Ehanol report - Ford Forums - Mustang Forum, Ford Trucks, Ford Focus and Ford Cars

XYGTHOPhase3 · 09-10-2003, 18:26

Don't know if anyone else has asked, but does anyone have or know where to get the full list of vehicles adversely affected by ethanol in petrol? All the reports I've read have just given very broad cars (eg 800,000 pre-98 falcons etc) but on the news I saw they had full lists of each make.
Thanks.

fte22 · 09-10-2003, 19:12

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/...902109760.html

TopGhia · 09-11-2003, 02:45

fte22,
Good find, can't load page 1, can't see any data for Ford or Holden, but most good European cars appear to not recommend its use.

I wouldn't use the stuff, they make a lot of it out of sugar byproducts, cane farms are not on my list of "environmentally friendly" enterprises. Just ask the Great Barrier Reef.

cheers

Mr Jucy · 09-11-2003, 03:17

My car won't but I wouldn't use it even if it could.

PHoeNiX_EB · 09-11-2003, 05:05

Page 1 says
"Holden
All petrol engine vehicles since 1986 will operate satisfactorily on E10"
and
"Ford
All Falcon petrol engine vehicled since 1998 will operate satisfactorily on E10. Please contact the Ford call center on........ for information on which other Ford vehicles can operate on E10"

TopGhia · 09-11-2003, 11:53

Thanks,
I reckon there's more pre 1998 Fords on the road than post 98, so it's no good for most Fords.

I can't see the point of growing grain or sugar to provide a fuel in a dry country like this. Grain should be for bread and cane sugar for Bundy Rum.

There is millions of barrels of oil in shale deposits up near Gladstone, why don't they get into that?

Quote:

Eight commercially viable oil shale deposits have been located on the coastal lowlands north of Gladstone. The Stuart oil shale deposit (with its high grade Kerosene Creek member) is considered to be the most economically attractive to mine initially.

The Stuart Project involves working sections of oil shale within the narrows Graben. The Graben is approximately 40 kilometres long and 5 kilometres wide and contains both the Stuart and Rundle oil shale deposits.

Estimates of the Stuart Resource indicate a total of 3.0 billion barrels of shale oil, with the Kerosene Creek Member estimated to contain 155 million barrels of oil.

I can smell a political rat.

XR8 Lamah · 09-11-2003, 13:25

Quote:

I can smell a political rat

Its fairly well documented that "lil' johnny" is pretty good mates with the manildra bunch ( who provide nearly all the ethanol ), and that the libs ( if not all political parties ) receive significant "donations" from manildra as well . . .

Plus apparently the 38% tariff protecting the local ethanol producers was apparently so rushed through that a ship from brazil arrived here to find the new tariffs, despite there being none when they left brazil.
afaik the cane growers also get reasonably significant gov't subsidies as well . . .

As far as I'm concerned, if it 1) isn't profitable on its own and 2) isn't particularly useful, we shouldn't be protecting this industry - let it go... Surely some more useful crop or product could be produced in the same fields ? (maybe I don't have all the "Facts" tho

)

As an aside, as long as it is designed for it, cars can run happily enough on ethanol - lots do in south america. However, apart from slightly different engine setup, you need to have all metal fuel lines and other bits and pieces to prevent the ethanol eating your car :)

If anyone has any "Facts" to change my mind, please deposit them into the Commonwealth account. . . . .

JC-XR8 · 09-12-2003, 08:27

In 3 to 5 years time, all fuel will have to contain ethanol as it is the cheapest and most readily available additive to use to boost the octane rating of fuel. I have posted details of this somewhere else on the forum, but can't find it right at the minute.

Personally, I will use ethanol based fuel when it becomes available, as it should be cheaper, with a higher octane rating than standard ULP.