Jump to content

Latest on Red Diesel


blackrose

Featured Posts

I agree with Catweazel about this . As an additional thought this whole EU thing makes me feel like my country has been stolen by the modern equivalent of the roman empire but it doesnt make me dislike my fellow europeans just the blasted pen pushers who dream up all this stuff.I seem to think maybe Norway doesnt belong to the EU, if so can we have another invasion I will lend them my longboat !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yawn!

Diesel is cheaper in europe, than here so how come it's their fault?

 

Euroseptics can never answer the tricky questions.

 

They just blindly continue the same old rant.

I agree it is often the case, but not always. My daughter lives in Germany, and she always comments on how cheap our diesel and petrol is when she returns to the UK! It could of course balance up with road taxes etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, me learned friends, is it OK to use white diesel in our boat engines? Are there any problems changing from white to red and back again? Will it seriously be the case that red from the local marina is going to be considerably more expensive than white from Tesco?

 

Where d'ya buy billy cans from?

 

A

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, me learned friends, is it OK to use white diesel in our boat engines? Are there any problems changing from white to red and back again? Will it seriously be the case that red from the local marina is going to be considerably more expensive than white from Tesco?

 

Where d'ya buy billy cans from?

 

A

I have been reliably informed that there is no problem running a modern diesel engine on white diesel (in fact that is what they are designed to run on), and then reverting to red. The same is apparently not so for older designed diesels which rely on the high sulphur content to help lubricate the injectiion pump. I think that what this means is that any high revving engine designed in the last 30 years to work in road vehicle will be ok, but slow running industrial engines might not be ok so check first.

 

Where price is concerned I don't think it will be any cheaper to buy white at Tescos than red at the Marina. I filled up last week, and the Marina Office told me that they will be selling their red diesel at a standard formula of 60% taxed, 40% untaxed which is what most people agree is a rough average for most recreatuonal boats. At that price Red at the Marina will probablry be cheaper than forecourt white. but of course it depends on how much they decide the base cost to be, I payed 76p a litre but other places were much more, so I could be wrong.

 

As far as cans are concerned, I think you mean Jerry Cans (Billy Cans are what Scouts cook their food in!) they can be bought from people like Tool Station for about £16, (free delivery at the moment) that's where I got mine from.

http://www.toolstation.com/search.html?searchstr=jerry+can

Edited by David Schweizer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been reliably informed that there is no problem running a modern diesel engine on white diesel (in fact that is what they are designed to run on), and then reverting to red. The same is apparently not so for older designed diesels which rely on the high sulphur content to help lubricate the injectiion pump. I think that what this means is that any high revving engine designed in the last 30 years to work in road vehicle will be ok, but slow running industrial engines might not be ok so check first.

 

Where price is concerned I don't tghink it will be any cheaper to buy white at tescos than red at the Marina. I filled uop last week, and the Office told me that they will be selling their red diesel at s astandard formula of 60% taxe, 40% untaxed which w=is what most people agree is a rough average for most recreatuonal boats. At that price Red at the marina will probablry bwe cheaper than forecourt white. bu i could be wrong.

 

As far as cans are concerned, I think you mean Jerry Cans (Billy Cans are what Scouts cook their food in!) they can be bought from people like Tool Station for about £16, (free delivery at the moment) that's where I got mine from.

http://www.toolstation.com/search.html?searchstr=jerry+can

I have heard much the same about white in newer engines. Can older engines use an additive such as oil?

Thanks for the billy can link. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So running a 10 yr old Lister Canalstar on white, red or a mix of both (pink?) is gonna be ok then....We're moored at Swanley Bridge Marina who charge the earth for fuel at the moment...lord knows how much it'll be come November!

 

Thanks for the Jerry can link!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some garages around our way sell red diesel in very tough 4 litre plastic containers. There was a refundable charge of 4 quid on the container when I got some. I kept them and fill them up at the fuel wholesalers, as they are very strong and well worth 4 quid.

 

So running a 10 yr old Lister Canalstar on white, red or a mix of both (pink?) is gonna be ok then....We're moored at Swanley Bridge Marina who charge the earth for fuel at the moment...lord knows how much it'll be come November!

 

Thanks for the Jerry can link!

That is how I understand it. I can see it will be cheaper to buy derv from ASDA or similar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve tried filling my narrow boats fuel tank from a 25ltr drum and even though I used a funnel I still spilt some, as my boat is moored in a marina it does make a mess of the water and pollutes the water which is my major concern as a fisherman, so if im trying to be careful and failing I bet there are thousands of others who couldn’t give a monkeys about spilling some drops of diesel, so the question is this does anyone know of a container with a tap fitted to the cap so I can fill up my tank without spilling fuel ? Maybe the caravan people have something suitable for carrying water etc?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve tried filling my narrow boats fuel tank from a 25ltr drum and even though I used a funnel I still spilt some, as my boat is moored in a marina it does make a mess of the water and pollutes the water which is my major concern as a fisherman, so if im trying to be careful and failing I bet there are thousands of others who couldn’t give a monkeys about spilling some drops of diesel, so the question is this does anyone know of a container with a tap fitted to the cap so I can fill up my tank without spilling fuel ? Maybe the caravan people have something suitable for carrying water etc?

It is difficult not to spill a drop, and a little diesel makes a lot of pollution. I struggle even with a big tractor funnel. There are those 12 volt fuel transfer pumps, but they are expensive.

 

I have said for ages that the biggest problem with this derogation removal farce will be pollution of the waterways, as people try to source cheaper diesel. How long before rules have to be brought in to prevent same?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

my favourite so far for getting diesel from a jerry can to the main tank with no spilling is this one:

 

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/E-Z-FILL-FUEL-TRANSF...id=p3286.c0.m14

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never had a problem with these http://www.online-pumpshop.com/xcart/produ...p?productid=137

 

And red diesel was 69p litre for 200ltr barrel + £15.00 delivery = approx 76.50p per litre from various hire plant companies.

 

Before we get the usual "it'll be full of cr*p from there" some of the plant I & others use on site costs considerably more than my boat - about 500k in one instance and if they wrecked the engine with dirty fuel they'd get sued back to the middle ages. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Q&A sez yes.... :lol:

 

I still think people should start using Biodiesel though, it is better for the engine and environment... :lol:

That depends on the engine and the source of the Biodiesel.

 

The vast majority of Biodiesel is just as bad as fossil fuels, for the environment and definitely worse for many people's lives.

 

Many engines don't like Biofuels at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That depends on the engine and the source of the Biodiesel.

 

The vast majority of Biodiesel is just as bad as fossil fuels, for the environment and definitely worse for many people's lives.

 

Many engines don't like Biofuels at all.

 

The problem is the definition of Biodiesel has been mixed up with UVO/WVO (Used/Waste Vegetable Oil), Biodiesel is processed oils made to be as viscose as regular diesel, maybe a little thicker, but most diesel engines can run happily on it without fault. Also, the Biodiesel can improve the engine running as it cleans out the cr@p left behind by dino diesel, aswell as cleaning out the fuel tank and lines.

 

The one major problem with bio that I know of is that older rubber fuel lines will be eroded by the biodiesel resulting in leaks and even breaks in the pipes, but replacing these with PVC piping would prevent that. I haven't any knowledge of how different marine diesels work, but surely they aren't that different to road-going diesels? And a lot of older diesel engines usually eat anything they have poured into them (I know of one engine, Russian I think, that will run on anything, even used engine oil!!!), some cases just need a little fine tuning, but end up running like they were using dinofuels... :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True!

 

Used/Waste vegetable oil = good for the environment...

 

Biodiesel, in the main = very bad indeed, for the environment.

 

I don't see how biodiesel is bad for the environment, as long as it is made from waste oils, then it is a good thing, I know governments are perverting the name by growing crops just for fuel, but in general, it's much better than drilling holes in the ground and sucking up vast quantities of dead creature fluids to burn in vehicles and suchlike... :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True!

 

Used/Waste vegetable oil = good for the environment...

 

Biodiesel, in the main = very bad indeed, for the environment.

Why is biodiesel very bad for the environment ? :lol:

 

(ok, if the land could be used for food then that might be better - but bad for the environment ?)

 

Our understanding is that vegetation fixes carbon from the atmosphere and then, if burnt, releases it again - so its a cycle....

 

In fact, as not all of it is burnt when used for biodiesel, some of the carbon remains fixed - so growing vegetation for biodiesel reduces atmospheric carbon.

 

The problem with fossil fuel is that we're using carbon that has been fixed underground for millenia and releasing it into the atmosphere again ...

 

Doesn't the burning of waste vegetable oil release carbon into the atmosphere that might otherwise remain fixed ?

 

Or are we barking ? :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is biodiesel very bad for the environment ? :lol:

 

(ok, if the land could be used for food then that might be better - but bad for the environment ?)

 

Our understanding is that vegetation fixes carbon from the atmosphere and then, if burnt, releases it again - so its a cycle....

 

In fact, as not all of it is burnt when used for biodiesel, some of the carbon remains fixed - so growing vegetation for biodiesel reduces atmospheric carbon.

 

The problem with fossil fuel is that we're using carbon that has been fixed underground for millenia and releasing it into the atmosphere again ...

 

Doesn't the burning of waste vegetable oil release carbon into the atmosphere that might otherwise remain fixed ?

 

Or are we barking ? :lol:

 

Not being a particular expert in the field I think there are two problems:

 

1) The land take is alright so long as you are taking over fields from food production or similar, but in some parts of the world rain forest and other valuable habitats are being ripped out, which is counter productive both in carbon footprint and other biodiversity issues

 

2) The carbon footprint of the processing is quite significant, which most people forget about (and I suspect the industry doesn't like to remind them!)

 

Sadly, there are no easy fixes. Inalnd boaters however are such small scale users that they don't really feature, and for me as a general rule I'm using less fuel in a week on the boat than I would having a car based holiday for the week.

 

We've drifted a bit off topic, sorry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is biodiesel very bad for the environment ? :lol:

 

(ok, if the land could be used for food then that might be better - but bad for the environment ?)

 

Our understanding is that vegetation fixes carbon from the atmosphere and then, if burnt, releases it again - so its a cycle....

 

In fact, as not all of it is burnt when used for biodiesel, some of the carbon remains fixed - so growing vegetation for biodiesel reduces atmospheric carbon.

 

The problem with fossil fuel is that we're using carbon that has been fixed underground for millenia and releasing it into the atmosphere again ...

 

Doesn't the burning of waste vegetable oil release carbon into the atmosphere that might otherwise remain fixed ?

 

Or are we barking ? :lol:

There are three types of land that are being predominantly used for growing fuel crops:

 

1: Third world land that would be best used for food production. Better for our environment, maybe, but hardly for those who are going hungry or being forcibly relocated.

 

2: Rain Forest which is quite rightly described as the world's lungs. The fuel used for forest clearance and the massive amounts of CO2 released, when the forests are burnt, to make way for Palm oil, is hardly carbon neutral.

 

3. Growing oil crops on peat marshes. Our peat bogs are some of the most important habitats in the world. Destroying these is hardly good for the environment. Peat marshland also traps huge quantities of greenhouse gases which are released, when they are ploughed for crops (or cut for fuel and fertiliser, for that matter). More CO2 and methane is released, when a peat marsh is ploughed, than is saved by growing a fuel crop.

 

The problem with biofuels is that their supporters (who are a dwindling group) get saving the environment mixed up with reducing the carbon footprint.

 

But, like I said before:

 

Recycling waste oil - good....Most biofuel crops - bad.

 

Oh, and on a more personal note. Covering the countryside with rapeseed crops is hardly good for the hayfever sufferer's environment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are three types of land that are being predominantly used for growing fuel crops:

 

1: Third world land that would be best used for food production. Better for our environment, maybe, but hardly for those who are going hungry or being forcibly relocated.

 

2: Rain Forest which is quite rightly described as the world's lungs. The fuel used for forest clearance and the massive amounts of CO2 released, when the forests are burnt, to make way for Palm oil, is hardly carbon neutral.

 

3. Growing oil crops on peat marshes. Our peat bogs are some of the most important habitats in the world. Destroying these is hardly good for the environment. Peat marshland also traps huge quantities of greenhouse gases which are released, when they are ploughed for crops (or cut for fuel and fertiliser, for that matter). More CO2 and methane is released, when a peat marsh is ploughed, than is saved by growing a fuel crop.

 

The problem with biofuels is that their supporters (who are a dwindling group) get saving the environment mixed up with reducing the carbon footprint.

 

But, like I said before:

 

Recycling waste oil - good....Most biofuel crops - bad.

 

Oh, and on a more personal note. Covering the countryside with rapeseed crops is hardly good for the hayfever sufferer's environment.

 

Thanks ! :lol:

 

Genuinely interested here - not trying to 'have a go' or anything...

 

Absolutely agree with everything you say - especially that the 'carbon' argument is used too much and often badly...except still slightly puzzled by one thing:

 

We understand that mature trees don't actually fix that much carbon - its growing vegetation that does that - so the argument for why destroying the rainforests to replace them with other vegetation is a bad thing might not be because of carbon so much....? :lol:

 

(Don't get us wrong - destroying the rainforests is an inexcusably BAD THING that generations ahead of us will shake their heads in disbelief at)

 

And agreed about the yellow rape of the UK countryside (small patches are fine but large areas definitely make our eyes water - and we don't get hayfever ! :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.