Ethanol in petrol
Over the past four years ethanol has been making its way to our fuel distributors, being sold as E10. It is a colourless alcohol, the same as in alcoholic drinks and is manufactured from grain or sugar. The CSIRO has calculated that an E10 blend cuts overall greenhouse emissions by around 3 per cent. However it’s more costly than petrol to produce and requires special storage facilities. Testing shows that fuel consumption increases by 3-4 per cent when using an E10 blend.
10 per cent ethanol mixed with petrol should not affect the majority of vehicles on our roads. The motor industry’s website advises which cars can use E10, E5 or no ethanol at all. All vehicles manufactured before 1986 are recommended not to use ethanol.
Ethanol is currently rebated at the normal fuel excise, but the rebate will be phased out over 5 years from 2011, by which time the industry is expected to have reduced the costs of production.
What’s your experience with E10? Is your car cheaper to run overall and has E10 had any effect - good or not so good - on your car’s performance or reliability?
March 12th, 2008 at 7:05 pm
Whilst we are talking about petrol, I recently read an article in the Herald that stated that one of the African Nations is running very short of water because 90% of water is being used to irrigate a “medicinal” crop. The irrigation pumps are fueled with Diesel that costs only 17 cents a litre. Thats right only 17 cents a litre. Now who is being ripped off by the fuel companies and the Government? What did you pay for your fuel this week, $1.50+?
March 13th, 2008 at 10:03 am
I enquired and found out that cars made after 1986 including the 1988 volvo that I had at the time were OK to run on 10% ethanol.
After the fuel came through the line the car ran very roughly both missing and using more petrol than before.
I could not wait to finish what was in the tank and get back to normal.
Due to this experience I would never consider using e10 again on any vehicle.
March 21st, 2008 at 7:50 am
I have a 1996 VS Commodore and tested ethanol fuel in my car. After running ethanol the fuel economy improved. I continued with it and over several tanks had an improvement of close to 1.5 km/L! I am in the country and the run to work is a 75km round trip so the savings is great. The car runs perfectly and as a test changed back to normal unleaded and the economy did not change.
Have you ever run your finger in your exhaust and ended up with a black finger? Not with ethanol, my exhaust is clean as a whistle. I attribute the improvement in fuel economy to the ethanol fuel cleaning the carbon out of my engine and exhaust.
My wife has an 2003 Magna and running ethanol in it did not see an improvement in fuel economy however like the VS the exhaust was clear of carbon. Being newer with lower km’s the engine would not have had the same carbon deposits thus not gaining the same improvement. Like the VS after the ethanol cleaned it out either fuel returned the same economy.
Long and short I am sticking with ethanol. I certainly surprised me.
March 23rd, 2008 at 8:53 am
VN serII commodore loves E10.
Runs better and gets up to 100k’s a tank full more on the freeway.
Too bad the price search thing in MyNRMA doesn’t work properly!
That is one of the only benefits I would use from being a NRMA member.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:25 pm
I have car that requires RON 95 fuel a Mazda SP20 (never again). First batch of E10 it ran a little rough, subsequent tanks have been okay. The fuel economy from my reckoning isn’t as good, it around 5% less km from a tank.
March 26th, 2008 at 2:07 pm
I recently tried E10 (out of necessity, due to the lack of both premium and normal petrol) in my 1983 BMW 323i. I normally use 95-98 octane premium due to the lack of leaded fuel, as my car needs the added octane to compensate for the lead. (valve recession is apparently not a problem in these cars… or so I’ve been told) on the E10 my car ran particularly poorly with lots of pinging (bad) therefore needing more revs on take-off to off set this, result being much worse economy. I will stick to premium, while I can still afford it…
March 26th, 2008 at 2:53 pm
Would I use ethanol in my car?? Forget it.
To save a lousy few cents a litre, with the possibility of doing my car no good & for what? a feel good feeling about the environment? No way.
If it was 10-15 cents cheaper, i might think about it.
We are being hoodwinked by the greeny climate change brigade.
Give me my premium fuel anytime.
March 26th, 2008 at 4:14 pm
I have used shell and caltex E10 (mostly caltex) in a Holden Statesman WL 5.7 litre and have not noticed any performance or fuel economy penalty. I keep records for the leasing arrangement over the last 2 years. I have also used caltex e10 in a motorcycle (Honda ST1100 V4 1996 model, carburetor) and have not notoced any performance or fuel economy penalty. Interestingly in the motorcycle I have noticed more difference in fuel economy from chnaging petrol brands than using E10.
March 26th, 2008 at 4:52 pm
I just heard that NSW unleaded is now required to be E5. Is that correct? Is the same fuel sold in ACT?
March 26th, 2008 at 5:45 pm
I’ve been using E10 in my ‘99 Holden Rodeo 3.2lV6 for a number of years. For some reason Caltex E10 and United E10 results in 40-60Km extra per tank load and I actively try and refill with it if I’m near an available outlet. Other suppliers don’t seem to give the same results. In fact I noticed no real improvement from their E10 compared to basic unleaded.
March 26th, 2008 at 6:08 pm
I have a 2004 camry Sportivo 2.4 litre and it runs great on E10, We had a older Mitsubishi Magna with the Astron 2.6 engine and that vechile did not like it at all as it would back fire at travel along freeways ect for no reason at all .
March 26th, 2008 at 6:11 pm
I drove from Bathurst to Sydney and return 3 times a week over the past 5 years. I found that E10 worked well for my 1999 Outback. I thought with all the hullaballoo that it maybe could have been cheaper than it was. I also used the high octane ethanol which was about as much per litre as regular unleaded. It certainly made a difference to the power and kilometerage of my faithful Subaru.
March 26th, 2008 at 6:50 pm
I have a 2006 Peugeot Cabriolet, and always put Premium fuel in religously. A friend that owns a petrol station recommended I try Ethanol, said he has a few cuistomers with prestige cars that use it. Thought if its good for them why not me. Not only is my car running smoother, but much more fuel efficient and saving up to 10 cents a litre. Better in my pocket than the fuel companies.
March 26th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
Have run E10 in my ‘92 V6 Pajero and notice a degrade in performance and an increase in cents per KM but attribute this to the rising cost of petrol over all. Stuck with E10 due to lower percieved environmental costs
March 26th, 2008 at 8:50 pm
I have been using E10 in my 1990 Nissan utility without any problems for the last 2 years. Other than a slight increase in fuel consumption I have experienced no adverse effects. I will continue to use ethanol blends.
March 27th, 2008 at 9:51 am
I run my Saab 93 Aero, when possible, on ethanol blend fuel (E10 95 octane and United’s E10 98 octane - when I can get it!)
It almost always runs smoother and is more responsive, and I can’t say I’ve noticed any particular change in fuel consumption. I haven’t check the colour of the tailpipe after running a tank, but might do after some of the other comments here.
My observation is that most service stations charge a lower price for E10 (some, but not all!), and 98 octane E10 is not easy to get with United being about the only place I can find it (note - I believe Shell’s V-power Racing 100 octane fuel is also E10; not that you’d think so at 20c per litre more!!)
I’ll certainly continue using it.
March 27th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
I tried E10 in my Prius a couple of times (well I would, wouldn’t I?) and found E10’s poor efficiency more than outweighed any cost savings. Worse than that, consumption was so bad it meant I was pumping more regular, non-renewable petrol into my tank as part of the E10 mix. I calculated a saving of about 3 percent in price, offset by using at least 15% more fuel. With E10, that meant I was using about 13% more non-renewable petrol. It didn’t make sense either economically or environmentally. A Prius, on the other hand …
March 27th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
My 05 Subaru Outback returns 0.4 to 0.6 L/100Km WORSE economy.
I have tried it about 6 tanks to be sure but a saving of 3 cents per litre for
a return worse than regular unleaded doesn’t add up economically.
I fill each week at about 58 litres so I save $1.74. I travel each week, around 550Km and on E10 get 9.4l/100 but on regular, get about 8.8 to 9.0/100. That equates to using an extra 3.3 litres and at $1.34/L, I am $2.68 WORSE OFF. I don’t use it any more. If it was 10c/L cheaper, I would reconsider.
March 27th, 2008 at 4:51 pm
I’ve been using Shell E10 for some months now in my 2001 Holden Vectra 2.2 litre. No negatives as far as I can tell and economy seems to be marginally better.The only problem has been consistent out of stock at my local station.
March 27th, 2008 at 5:17 pm
I have been using E10 for awhile in a 2000 Lancer without any problems - actually fuel consumption is better.
On our trips around Australia we have also used it in our 1993 Mitsubishi L300 with no problems and again better fuel consumption.
My problem now is actually being able to purchase it when I want to - several service stations in the Wollongong area have been out on Monday, Tuesday & Wednesday last week & this week - you do have to wonder?????
March 27th, 2008 at 8:08 pm
E10 fuel is not cost effective ( 3cent saving for a 4% loss in economy), so I won’t use it.
Enviromentally it might be good, however I won’t contribute to the petroleum companies profit by paying more for the E10 fuel.
March 27th, 2008 at 9:01 pm
I use high octane E10 on long trips in my 2004 Holden Astra. Performance and economy are good, perhaps better. The car seems to ‘like it’; it seems to clear its throat.
I’d need to be reassured that it could sit idle, particularly in hot humid conditions, with no side-effects.
March 27th, 2008 at 11:46 pm
i have used e10 in my 98 explorer for about 2 months. in that time my car completely stopped working & had to be towed to a mechanic.
the problem being the computer was adjusting to the different oil mix required & it threw the system out completely. it had to be completely reset. apparently my vehicle should only be run on 95+ rom. my wife drives a hyundai excel & when she uses ep10 she has noticed that the car shudders while at idle. i think i will stick to the premium fuel. more costly at the bowser but cheaper mechanically.
March 29th, 2008 at 8:59 pm
use e 10 in my hyundai,vandguard, and rideon mower . all vehicles run well, start easy, elandra 8L 100 vanguard 10L100 COX 2.5HOURS to tank elandra 65000 k vanguard 49years ?miles mower12years still on original plug and cutting 2 acres .happy user of ethanol blend.
March 29th, 2008 at 9:01 pm
I have been using United 95 octane E10 in my new 07 Territory whenever possible and have been pleased with the results. I get the impression that it runs smoother and more economically than with 91 ULP, and I save a little money. However I tried a tank of Shell’s 91 octane E10 and the car did not seem to run as well.
I drive about 1000 kms a week in the city and the country
March 30th, 2008 at 11:36 am
My V6 VE Commodore does run noticably better on the 95 Octane E10. probably becuase its on LPG as well the E10 does not loose its ‘bang’ as quickly as normal 91 octane. I noticed that Woolies 91 octane made the car run poorly (when on -petrol) after a few weeks of being in the tank. So dont use Woolies any more. Get my petrol from opne of the E10 outlets while on petrol its noticably better.
I would only be buying E10 where its 95 octane so am dissapointed that Shell took the opportunity to dilute their E10 to 91 RON - essentially its a poorer fuel than any comparable. Bad move shell.
March 31st, 2008 at 7:13 pm
i thought e10 was 3cents cheaper than ulp . not so at all garages in kirrawee nsw. only 2.50 more than ulp . no ones going to buy e 10 @ 2.5cents when uyou can get 4 cents off these garages ulp prices @ woolworths & coles/shell outlets. what happened to petrol policeing?…eh.
March 31st, 2008 at 9:38 pm
I’ve had three vastly different cars recently and tried different fuel in all. Firstly in my 92 EB Fairmont. Depending on where I filled up seemed to vary. woolies e10 was the worst, shell was no different to normal unleaded but united e10 made the car run smoother and more efficiently. Then i bought a slightly older Peugeot. It Hated it and ran rougher than normal with less performance and economy. Now I have a VT Calais. I ran it religiously on e10 untill I had it converted to LPG. The company which installed the converter advised me from not putting in e10 as it doesn’t store well and can sit in the tank for some time. That is the only reason that I still don’t use it and if I have another petrol only car will return to using e10.
April 8th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
All cars seem to respond differently to the various fuels, but I’ve found United’s 95 octane E-10 a good choice for my 1994 Liberty. Other E-10s with 91-92 octane ratings give poor consumption figures and lacklustre low speed engine performance.
Metro advertises its E-10 as “Max” but my email enquiry as to the source and octane rating was not responded to - can anyone shed some light on Metro’s product? I think “Max” maybe short for “Max Con”.
If your car uses premium, then United’s may be the only viable E-10.
April 14th, 2008 at 8:39 pm
you can buy a car that is factory ready for alcohol fuel. In some states (mostly in the Midwest) you can buy E85 (85% ethanol, 15% gasoline). The cars these days are made with variable fuel injection technology, which measures the oxygenate content of the fuel (since alcohol, ETOH, contains an oxygen molecule which makes it burn more efficiently when the timing and air/fuel mix are appropriately adjusted by a computer chip that is factory installed.
In fact, over 2 million cars per year in the USA already are set up to run on E85, and no one told us about this. The oil companies know that oil reserves are dwindling, so the technology is gradually adapting. Experts in the ethanol industry predict 20% of the cars will be fueled by ethanol in just 6 to 8 years (and with ethanol production increasing by 12%/yr., we have the capacity to do this.)
E85 is 102 octane. It burns clean and is better for the engine because it burns cooler, with less carbon buildup.
April 16th, 2008 at 5:04 pm
I find it remarkable that everyone is squabbling over a few cents per litre of fuel and nobody is talking about the hike in food prices. According to many recent studies, including one by the United States Department of Agriculture food prices are going through the roof because of ethanol production; see the following link: http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?ch=specialsections&sc=biofuels&id=18173&a=
Both oil and agricultural products are scarce resources. If demand increases and supply doesn’t the price goes up. That is the market place at work not a corporate conspiracy where companies are ripping consumers off.
Oil prices are rising because the demand from a booming world economy (mostly as a result of china) is outstripping the increase in supply. To increase the supply of refined oil, billions of dollars need to be invested in refineries etc. This investment takes time and as result, there will always be a lag in the time that it takes supply to catch up to demand. This will mean that prices will rise in the interim.
In the longer term prices will fall because oil companies invest not for just current demand but for tomorrows demand. So lower oil prices will come once the new old refineries are on-line.
But what about ethanol? Ethanol is made from sugar cane, corn syrup and other agricultural products. All of these are scarce resources and have limited supply. If the demand for ethanol increases but the supply of sugar cane and corn doesn’t then the price of food is going to increase. I wonder… when this happens does mean that the farmers are ripping everybody off?
So next time you save 3 cents a litre by filling your car up with E10 take a look at the price of corn or sugar and other food products. Ask yourself are food prices going up?
Also ask yourself what will happen to the price of E10 the next time we have a drought. The answer… demand for E10 will stay the same but because of the drought there will be a shortage of supply. The price of E10 will increase and we won’t only have high E10 prices but we will also have high food prices. At the moment droughts have no impact on the price of fuel.
April 16th, 2008 at 10:53 pm
I have been using Ethanol fuel in my 1989 pulsar for about 2 years now and use it when ever i can get some (which you can’t get in Wagga). I have noticed about an extra 10% kms per tank and also a significant reduction in the smell! now when ever I have to use standard I get revolted by the smell of the fuel.
April 23rd, 2008 at 11:48 am
Brazil seem to be doing okay…
April 25th, 2008 at 9:45 am
I have a 1994 Peugeot 307 and usually use 95 or 98 Premuim unleaded. I find that the economy with the ethanol petrol is lower. 98 Premium petrol is more expensive to buy that’s for sure but when you look at how many kms you get for a tank it actually costs no more. Putting cheaper ethanol petrol in my tank is an illusion of economy.
Jennifer
April 25th, 2008 at 11:48 am
I have been using E10 for the last 6 months, when I can get it. My local Shell seems to always have a sign saying it is out of E10 and they have many excuses from, it’s hard to get to it requires special filters and we can’t get them.
I have found that using Shell E10 (mostly for other outlets) I actually get better consumption. I have a 2006 Honda Civic 1.8L. My best consumption on 92 is 6.9L/100 - 95 is 6.7L/100 - E10 is 6.3L/100, all done on country trips.
I wish Shell would get serious about fixing the supply issues. I have had no problems closer to the city in obtaining E10. I live at Penrith.
June 8th, 2008 at 9:59 pm
Does anyone have experience with using Shell V-Power Racing (100 Octane, 5% ethanol) in a BMW, specifically a X5 4.4i. The guys at BMW Sydney say it is not recommended because of the ethanol content, but I have found smoother running, noticeably more power and elimination of pinging. However, will it damage the engine in the long-term?
August 29th, 2008 at 9:59 pm
ive used E10 out of necessity and experiment a few times
and every time it has been negative
i drive a honda CRV 2007, which states that E10 is alright but:
-it shudders(knocks) when idling
-drop in performance
-drop in milage
i heard it cleans ur engine but ruins your engine over a longer period of time?
i would rather an extra 4c per litre than a major costly service
September 2nd, 2008 at 4:33 am
I have a motor scooter, its very economical. 5 litre tank does you about 60 or 70 kilometers. I recently on near empty tank filled up with E10 and wow what a difference. Its just feels better to ride. It starts everytime with a broooom. I use to use unleaded and always had problems with it starting etc. Its smoother and only cost $3 to fill up.
N
November 7th, 2008 at 5:35 am
I have a Commodore VT, 1997. Since using E10 fuel consumption has increased. (Was getting 10km/l, now 7km/l). Engine running rough and getting hard to start. No thanks, to hell with the environment. Global warming and carbon trading is a “Business” not a threat.
November 24th, 2008 at 8:07 am
We run a fleet of hiace vans and all drivers report poorer performance with E10. We also find our private cars, a Toyota Rav 4 and a Hyundai Getz are sluggish if we use E10. Havn’t done a fuel consumption study but I hear you lose 3% consumption. Whats more important is the effect it has on food production. Personally we don’t want to be responsible for contributing to global famine so we’ve decided to give the E10 a miss.
December 29th, 2008 at 10:35 am
My ‘03 Pathfinder goes well on E10 and our ‘03 Peugeot 307 also runs OK on it. Bit worried about the Pug though, as it should run on PULP. The Nissan does 18l/100 around town on ULP and is doing 19l/100 on E10. The Pug is doing 14l/100 around town, which is high for a small car.