Biofuels: Undoing a Mess of Their Own Creation
New National Party leader, Mark Vaile, has called for greater support of Australia's biofuels industry which produces ethanol.But Australian motorists are more likely to opt for smaller cars before they buy vehicles which run on anything but petrol.
Mark Vale may well lament that Australian motorists would rather fill their tanks with lard than with an ethanol blend petrol, but he has only his own coallition partner to blame.
One near-monopoly producer, the Manildra Group - which happens to be a handsome donor to the federal Liberal Party - continues to market it through independent service stations at concentrations of about 20 per cent.Yet almost every major car maker in the country has warned that at concentrations of more than 10 per cent, ethanol damages engines. They will not honour warranties for cars run on higher blends.
And it's not just car companies that want a 10 per cent cap. So do consumers, boating and motoring organisations and the Australian Petroleum Institute (API). Not to mention the federal Environment Department.
But the Government has procrastinated on setting a limit, and does not even require retailers to inform their customers what they are buying.
This sorry chapter, played out before the last election, torpedoed an opportunity that could have substituted, quite safely, 10% of the country's petrol volume with a green alternative. Sensibly implemented, it may have lowered, albeit marginally, the cost of a litre of fuel, and made a positive contribution to lowering the country's greenhouse gas output.
The Liberal party seemed more concerned with the welfare of a corporate financial donor than complying with the recommendations of vehicle manufacturers that would have provided motorists with the confidence that ethanol in suitable concentrations would not hurt their vehicles' engines.
Blended fuel has been used in other countries' cars for years.
In this country, where every second petrol station sports a "No ethanol" sign, Mark has a huge task ahead to convince the motoring public that blended fuels containing up to 10% ethanol is a good idea.
2 Comments
Leave a comment
Post a comment
Note! This site runs a spam filter which, among other things, looks out for certain words which it uses to guess whether the post is junk. For this reason, avoid using words related to gambling, ie, poker, roulette, casino etc, or names of certain sexual performance enhancing drugs. Posts that contain these words are automatically junked.
It may also moderate comments that contain more than two URLs, including your web page URL.
If you get a message that your comment has been moderated, and it hasn't materialised within a day or so, please email me so I can retrieve it.
Banner Designed By:
Why a 10% limit? Brazil used 22% for many years. Maybe the car manufacturers have hidden agendas for a 10% limit. They may simply be unsure about damage and wish to play it safe in case of lawsuits. In any case, they should be able to modify the engines to suit - put the pressure back on them to get their engines right!
And how surprising that API are against it. Of course they would be.
I reckon we should be doing a lot more research in using alternatives, and not just ethanol. Would canola oil work?
Too much criticism has been placed at the cost of ethanol and the need for subsidy. Subsidies should not be considered a big issue. For goodness sake, we are running out of oil. Another flair up in the Middle East, war with Indonesia and demolishing our oil wells in the Timor sea, more hurricanes in Florida - we MUST have an urgent viable alternative for petrol an all costs, or we will suffer big time eventually.
I once cornered a fuel engineer from a major oil company during a break at a seminar where he was trying to convince his commercial audience that ethanol was "O.K." and would not hurt their vehicles. I asked him if he used fuel blended with ethanol in HIS car. He sheepishly said, "Well - no. I like my cars to last over 100,000 miles." I think that speaks volumes...