Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

petrol 99cents/litre

Discussion in 'Technical and Troubleshooting Torque' at netrider.net.au started by JohnG., Jun 24, 2006.

  1.  Top
  2. I have probably tried E10 without knowing it. Coz some petrol station don't tell you if there is ethanol in their petrol.

    But for E85 or above, will wait and see.
     
     Top
  3. What a lot of hogwash. It is well known that alcohol fuels are of a much lower calorific content (less energy per litre) than petrol, how can ethanol have slightly better economy? Anyone want a bike that goes 90km to a tank?
    Carbed engines need mucho work to run alcohol, you have to almost double jet sizes, most engines will need different carb needles and fuel lines and possibly gaskets( alcohol fuels are not too compatible with some conventional rubbers). I can't see how an injected engine could work without changng injectors and possible fuel maps in teh computer, unless they are just going to whack an external injector at teh throttle body or similar?
    And long term engine problems could be an issue, I've heard valve guides and oil deposits are problems, but on race engines, it's not really an issue.
    Lets not forget alcohol fuels affinity to water as well, with motorbikes already being havens for water in fuel tanks, that is a significant problem. Never mind it mixing in teh service station tanks before it even gets to your fuel tank. Water in alcohol mixes into it, so you get a reduction in octane rating.
    Of course, these issues can be resolved, but telling people its simple and a one off cost is baloney.

    Regards, Andrew.
     
     Top
  4. Ethanol has a higher Oxygen content than petrol, it also has a higher octane rating IIRC.
    Those two combined do a lot to negate the lower heat production capability, so economy ain't that bad in *most* cases.

    As far as producing a burnable, usable mixture, lots of carbied engines can handle 10% ethane without too much hassle, all EFI engines should, unless they're knackered already. That's why they sell E10, cos it can be used.

    The problem is in the damage ethanol does to older, flexible fuel lines and some metal components, and rubber seals/gaskets etc... it stuffs them!!

    South Americans love the stuff, been using it for years, Nth Americans are building more ethanol plants every year.
    If we produced engines FOR ethanol, not converted jerry-rigged petrol engines, there'll be excellent benefits for our sugar farmers, wheat farmers, and the environment.

    We need to wean ourselves off petrol, onto pure 100% ethanol, the longer it's a half arsed compromise, nothing good will happen.

    Whats the alternative? hybrid? please that's a crock. Hydrogen? been fartin around with that for years, still getting no-where, LPG/CNG is still Hydrocarbons and a limited resource. Battery? Still needs energy to recharge, Solar... long way away. Fuel cell? maybe... but still uses hydrocarbons.

    One things for sure, check that it's OK to put ethanol blends thru your fuel system, for Yamaha owners.. that's a big NO!!

    JJ
     
     Top
  5. Sugar is grown in the ground.
    Mixed with Water.
    Yeast is Added
    Alcohol is produced by the catabolism of the glucose into ethyl alcohol.
    This gives a MAXIMUM concentration of 18% alcohol in a water solution, useless for burning.

    How do we concentrate the alcohol to be useable? (>90%)
    We distill it.
    How do we distill it? We heat it.
    How do we generate the heat? We burn fossil fuels.

    No escaping fossil fuels people. The world will end when we run out.

    Even if the electric/hydrogen car is perfected, how will we lubricate it?
     
     Top
  6. renewable heat sources N20..
    methane for one, we produce masses of the shYte (pun intended)
    wood, if you could shut the rabid greenies and the "see profit at all costs" industrialists up long enough for the rest of the world to be heard, wood can be used as a renewable, sustainable source of heat, and construction material.

    Solar could eventually be used, either directly or via electricity.
    In some places, wind and Hydro can be used for electicity (in Tas the greenies tried to stop wind farms for electricity.. WTF???)

    Lubricants can be made from vegetable and animal products, as it was before oil became God. If you put enough resources, finances into something, a way will be found.

    Plastics is the big problem, other ways of binding fibre than epoxy needs to be found.

    Humans survived before oil, we will after, not as many of us (thankfully), not as mobile as we are now, but we'll survive.

    Unless the yanks/russians/chinese find a resource to pillage on another planet.. or blow us all to hell well before that.
     
     Top
  7. Vegetable and animal product lubricants are unviable, simply for the massive areas in which the products need to be grown.

    There is a reason oil is king: it's easy to get, and you can get large amounts very quickly.

    Methane has a terribly low enthalpy (heat of combustion) and it is also very hard to gather other than biospheres etc (there are billions of tonnes of methane in the atmosphere, but you just can't get it)

    Wood is also unviable from an environmental standpoint. It takes many years to grow a small amount of wood, and the hippies won't like it if you chop them down. They will also tell you that if you cut down all the trees we won't be able to breathe anymore, but the fact is that JUST the cornfields in Kansas in the US provide enough O2 everyday for the entire population of the US.

    Solar panels themselves are unviable because you require large amounts of Group I and II metals which are expensive, dangerous, and degrade quickly.

    Maybe focusing sunlight to heat water and turn turbines would work, but would be expensive and inefficient, and still require large amounts of lubricants (which we've run out of)
     
     Top
  8. What about electricity generated by wind and tide? With rapidly evolving battery technology, could that be an answer, or at least a partial one?
     
     Top
  9. you're a real "glass half empty" sorta guy eh? :?

    Neary everything DaVinci tried was "impossible" in his lifetime, later, when someone else stumbled onto, or worked out how it could be done, his ideas work.

    I can imagine you back before flight "na.. impossible, we'll all be stuck on horses for ever". "that new fangled elec-trickery, it'll never amount to much"
    Vikings/Columbus etc got a fair way on wind and animal fat for lubrication.

    Like a lot of others, your thinking inside the current parradigm.

    Thankfully DaVinci, Watt, whoever that first guy was who made the wheel, they thought outside the square (another intentional pun :LOL: ).

    I optimistically look to alternatives, and believe that smarter, way smarter people than I will find a way. It'll be such a simple solutiion, all the rest of the optimists will say " why the feck didn't I think of that"

    Then you can find something else to trigger doomsday, or armegeddon, or wotever...

    So what if we have to revert to slower simpler methods of heating, transport, communication LIVING? so what if we have to learn to conserve energy, grow our own food. the world is overcrowded with humans, this may be the best method of self limiting the human race, nothing else has managed yet.

    It doesn't sound so bad to me.. If Johny and George want to go fight in someone else backyard, they might find themselves voted out BEFORE the troops get there, no one gets to die....

    I've got to be an optomist, for my daughters sake, she's the only reason I'm living now.

    JJ
     
     Top
  10. Found this via another forum .. it's titled "Life after the oil crash" ...

    http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/

    It's a long read but quite interesting all the same. Covers quite a bit of ground re alternatives as well.

    Anyways, thought I'd post the link for what it's worth.
     
     Top
  11. Isn't the main problem with ethanol that as well as being less efficient in the current engines ,
    like hydrogen , it takes more energy to make than you get from it.

    If it's as good as stated , and used so much in South America, why are they not super powers after saving so much.

    It's all a furthy by CSR etc for more government funding, we could never grow enough to have a fully ethanol driven transport system.

    Me thinks we'd be better off putting the funding into a more sustainable means of power
     
     Top
  12. WHat happened to the Mr Fusion? I want to run my bike on banana peels and soft drink!

    Regards, Andrew.
     
     Top
  13. Fossil Fuels will never run out. Demand for oil continues to rise of course, and it will peak in this century for sure, with massively inflating prices, and declining supply following. The volume of oil available in the world is not a problem, there's actually enough to last a long time, just that it will get really expensive, harder to extract, and not available quickly enough to meet growing world demand

    Coal on the other hand will be around forever. Its terrible dirty stuff, but there's no end to it in sight. There's so much of it, there's no accurate estimates of supply, but the general thought is enough for many centuries of energy, even with rising demand. Whether we should use it is another matter...

    Your arguement is a bit contradictory. You are optimistic about the development of new technology... But you are also suggesting that we should/will have to revert to a simpler lifestyle?

    People have way too much trust that science will be able to cure environmental woes. To quote Peter Doherty, Australian nobel prize winner:
    "Many misinterpret the scope of science. The enormous successes over the past century have led to the widespread assumption that there will always be some sort of clever fix. Why shouldn’t everyone drive around in gas-guzzling, polluting four-wheel drives, people ask. If the oil runs out, hydrogen will fix the problem… It will take either fossil fuel or nuclear power to produce hydrogen in large quantities. Strangely, although many in the broader community are suspicious of science, they are at the same time confident that science will solve every difficulty. In truth, science does some things very well, and others not so well. Look at the technologically magnificent new A380 Airbus: sophisticated electronics and control systems- and it burns fossil fuel.”

    I think that fairly sums it up. Science produces new technologies that have consistently ruined the environment. We need a fundamental shift in values and our use of the environment. Human intereference has created our present environmental crisis, and will not be the answer to solving it. We need to withdraw as much as possible from activities that drain on the environment. That's all non-essential human activity. The alternative is the death of nature. New technology will not solve our present crisis.
    I'm curious, what is it about Yamaha engines in particular that makes you say ethanol's a no-go? I've put some awfull things in my tank... :wink:
     
     Top
  14. Hate to be a conspiracy theorist, but all those are viable alternatives, if we got behind them 100% (just like ethanol, as you say). The fact is there is a massive investment in the oil industry, and a very powerful and connected industry it is. Trying to get an alternative fuel off the ground is extremely difficult, especially with the resistance from the incumbents.

    Time will change this, hopefully. Hybrid is a good half-way step, IMO. The technology is there: they've created 300km/h+ supercars powered by electricity.

    I believe ethanol is a step sidewards, not forwards. It isn't significantly more efficient (if at all) and just doesn't seem like a worthwhile option. To me it also seems like a pathetic attempt by the Government to subsidise our sugar industry, which apparently is having trouble competing in our globalised economy.
     
     Top
  15. I have absolutely no problem with the concept of ethanol, methane, or Tooheys Old as fuel. My problem is with putting them in an engine that was designed for something else. I have posted a link here before that clearly spells out the reasons why ethanol is not permitted in aviation fuel, yet the Brazilians have designed an approved aero engine that runs on 100% ethanol, and only on 100% ethanol. If KawaYamaHondaZuki launch a bike with an engine specifically designed for ethanol fuel I will fill it with ethanol fuel......ti'll that day, no way will I risk my machinery for an eco-political compromise.
     
     Top
  16. Yeah ethanol will start at 99cents but eventually it will become 145centsa litre like petrol lpg has been going up with petrol prices for years i see no oil in lpg why the rise????? :evil:
     
     Top
  17. The argument that E85 or E100 will stuff you engine is irrelevant because as that article stated, "some modification would be required" at construction. So the car manufacturers would build engines suitable for this different fuel.

    It certainly looks to be the way to go. Especially as it could be very quickly introduced.
     
     Top
  18.  Top
  19. after reading several pages of that website... we are all fcuked.. well and truely right royaly screwed... :(

    on the brighter side at least the sun hasn't gone out... that goes we all die period...
     
     Top
  20. isn't this being launched in qld?

    where they take huge masses of nsw and victoria gst and use it to subsidise their existing fuel supplies already?

    Bring it to nsw and you'd be automatically looking at $1.10/litre and it'll only go up from there. For me, the price/economy gap isn't high enough to change to a nastier smelling exhaust pipe :D
     
     Top