At least now we can see why Johnny Howard decided not to introduce a big fuel levy or investigate fuel prices too thoroughly. He’s going to let service stations put up to 10% ethanol into fuel mixes and not tell anyone or make it less worrying even "despite manufacturers’ fears of damage to some car engines". That will be a huge help for his mates in the sugar industry.. who was it? Manildra ? Yes, it was.
We know from previous times that the owner of Manildra is a great mate of little Johnny so I can see where finally having a real reason to put his Ethanol into fuel mixes is a far preferable solution than helping out consumers by capping fuel prices or levying them.
The Manildra Group, which had developed in the 1960s as a grains processing company, first began producing ethanol in 1992 as a waste product of its manufacture of industrial starch. The company now produces 87 percent of all Australian ethanol, and supplies its own ethanol-petrol fuel blend to independent petrol stations.
Manildra Group chairman Dick Honan is one of Australia’s wealthiest individuals, with an estimated personal fortune of $272 million and close personal ties to senior figures in the Howard government.
Australia’s largest ethanol producer is the Manildra Group, a grain-business giant. Since 1992 it has produced ethanol from the waste stream of its factory at Bomaderry, near Nowra on the NSW south coast. The factory’s prime role is to extract starch, gluten, and other useful products from wheat. About two-thirds of the 60-million litres of ethanol produced by Manildra each year is blended with petrol.
When, last October, the Sydney Morning Herald commissioned an analysis of petrol sold by nine independent outlets in the Sydney’s south and south west, it found samples from three contained more than 20 percent ethanol, and three others more than 10 percent. Most of the six retailers were reportedly unwilling to comment to the SMH, but two named Manildra as their supplier.
Above 10 percent ethanol, you enter the danger zone. Ethanol is both corrosive and a solvent. It eats away at fuel lines and fuel-delivery-system components. It can also loosen gunk in fuel lines, leading to blockages, and in older engines – especially those with carburettors – lead to cold-start problems and misfiring.
Keep it at 10 percent and the vehicle manufacturers are reasonably happy, although you’ll get slightly decreased fuel economy. On top of this, ethanol’s environmental credentials turn out to be rather dubious. Theoretically, ethanol should burn a little cleaner than petrol and generate less carbon dioxide. The reality, according to CSIRO (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation), is that the differences in tailpipe hydrocarbon emissions between premium unleaded and premium unleaded with the 10 percent ethanol are negligible.
The same CSIRO study also found that the carbon-dioxide emissions are marginally lower. But what the study didn’t say is that these tailpipe gains are potentially offset by the high CO2 penalty levied in growing the grain or sugar to make the ethanol.
A 2001 study by Cornell University in the US found that growing an acre of corn for conversion to ethanol required 529 litres of fossil fuels. Similar studies on the energy consumption of the sugar-to-ethanol process haven’t been done. The same Cornell study, again based on corn conversion, found that 70 percent more energy is needed to produce 3.8 litres (1 US gallon) of ethanol than is contained in the ethanol itself.
Put it all together and there aren’t many good reasons for adding it to petrol. Car manufacturers aren’t keen on it, even though they are reluctant to go on record saying it, while the environmental costs appear much higher than the sugar-cane growers, ethanol producers, and both groups’ supporters in parliament will own up to.
More interesting info on the site.