding ethanol to fuel for almost 100 years, admittedly they have massive traffic jams but not because they’ve all broken down.
Ethanol is also the active ingredient in most fuel system snake oils, a shot of vodka would be cheaper than a visit to Halfords.

 

[Sasquatch]

People have been trying to develop eco or synthetic fuels since the 1930s, and in that time no one has discovered process for doing so that comes remotely close to the cost of dino pump fuel.

The relatively small percentages of bio derived (rather than bio fuel, which it is not) additives such as ethanol is about as far as it is ever likely to go else it won't be financially viable.

 

[mattius]

The fuel in a vehicle tank is not in the vehicle long enough to incubate microbes.
Biocides are extremely hazardous compounds, I know because I used to dose marine fuel systems, by far the most dangerous substance on a ship unless it’s nuclear powered.
I’m not aware of any microbes that can survive in fuel without a significant water content.
Biocides don’t cause sludge, the microbes do, I’ve personally removed tonnes of microbe jelly from marine fuel tanks.

But that's just the problem, it's not the fuel in your tank, it's the fuel in the forecourt tanks that has the microbes, in a poorly maintained forecourt, hight water content is a thing. Forecourt Fuel pumps do have filters for biocides, however it's again down to how well maintained they are.

 

[Lubrown]

We’re here to add more eco fuel to the tanks

 

[mattius]

People have been trying to develop eco or synthetic fuels since the 1930s, and in that time no one has discovered process for doing so that comes remotely close to the cost of dino pump fuel.

The relatively small percentages of bio derived (rather than bio fuel, which it is not) additives such as ethanol is about as far as it is ever likely to go else it won't be financially viable.

It does exist, it's just bloody expensive. P1 Fuels has one of the best, it's used in WRC cars for a number of years now.

Im old school, the valve seat recession caused by the removal of lead from petrol burnt a whole in my pockets a few times...

In a modern engine designed to copy with it, cool, but they don't give you the option these days.

In the early days of biodiesel it was on a separate pump at the forecourts, but no one bought it, so they made regular pump diesel have a percentage of it, that's slowly been increasing.

 

[whodat]

I may be wrong - it has been known, but in the last 30 odd years they have gone from 0% to around 5-10% bio fuel mix. Very slowly.
In about 300 years, it should all be biofuel - or seaweed as that is what our mutant cyber e-offspring or i-offspring (depending on the preferred implanted sea-current navigation chip) will be clinging on to.

 

[Lubrown]

I may be wrong - it has been known, but in the last 30 odd years they have gone from 0% to around 5-10% bio fuel mix. Very slowly.
In about 300 years, it should all be biofuel - or seaweed as that is what our mutant cyber e-offspring or i-offspring (depending on the preferred implanted current navigation chip) will be clinging on to.

Yes, it’s glacial level ‘progress’.

E5 & later E10 for petrols - the numbers (as you’re aware) refer to the maximum ethanol content and B7 for bio diesel (again, 7% maximum bio fuel content) weren’t just a fag packet idea quickly dumped into tanks.

This after eventually getting lead out of petrol sold to the masses despite knowing the health implications.
Meanwhile lead can still be added to jet fuel - despite the known risks, highlighting how little we push for new technologies sometimes.

Biodiesel is improving so if some mysterious figures are forcing fuel suppliers to use the newer more eco stuff then that’s a big win for the end user. FAME biodiesel, the ‘first gen’ stuff does absorb moisture and has a maximum storage life of a year. Newer biodiesel is HVO - burns cleaner and does not absorb moisture easily at all. Has a ten year storage life. Progress!

As for petrol the government have known since at least 2007 that it is not worth going too high with the percentage of ethanol as the current ethanol mix of these fuels is still mostly (90%) based on crops that humans need to eat or cause deforestation.
India is looking into blending up to 27% and Brazil have tested fuels at 30%. If you can get the ethanol from sustainable sources that don’t compete with food production or cause deforestation (and preferably don’t consume as much water in the production as the current ethanol processing does) then vehicles will take it and it will be a good move. There is a lot being spent on looking for cleaner and more sustainable fuels. ICE will be here a long time yet so getting it to run cleaner while adding to fuel security will of course be a big focus. And to support the move other transport methods and fuel sources will still be needed.

I like progress. I like problems being solved. I appreciate mistakes will be made along the way. Plenty of positives when you look for them. The push back and misunderstanding is a minor frustration that needs work - people need to be better informed if they are to support the progress.

 

[whodat]

I remember reading a long long time ago (late 80's) about Brazil thinking about making some of their sugar cane (I think) crops available to convert to ethanol for use as an additive. Within about 5 years they had done it and got to the same sort of level as we have over 30odd years. However, that led to other problems - more benzene and other ringed hydrocarbons from the exhaust.

Did you know the same 'chemist' who came up with TetraEthylLead additive also came up with CFC's as a refridgerant? Clever bloke.
GM got 2cents on the gallon for each gallon of fuel sold at the pump as they owned the patent for the lead additive.
There were other, possibly better, additives already developed but the patents were owned by other companies or not patentable, or were just not as profitable.

"And so it goes..." as Kilgore used to say.

 

[Ali-G]

the consensus was that adding more ethanol is unsustainable as to scale it up would mean diverting crops (and field space) for fuel rather than food.

Doesn't Mad Ed need all our farmland to cover in his Chinese slave labour produced solar panels?

 

[DXX]

Doesn't Mad Ed need all our farmland to cover in his Chinese slave labour produced solar panels?

Yes to power data centres so we can keep photos of our dinner and alloy wheels on the Cloud forever!

 

[Lubrown]

Doesn't Mad Ed need all our farmland to cover in his Chinese slave labour produced solar panels?

One person doesn’t need entire fields of solar so the answer to your question is no.
As for slave labour we all add to that - you can’t pretend you exclude anything Chinese from your shopping. If you use food couriers you’re adding to that problem here at home too. Most people buy tat they don’t need from China, at least solar panels (like the ones on your van) have a decent purpose.

But there are lots of competing uses and industries that need land. Housing, food, energy, transport (and a bit for water storage would be nice).

And more to the point growing crops is becoming less reliable with droughts and other weather extremes becoming more frequent.
The impact of fossil fuels on climate change was acknowledged in the late 50s. As I say, glacial progress.
Maybe if someone stuck their head above the parapet back then we wouldn’t be in such a mess now. Not many brave enough to do that though. There are plenty that want to do sweet FA about it just for personal gain.

 

[Ali-G]

you can’t pretend you exclude anything Chinese from your shopping.

I don't and never have.

solar panels (like the ones on your van) have a decent purpose.

I don't have a van and when I did it didn't have solar panels on it.

 

[Sasquatch]

I remember reading a long long time ago (late 80's) about Brazil thinking about making some of their sugar cane (I think) crops available to convert to ethanol for use as an additive. Within about 5 years they had done it and got to the same sort of level as we have over 30odd years. However, that led to other problems - more benzene and other ringed hydrocarbons from the exhaust.

Did you know the same 'chemist' who came up with TetraEthylLead additive also came up with CFC's as a refridgerant? Clever bloke.
GM got 2cents on the gallon for each gallon of fuel sold at the pump as they owned the patent for the lead additive.
There were other, possibly better, additives already developed but the patents were owned by other companies or not patentable, or were just not as profitable.

"And so it goes..." as Kilgore used to say.

What a wonderful choice.

Leaded petrol makes you dumb and, occasionally, criminally insane.

The benzinated substitute makes you cancerous.

 

[Lubrown]

more benzene and other ringed hydrocarbons from the exhaust.

Depends on what other additives are added, what aromatics are removed and even the type of engine used but several studies show E10 produces less benzene (amongst other things) than E0 when burnt.

You might like this paper (Link) as it references various other studies/papers looking at fuel mixes.

 

[whodat]

That was in the 90's when those papers came out about the 'newer' pollutants in and around (edit) Rio de Janeiro. I am sure (hope) the technology has come along alot in the 20+ years following their change in policy.
For one thing - auto makers would take the newer fuels into account when manufacturing etc etc.
Still - will read through that paper later on as I don't remember reading any updates to the research done in the 90's.
Cheers.

Hold on - does it have a 'happily ever after' ending?
Didn't think so.

Sasquatch - I ended up reading the wiki just now about the leaded petrol - either the wiki is wrong or my memory has altered a little (probably the latter) but the gist is the same.
If you can put human suffering and ecocide into dollars (which seems to be quite popular now) - they come up with a pretty large $ number that is verging on the US national debt scale. Not saying leaded petrol caused that. That would mostly be wars and middle men taking their 10%, but interesting anyway.

 

[whodat]

Lubrown - Yes - that was an interesting read - not quite sure one is better than the other.
Also that paper was sponsored by Growth Energy - "an American trade association that represents ethanol producers" if it makes any difference at all.
Who was it who said pour a shot of vodka into the tank?

 

[DXX]

Laura Kuenssberg’s reaching for the phone right now, book a train ticket to London for next Sunday.

 

[whodat]

Lubrown - leading on from your link (what a rabbit hole of papers there are that lead from that one), this one from the snippets that were accessible seemed to say that on the whole it is all a bit of a waste of time - the authors of this paper were also denied permission by a major ethanol producer to use data from the manufacturer's reports.

Ethanol in gasoline: environmental impacts and sustainability review article

This study concerns the use of ethanol as a gasoline (petrol) additive, at levels around 10% by volume (‘E10’) as well as an 85% blend (‘E85’). By det…

www.sciencedirect.com

Anyway - we all take from all this info what we want to accept. I know I have my own biases and also know that everyone else is completely wrong all the time. If only I ruled the world. Again. I was sacked last time. Something about batshit and negligence.

 

[DXX]

Brazil uses up to 25% ethanol gasoline but also have massive offshore oil reserves. Ethanol fuels is well accepted and normal there.