Ferg,
I am obviously concerned about the same issue. I contacted Rotax direct some
time ago, and they say that an ethanol content above 5% is a NONO. It causes
detonation, internal corrosion and possible engine failure. Your concern
about fuel lines in comparison is irrelevant.
As recommended by COPA, I have also written to the Ontario premier
explaining the situation, and also including a copy of an EAA article
outlining the same problem in Montana. We are all hoping that the ruling is
modified whereby the premium 91 octane (North American) fuel is supplied
without ethanol.
If you think this is to do with global warming, think again. It is all to do
with supporting the poor impoverished farmers.
If anyone from Brazil is on this forum, can you enlighten us on what you use
for Rotax fuel ?
I remember your cities having a strong smell of alcohol 20 years ago from
car exhaust fumes.
Karl
>From: "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO@rac.ca>
>Reply-To: europa-list@matronics.com
>To: "EUROPALIST" <europa-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: Europa-List: Anguish..........
>Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 15:28:10 -0500
>
>
>Cheers,
> I attended the EAA/RAA chapter locally last Friday to hear the
>pricipal speaker, a qualified fuel expert who acts as Quality Control for a
>large petroleum firm in Canada. His topic was future fuels. Fuel and its
>derivatives when operated in Canada is a provincial affair, since trade and
>commerce come under provincial jurisdiction unless exported.
> Our speaker pointed out that theProvinciual Premier had called
>for and is acting on a proposal to increase the ethanol content of motor
>car
>fuels to an average of 5% over the next few years to a present-day maximum
>of 10% anywhere. This is somewhat nebulous in intent, since the plan is to
>reduce noxious exhausts, especially in the greater Toronto area (GTA). The
>fuel has become known as E10. Whether it means 5% everywhere or that
>Toronto
>(being the greatest offender) will have 10 while outlying districts will
>carry much less - is still up in the air. There is feeling that this trend
>will increase in popularity across the land.
> Naturally this is of interest to those such as myself who were
>planning on the use of MoGas as is advertised in Rotaz and Europa
>materials.
>Slightly less than half the attendees owned Rotax or similar, using MoGas.
> The bulk of his topic was the destructive qualities tested in
>labs to date. The conclusion is that E10 will wreak havoc on aluminum fuel
>lines and most rubber-type tubing, including many of the epoxy and like
>materials. So there I am - fuel lines aluminum alloy where difficult to get
>at (in order to avoid the difficulties of changing same at periodic times)
>-
>I had taken great care to avoid vibration threats - AND the Europa standard
>fuel tank of the 1997 vintage (already changed once after leaks detected in
>original tank, and fuel filler tube also changed).
> In view of the popularity of the Premier's edict (TO. is
>swiftly
>becoming a choking zone at rush hour) without incurring the rural wrath,
>there seems no point in objecting. This of course accounts for the Subject
>title and my preliminary dread. At the moment it looks like I have built an
>aircraft with a sword over its head (to say nothing of dwindling
>resources).
> So my purpose in writing is to clang the bell on coming trends
>for those as yet unaware, and to beg some good news that E10 will not eat
>through my embedded fuel cell. I find the idea of changing fuel lines (we
>were told that stainless is not free of threat) abhorrent enough without
>worse news.
> Tell me it ain't so!
>Ferg Monowheel Classic 914 - sanding sanding sanding
>
>
|