Biodiesel Rulez!!! [ARCHIVED]

[alwayz_yummy]

ask ko lang, kakafill ko lang kasi ng 6.13 liter of flying v(sa philcoa)'s bended bio diesel. eto muna kakarga ko in the next loads.. hope may improvement ko makita in the next fills. are all flying v's selling this? alin pa station alternative ko?

as of now, i dont expect anything(kasi may previous fuel pa ako,e...)

[garyq]

alwayz: lahat ng nakita kong Flying sells the blended bd. You can of course buy from BD dealers and mix it yourself. Regarding the results, what are you expecting ba? for sure your emissions will be cleaner and you are promoting a fuel that is indigenous and renewable. IMHO yun ang pinaka malaking benefits ng CME

[landlord]

To b d users. Where can I get bio diesel somewhere close to Alabang? What brand is the one that comes in the 20 liter container? Saan to available?
Thanks.

[biogas.works]

Regarding the results, what are you expecting ba? for sure your emissions will be cleaner and you are promoting a fuel that is indigenous and renewable. IMHO yun ang pinaka malaking benefits ng CME

You mentioned writing a short thesis for your masters about this.

Please remember, I fully endorse the use of CME. I agree that it is an indigenous & renewable fuel that also reduces emissions & (quite importantly) is also capable of increasing fuel mileage.

Significant effort, cost and technological improvements went into the design of CRDi systems to basically reduce emissions and increase mileage. Now, as Filipinos, we have a product that can do this for a few measly centavos.

No expensive engine modifications and parts are needed & anyone can do the tests. Two bottles of CME costing Php 150.00 is all that is needed to find out what 0.5% CME can do so that when only 1% CME is available per the BioFuels Act -- we can have data that will tell us if 1% is giving us the best performance or is simply costing us more money unneccesarily.

Please note also that by using less CME locally MORE of it will be available FOR EXPORT. And, GLOBAL fuel savings and GHG emission reduction will be GREATER!

[alwayz_yummy]

well-> firstly and important, basta compatible siya and wont give unnecessary sounds...

ung iba, like improved milage/performance,etc, subjective kasi kaya i dont expect much of those.

[garyq]

You mentioned writing a short thesis for your masters about this.

Please remember, I fully endorse the use of CME. I agree that it is an indigenous & renewable fuel that also reduces emissions & (quite importantly) is also capable of increasing fuel mileage.

Significant effort, cost and technological improvements went into the design of CRDi systems to basically reduce emissions and increase mileage. Now, as Filipinos, we have a product that can do this for a few measly centavos.

No expensive engine modifications and parts are needed & anyone can do the tests. Two bottles of CME costing Php 150.00 is all that is needed to find out what 0.5% CME can do so that when only 1% CME is available per the BioFuels Act -- we can have data that will tell us if 1% is giving us the best performance or is simply costing us more money unneccesarily.

Please note also that by using less CME locally MORE of it will be available FOR EXPORT. And, GLOBAL fuel savings and GHG emission reduction will be GREATER!

bro i've read all your posts regarding using .5% instead of 1% and it is duly noted. I think you mentioned this already several times sa mga post mo and I think many of us here na regular sa tsikot appreciates your contribution sa forum.

[garyq]

well-> firstly and important, basta compatible siya and wont give unnecessary sounds...

ung iba, like improved milage/performance,etc, subjective kasi kaya i dont expect much of those.

bro yung positive results ng CME(BD) as alternative fuel for diesel engines very well documented so don't be afraid I've been using it on several of our vehicles (canter, elf, crosswind, kia) for over three years now at B1-B5 and wala naman negative results. Started with senbel then chemrez and now homebrew. Go ahead bro!

[mazdamazda]

Even if emission is slightly higher for 0.5%, the emission for 2 vehicles using the same fuel will be ultimately lower.

Can you quantify what "slightly higher" means?

My tests produce 10-15% fuel savings with 1% CME. Comparatively, 0.5% CME gives more fuel savings of 15-20%. I have been testing since July 2006 using a simulated dyno to produce scientific and statistically accurate data. No local test has this level of accuracy.

From what you are posting, you are already CONCLUDING rather than hyphotesizing that a 0.5% blend will produce a better fuel consumption comapred to a 1% blend.

BUT,

Wasn't this only done only on one type of vehicle? What would be the effects of this on brand new vehicles? Or 20 year old vehicles? To those equipped with turbos? Those with CRDis? Those with variable geometry turbos?

Is the 6,000 miles (since July 2006) that you've logged in your testing considered already a LONG-TERM test already?

Can you further explain to us also on how you measured your fuel savings on a "simulated chassis dyno"? Was this used using equipment at Autoplus, Speedlab or Autotechnika since AFAIK they are the only ones in the country who have a chassis dyno.

I can understand that you are trying to get other motorists to participate in your experiments, but to conclude (well, you mentioned this several times in diffrent posts already) that 0.5% is better... well... that's a bit of a stretch already.

No wonder, Chemrez is rushing to build a larger plant and PNOC, Shell, SeaOil, etc. are scrambling to put up CME plants. At 1% this venture is VERY PROFITABLE for them!

You say that Chemrez & co. are only after the profits, but WHO pioneered this venture and took risks in introducing biodiesel here commercially a few years ago?

Then you also said...

Please note also that by using less CME locally MORE of it will be available FOR EXPORT. And, GLOBAL fuel savings and GHG emission reduction will be GREATER!

So even if the Philippines is using a 0.5% blend, the profits of the said companies will be same since they will just export it abroad.

Significant effort, cost and technological improvements went into the design of CRDi systems to basically reduce emissions and increase mileage. Now, as Filipinos, we have a product that can do this for a few measly centavos.

CRDi? That's an entirely different topic.

[kihtmaine]

Nasa pampanga ako kanina yung sinakyan kong jeep nagpakarga (yung nasa kalsada) ng krudo kaso eto ang napansin ko yung kulay krudo dark green hindi siya yung kulay krudo talaga.

Ano kaya yun? Veggie oil or BD?
Sa monday babalikan ko yun tatanungin ko sila

Ok rin pala doon 28 bucks per liter yung diesel sa caltex.

he he he he
Ang saya!!

[biogas.works]

Thank you for your comments and questions. I was beginning to think no one cared and all my efforts were simply for nothing.

Can you quantify what "slightly higher" means?

No data is available for CME. At best we can only learn from "Higher Precision" evaluations on Canola BD that found 5% and 1% had GHG reductions of 4.6% and 3.4% respectively. As this blend changed by 80%, please note that emission increased only by 35.29%. Its safe to say, between 1% and 0.5% CME, emission will not increase by 50%. Probably not even by 35.29%. It will only increase by a "slightly higher" amount.

... you are already CONCLUDING rather than hyphotesizing that a 0.5% blend will produce a better fuel consumption ...

Yes, I am CONCLUDING and not hypothesizing because I have tested both 1% and 0.5%. I cannot help wonder if the proponents of 1% CME know the performance benefits conclusively -- I understand, it is they who hypothesized 1%. (Please see also my reply to "simulated chassis dyno" and to the need for your participation.)

Wasn't this done only on one type of vehicle? ... effects on brand new vehicles? ... 20 year old vehicles? ... those with turbos? ... with CRDis? ... with variable geometry turbos?

Yes, my data only comes from one vehicle and I do not know what 1% CME will do to other vehicles specially brand new ones. I believe the proponents of 1% CME do not know either specially because they have not conducted any chassis dyno tests with Autoplus, Speedlab or Autotechnika. I know this because Chemrez admitted it to me and AFAIK the dynos in these shops cannot run fuel mileage tests.

This is why, I repeatedly ask you my fellow tsikoteers to get involved. Get performance (emission, fuel mileage, etc) data for 100% diesel in your cars so that you will have data to compare if 1% is better as the proponents say. In a few weeks, all diesel will be pre-blended with 1% whether it is good or NOT and whether you like it or NOT. Get data before your opportunity to get it will be lost forever.

At best, using 0.5% should be the safest option, for now, since no one really knows what 1% will do on a LONG-TERM basis.

Is the 6,000 miles (since July 2006) that you've logged in your testing considered already a LONG-TERM test already?

How did you measure fuel savings on a "simulated chassis dyno"? Did you use equipment at Autoplus, Speedlab or Autotechnika since AFAIK they are the only ones in the country who have a chassis dyno.

On Feb. 9, 2004, Pres GMA by virtue of MC 55 directed all government vehicles to use 1% CME. Did they learn anything from it? If so, WHAT? Where is the data? The PCA, a primary stakeholder, performed a comprehensive 20,000 km test on one vehicle (SDN 982) but detailed data from the said test appear to be missing.

Since no dyno tests were performed locally and none seems to be have been done for CME in other countries, it is safe to say, all data available (specially missing data) cannot be used because accurate fuel mileage tests can only be obtained from a dyno. As my "simulated chassis dyno" produces verifiable data, in the absence of any other data -- at 6,000 kms & going -- they are probably the best data we have available.

I can understand that you are trying to get other motorists to participate in your experiments, but to conclude (well, you mentioned this several times in diffrent posts already) that 0.5% is better... well... that's a bit of a stretch already.

If you will be happy to use 1% CME when it is the only fuel available in a few weeks and you believe everyone will sustainably reap all the benefits claimed by the proponents, I apologize for my repeated requests that you particiapte in the tests. I simply felt my findings were important (as they will save you money) and I just wanted to be helpful.

You say that Chemrez & co. are only after the profits, but WHO pioneered this venture and took risks in introducing biodiesel here commercially a few years ago?
Then you also said...
So even if the Philippines is using a 0.5% blend, the profits of the said companies will be same since they will just export it abroad.

I said it before and I will say it again. I believe CME is God's wonderful gift to Filipinos. And, Chemrez, Senbel & etc, deserve to be commended and to profit for developing it locally.
However, I believe 1% is only good. 0.5% is BETTER. It is cheaper (since both deliver just about the same savings) and (with limited production capacity) more of it can be exported.

CRDi? That's an entirely different topic.

I was referring to the scientific effort, technological development and cost of CRDi to increase power, improve mileage and lower emissions. CME can achieve many of these for just a few centavos and using our present vehicles.