Ethanol Fuel forces Lexus to recall over 214,000 cars

[AWD Chaser]

http://www.thestreet.com/story/10458...0-us-cars.html

Toyota said Friday that it has launched a safety recall of about 214,500 Lexus vehicles sold in the U.S. due to the potential corrosion of the cars' fuel delivery pipes.
Toyota Motor Sales USA Inc. is recalling the vehicles in conjunction with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The recall affects GS300/350, IS250/350, and LS460/460L Lexus vehicles with model years 2006 through 2008.
According to Toyota's statement, some ethanol fuels with a low moisture content may corrode the internal surface of the fuel delivery pipes, resulting in a fuel leak over time. The pipe corrosion may trigger the malfunction indicator light in the vehicles, the company said.
Lexus dealers will replace the fuel delivery pipes at no charge, Toyota said. No other Lexus or Toyota vehicles are involved in the recall.
In late January, the Japanese automaker said Lexus will mail safety recall notices to affected owners.

[TC200six]

Yes Anna Bligh, You hear that? You say on media interviews about ethanol that "It's friendly for both our environment and our engines". Well not the rest of vehicle is it now? The myth is that all post-1986 vehicles are safe to run on ethanol, but look at this story. [End rant] :

[Mr Hardware]

Ethanol is the biggest joke in the fuel industry. It's probably worse for the environment in terms of growing and processing and then burning, it costs more as it's 3cpl cheaper but you burn way more of the stuff because of the low energy content per litre, and cars generally don't like it. The only thing it's good for is queensland's economy, and i'm not rooting up my car so a farmer can toss out his traditional crops and replace them with food sources for cars to burn. Hell, there isn't enough food in the world for all the people, how about our cars just burn things that people can't eat, ok anna?

[csv8]

Sugar belongs in my coffee not my car !!!

[vztrt]

Here we go!

[steamin63]

Originally Posted by vztrt

Here we go!

is this the new PRO ETHANOL line of argument ?

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by steamin63

is this the new PRO ETHANOL line of argument ?

Nah just sick of some of the BS that gets posted up here, because Toyota didn't engineer their car properly Ethanol is evil and your car will blow up.

I had major issues with LPG on my old car does that mean that I should go around saying LPG is crap and should only be used in BBQ's??

Then there are the ones that go on about Diesel being a rubbish fuel and that the engines are rubbish.

Why is it the Falcons dont have issues with E10, ring Ford up (13FORD) and you'll notice that they say its fine to run your Falcon on E10 (post 1987 models) yet they say that an aftermarket LPG system is not recommended.

The point I'm trying to make is that as soon as there is some story regarding ethanol people are jumping out from everywhere telling you how bad it is when they really have no idea.

[The Monty]

I got a flat tyre from using ethanol, lol.

Id say the problem, while being directly related to Ehtanol, is actually not the ethanol, but the typ of metals/rubbers used in the fuel system that Lexus have obviously not made to the required specification they said it would be.
Its not the Ethanols fault that the car manufacturer stuffed up by saying it could be used when it clearly couldnt. Some of you people really need to wake up and smell the roses.

[steamin63]

Originally Posted by The Monty

I got a flat tyre from using ethanol, lol.

Id say the problem, while being directly related to Ehtanol, is actually not the ethanol, but the typ of metals/rubbers used in the fuel system that Lexus have obviously not made to the required specification they said it would be.
Its not the Ethanols fault that the car manufacturer stuffed up by saying it could be used when it clearly couldnt. Some of you people really need to wake up and smell the roses.

smell what roses. they were torn up to grow sugar cane for the ethanol.

[The Monty]

Originally Posted by steamin63

smell what roses. they were torn up to grow sugar cane for the ethanol.

[madmelon]

Look- ethanol itself isn't terribly bad for fuel systems. The WATER it absorbs IS. If it didn't absorb so much water whilst sitting in servo tanks, there wouldn't be half the problems there are...

[blownba]

Wait and see what happens with the V8 supercars running E85 this year. Its gonna be a nightmare. 30% more fuel delivery required to achieve the same power as premium.

[burnz]

Originally Posted by blownba

Wait and see what happens with the V8 supercars running E85 this year. Its gonna be a nightmare. 30% more fuel delivery required to achieve the same power as premium.

and the engine builder are blowing motor, trying to get a handle on things.
life span of the engine is down to 1500K's .
but as you say the race will be defanatly won/lost in the pit's now.

[ebxr8240]

Originally Posted by burns

and the engine builder are blowing motor, trying to get a handle on things.
life span of the engine is down to 1500K's .
but as you say the race will be definitely won/lost in the pit's now.

What experience do you have to say that??
Sheesh !!

[burnz]

Originally Posted by ebxr8240

What experience do you have to say that??
Sheesh !!

well some team's sent their builders/tuners to the states.
other team retain the serveses of mick athowood.

[geckoGT]

We really do need to remember that in the US E85 is becoming very common (85% ethanol). We do not have E85 available here.

Many reputable motoring bodies have stated that E10 (the 10% ethanol that we have here) is suitable for all late model australian cars, E85 is not as it requires a suitable fuel system. This is obviously something Toyota has failed to provide for US cars running E85. There does not seem to be an issue with there cars running E10 in Australia.

As for "sugar belongs in my coffee", compelling argument there, not sure how to counter that.

Come to think of it, my cat has been sleeping more since we changed the ute to E10, ethanol is bad!

[68XTFairmont]

E/10 stole my baby

E/10 is the cause of high seafood prices, due to food shortages caused by the cropping required for the production of E/10 people have started eating Cockles(pipi's depending on which state you come from) This in turn has driven up the price of Cockles which then makes it more expensive for fisherman to buy the bait that they catch their fish with.


BURN THE EVIL E/10 lmao

[deesun]

Ethanol is said to be the answer to higher petrol prices if and when full production starts and it is used as much. But if bananas increased x4 when a big storm went through north QLD what will happen to the price of sugarcane/petrol ? With the increase of Global warming and harsher weather conditions every time there is a storm up goes the price. See same day different BS.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by deesun

Ethanol is said to be the answer to higher petrol prices if and when full production starts and it is used as much. But if bananas increased x4 when a big storm went through north QLD what will happen to the price of sugarcane/petrol ? With the increase of Global warming and harsher weather conditions every time there is a storm up goes the price. See same day different BS.

Even though E10 is a few cents cheaper you burn more of it for a set distance, so its nothing but a false economy, it really saves you nothing.

[FPV+fteT3]

Well glad my FPV and Subie both hate drinks with sugar and only drink 98 I wont have to worry about anything :

[ebxr8240]

Why give our hard earned money to Desert dwellers though??
Keep the money in our country!
Higher compression can compensate for some fuel economy..
Yes the oil companies are ripping !!
But that doesn't make Ethanol a bad thing..
It adds way less c02 than fossil fuels..
Generally the higher octane fuels have it added anyway..
I stand corrected .. U.S use E85 .. I think this is where Toyota was cought out.. It was the fuel lines after all...

[Romulus]

Originally Posted by ebxr8240

Why give our hard earned money to Desert dwellers though??
Keep the money in our country!
Higher compression can compensate for some fuel economy..
Yes the oil companies are ripping !!
But that doesn't make Ethanol a bad thing..
It adds way less c02 than fossil fuels..
Generally the higher octane fuels have it added anyway..
I stand corrected .. U.S use E85 .. I think this is where Toyota was cought out.. It was the fuel lines after all...

Really? When you take into account the amount of engergy and water used to create ethonol it has a carbon positive effect, not the opposite as some tout. Check this out, borrowed from Crikey.com today. Coincidence perhaps?

"The greenhouse benefits of biofuels have long been debated. The then-Australian Greenhouse Office commissioned a study by the CSIRO that indicated there was little difference in emissions between E10 derived from molasses and premium unleaded. Data from the International Energy Agency collated in a Masters thesis by grain merchant Dennis Ward suggests a 5% biofuel mandate across the OECD -- that is, if 5% of all transport fuel in the OECD were replaced with ethanol -- the reduction in world greenhouse emissions would be a quarter of 1%.

However, applications by Manildra to expand its facility at Bomaderry on the NSW South Coast, and by other companies such as Agri Energy and the Four Arrows Group to build new ethanol facilities at Condobolin, Oaklands and Coleambally have provided a rare glimpse into the energy intensity of the ethanol production process, as companies have been required to estimate greenhouse emissions as part of their project Environmental Impact Assessments. Scott Hickie, adviser to NSW Greens MLC Ian Cohen, has estimated that, on the companies' own assessments, the proposed new ethanol facilities alone would add up to 1.5% to net NSW greenhouse emissions -- an extraordinary figure for a fledgling industry. At least four further plants have also been proposed across rural NSW.
The figures include greenhouse credits assumed from the replacement of petrol with ethanol. As Manildra itself states in its EIS for an upgrade of its Bomaderry plant, which it is estimated will generate an additional net 230,000 tonnes of CO2-equivalent a year, "the project will result in a net increase of greenhouse gas emissions, even when the downstream reduction as a result of replacing petroleum fuels with bioethanol is taken into account."

This is at odds with the statements by NSW Lands Minister Tony Kelly (christened "Minister for Ethanol" by Morris Iemma), who told NSW Parliament last year "new transport fuels must also be capable of making a significant contribution to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and they must not lead to unintended consequences, such as increasing the price of food. The New South Wales ethanol mandate gets this balance right." Announcing the new mandate in December with Kelly, Environment and Climate Change Minister Carmel Tebbutt said "we need to embrace bio fuels in a sustainable way, but acknowledge their contribution to reducing greenhouse gas emissions."

Manildra itself is less reticent about the link. Its subsidiary Shoalhaven Starches, which runs the Bomaderry facility, said in July 2008 that "the use of ethanol as a fuel or fuel additive has many benefits: it is a renewable fuel and lessens reliance on fossil fuels; it reduces greenhouse gas emissions and other air pollutants..."

Kelly’s office today said that, while its advice was that biofuels contributed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, they were not a silver bullet solution to climate change. The purpose of the mandate was to establish a foundation and a framework that provided the market with a platform and the incentive to produce a range of biofuels.

Greenhouse emissions aren’t the only area where ethanol has been oversold. When Morris Iemma committed at the 2007 NSW election to a 10% ethanol mandate by 2011, he declared it "a win for the environment". In fact, Manildra has been a repeat offender when it comes to breaching environmental requirements. Only in July, Shoalhaven Shire Council served a Prevention Notice on Shoalhaven Starches for the discharge of industrial waste into the sewage system.

NSW Environment Department records show the company has failed to comply with environmental requirements (including minor ones relating to monitoring) on hundreds of occasions in recent years. By way of comparison, the Caltex petroleum refinery at Kurnell in Sydney has had only a handful of non-compliance reports. Manildra’s representatives did not return Crikey’s calls by deadline.

The E10 mandate will also have a major impact on water usage. The 2.5m tonnes of grain required each year to produce the ethanol necessitated by a NSW E10 mandate will see up to 10 ethanol plants across NSW, all trying to source grain from reliable suppliers. Barring a massive increase in rainfall across the Murray-Darling Basin, this means irrigation, further skewing the MDB water market already heavily over-allocated and still subject to State Government distortions.
None of this is news to the NSW Government. It is understood that the E10 mandate is strongly opposed by many inside the NSW bureaucracy. The NSW Labor Party, however, continues its strong support for the industry.

[Bossxr8]

Santa Clause. The Easter Bunny. Ethanol fuel and Toyota Prius's being good for the environment.

What do they have in common.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Santa Clause. The Easter Bunny. Ethanol fuel and Toyota Prius's being good for the environment.

What do they have in common.

Ummm, they all have capital letters?

[The Monty]

Just remember that all you people saying Ultimate and Vortex for life, Ethanol will never be used in my car, that most of the premiums have 5% ethanol in them. OMG, the roof is going to rust now ARRRARAGAGGAGAGAhhhh..

[Bill M]

Originally Posted by The Monty

Just remember that all you people saying Ultimate and Vortex for life, Ethanol will never be used in my car, that most of the premiums have 5% ethanol in them. OMG, the roof is going to rust now ARRRARAGAGGAGAGAhhhh..

You have evidence of this? Which premium brands?

[The Monty]

Vortex and V-Power Racing both have 5% Ethanol. Ultimate does not.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by The Monty

Vortex and V-Power Racing both have 5% Ethanol. Ultimate does not.

No they have 3% as a cleaning agent.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by vztrt

No they have 3% as a cleaning agent.

I have seen info from both shell and caltex that state they may contain up to 5% ethanol. They probably average 3%.

Fact: ethanol absorbs water from the atmosphere
Fact: more energy is used in producing the ethanol than you get out of it by burning it
Fact: if fuel containing ethanol sits for long enough the water absorbed will be enough to separate out from the immiscible petroleum products and takes the ethanol with it, significantly lowering octane.

Fact- ethanol is a renewable energy source, fossil fuels are not.
Fact- Fossil fuels will run out and this will spell the end of the dinosaur blood burners (but hey, the GT will make a great cubby house for kids).
Fact- Fossil fuel production was very inefficient back when they decided to replace the horse on carriages, good thing they did not give up and keep the horse (it would look funny with a intercooled blower set up and lowered legs with bling horse shoes).
Fact- The average person does not have a car that lives in a garage and goes out on a drive only on sunny weekends, therefore they don't care about moisture absorption on rarely used cars.

Not denying your points but nothing is insurmountable with further development and research.

[olfella]

Originally Posted by The Monty

Vortex and V-Power Racing both have 5% Ethanol. Ultimate does not.

And thats a fact??