E10 Fuel

[Lee Moore]

So with introduction / standardisation of E10 fuel, what will be the impact on older cars and how are people planning to go forward? As I understand it, the higher octane fuels will remain E5 for the time being but it seems logical that there will be a push for that too to become “greener”.

Strangely I have read that E10 could be around 33% less efficient, so not sure it really is greener?

Good to see Porsche are still committed to the ICE in the 911 till 2030 and are involved in the development of “green” petrol long term, i’m still convinced there will be a place / need for it in the future and not just for classics.

[Tony Jaskeran]

This a very complex area, on the one hand we want everyone to be greener and use less resources. However we still don’t know what this means, are we just shifting the goal posts.

I think there will shifts in lots of different directions before they agree on what is going to work and E10 is an example.

Even if the E10 fuel is less efficient now with technology evolution this will improve, after all in the 1970s no one would have believed you could get 70+mpg.

 

[Lee Moore]

I think it’s important for us to strive for greener and more efficiency but feel that we should set goals rather than just dictate how we get there – electricity is not automatically green!

[Tony Jaskeran]

100% agree, we must look at the whole supply chain and make sure that green is exactly that, I really worry about used batteries, and also we are still using more raw materials to make new cars. There must be a way to reuse more of what we throw away.

The saving in manufacturing cost and the subsequent emissions must be significant.

[Lee Moore]

It will be interesting to see how many and how long the new green vehicles stay on the road. Then how there footprint compares over the lifetime of the vehicle compared to the many 50+ year old vehicles we still have today.

[Tony Jaskeran]

I grew up with those Volvo ads saying the average life span of their car was 19.7 years. Amazing this was over 30 years ago. We need this type of longevity to reduce and reuse.

The car manufacturers can focus on spares so there will be a good revenue stream for profitability.

Maserati might even support their older cars to (fingers crossed)

[Graham Wood]

Used batteries concern me too, and the Cobalt element especially as a large percentage is mined in the DRC. The child labour & human rights problems in the mining there are not good (to say the least) and it is a particularly unstable country (despite Belgium trying to make up for the many, many wrongs they inflicted there in the past).

It seems to me the ‘youth of today’ now regard cars as disposable items (along with everything else). The proportion of kids with their Adams, Zoes (and whatever other silly names there are out there) who would know basic mechanics is falling.

I wonder what the ‘shelf life’ of some of these cars is now? In theory they should last for years in terms of bodywork & reliability, and I imagine must all be full of highly recyclable components – which is good, but the energy expended in recycling as opposed to extending the life of the vehicles must be immense.

 

 

[Keith Davies]

Most manufacturers design cars with a life of 7 years and with all modern cars having masses of electronics inbuilt there is a conflict in getting old cars off the road (as the manufactures want) against the logical one of keeping them going for many years to reduce the overall carbon footprint. Audi took the best approach with increasing and extending their spares supply (at high prices admittedly) rather than shutting down spares requirements after 10 years as is the legal requirement. As for E10 and according to the Esso web site there is still no ethanol in their premium octane petrol but it looks as though 5% will be the default minimum soon.
These batteries are really a scare with the materials used, their origin and disposal. On the positive side a lot of young adults are not getting driving licences so it may be that when us petrol heads finally stop driving the problem may go away!

Keith – 1972 Indy and 1990 Biturbo 222E

[Graham Wood]

The link to the government page which includes compatibility checks for E10 does not include a single Maserati!

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/e10-petrol-explained#compatibility

Nothing about when E5 fuels will change yet, imagine that will be a way off.

The FBHVC have recently clarified their position on E10 fuels following the recent government updates.

After an extensive consultation process, the Department for Transport has announced that they will legislate to introduce E10 petrol as the standard 95-octane petrol grade by 1 September 2021. They will also require the higher-octane 97+ ‘Super’ grades to remain E5 to provide protection for owners of older vehicles. This product will be designated as the ‘Protection’ grade.

The introduction of the 95-octane E10 grade and the maintenance of the Super E5 protection grade will be reviewed by the Government after 5 years to ensure they remain appropriate to the needs of the market. In relation to the E5 protection grade, such a review will examine market developments over the period. HM Government have sought to reassure FBHVC members and historic vehicle owners that, without a suitable alternative becoming available, it is highly likely the Super E5 protection grade would continue to be available.

Filling stations that stock 2 grades of petrol and supply at least one million litres of fuel in total each year, will need to ensure one product is the Super E5 protection grade. While not all filling stations meet these criteria, almost all towns across the UK will have a filling station that supplies the ‘Super’ grade and currently one major retailer, a national supermarket group, has committed to offer the product. The main exception to this is in certain parts of the Highlands, north and west coast of Scotland, which will be covered by an exemption process and allowed to continue to market the 95-octane E5 grade.

The Federation therefore recommends that all vehicles produced before 2000 and some vehicles from the early 2000s that are considered non-compatible with E10 – should use the Super E5 Protection grade where the Ethanol content is limited to a maximum of 5%. To check compatibility of vehicles produced since 2000, we recommend using the new online E10 compatibility checker: https://www.gov.uk/check-vehicle-e10-petrol

It should be noted that some Super E5 Protection grade products do not contain Ethanol as the E5 designation is for fuels containing up to 5% Ethanol. Product availability varies by manufacturer and geographical location and enthusiasts should check the situation in their location.

[Chris-Sheppard]

There is a legal requirement to discontinue spares after 10 years?

[Peter Holmes]

According to their website, Classic Valvemaster Plus contains an ethanol stabiliser enabling the use of E5 and E10 petrol. Be interested to hear what Maserati has to say on the subject!  We should be using Super E5 grade petrol in our Maseratis anyway.

http://classicvalvemaster.co.uk

[Keith Davies]

Getting back to the basics, Esso are still saying there is no ethanol in their supreme fuel, likewise with Texaco. So use those for now until further legislation determines where to go next. Shell still do not say anything about ethanol content in their fuels so you have to assume that their fuels are “as marked” on the pumps.

Cheers – Keith

[howard-poole]

As with all such legislative changes that will affect existing inventory in one way or another, there is much debate and conflicting opinions as to how it will do this, won’t do that etc.  My research unfortunately cannot provide much clarity, save to say:

a. Using E10 will not result in instant failure but the older the components, the sooner some degradation will occur.

b. Probably not a bad idea to change “soft” fuel system parts in advance (assuming you can verify E10 compliance…)

c. Don’t leave E10 in the tank without an ethanol stabiliser if the car is not to be used for a prolonged period.

One report I read suggested that although the measured energy density is lower than E5/pure petrol, the stuff actually burns cleaner and may in fact result in improved performance and negligible consumption increase.  This will obviously depend upon the individual vehicle specs but, my brain cannot reconcile figures of 30+% degradation with only a 5% change in chemistry!

So there you go, no help whatsoever.

[Author]

Posts