Yet another change quietly slipped in by the government in the name of emission reductions without proper consideration.
E5 and the soon-to-be introduced E10 are gifts to the fuel companies. Alcohol is cheaper than petrol, so they make more profit/gallon. Anyone seen any suggestion of petrol companies passing any of this on to the customer – no, I thought not. Alcohol is also less calorific than petrol, so E10 gives fewer mpg, leading to more sales for the petrol companies. Win/win.
Alcohol attacks certain plastics and rubbers, so if your vehicle is more than a few years old, and wasn’t designed in anticipation of alcohol in fuel, there is a real risk of damage to fuel system components. This can be expensive and difficult to rectify. If your motorcycle has a plastic tank, watch out, it may slowly dissolve.
Alcohol also readily absorbs water, so if you use your vehicle infrequently there is risk of corrosion attacking the tank and any internal fuel pump. There are also chemical reactions which can occur creating acids which lead to bacteriological black slime creation in the tank. I’ve had personal experience of this with E5 in a classic mini, and E10 will be worse. Adding a fuel stabiliser goes some way to reducing the problem, but there is a non-trivial cost involved.
And there will surely be ecological issues involved in producing the vast amounts of cheap alcohol required.
Since petrol engines vehicles will be phased out in the next few years, wouldn’t it have made sense to leave things are they were for the interim, or at least make alcohol-free fuel available for those who need it for their old vehicles?
Mike