I opted for a dual-fuel system with a vestigial 25L (1/3 size) petrol tank for $3000. LPG only was $2800. Since I don’t have an LPG jerrycan, I thought dual-fuel had a practical advantage, so spent the extra $200.

wbb
May 15th, 2008 at 10:52 pm

Loss of power is an urban myth.

Nope, the power loss is real. Spark ignited piston engines can be set up to run just as well on LPG as on petrol, but conversions of petrol vehicles (particularly older ones) just don’t make as much peak HP or low end torque.

The power loss is most noticeable when max power is required frequently, as in heavy vehicles with relatively small engines. My yoot weighs 1650kg and only has a 2.0L engine. Foot on the floor often, particularly when accelerating to motorway speed or climbing hills. More downshifting while climbing hills. The low end torque loss means revving the engine higher before engaging the clutch, else the engine may stall ie taking off from a stoplight.

steve h

May 14th, 2008 at 4:01 pm

Another problem is the perceived lack of power (almost irrelevant in Sydney traffic these days)

The power loss IS irrelevant in Sydney traffic, on mostly flat roads, in a passenger car with an automatic transmission and a relatively high power-to-weight ratio. A light truck with a manual gearbox in the Blue Mountains has a bit more trouble with the power loss.

carbonsink
May 14th, 2008 at 6:11 pm

BTW, another reason why LPG isn’t a no-brainer: Limited availability outside metropolitan areas.

These guys drove an LPG car around Australia, 13,000km, under $1000 worth of fuel. LPG is more widely available now than ever.

Peter Ferguson
May 14th, 2008 at 7:32 pm

[…] seems rebate now going as extra profit to LPG man.

I agree. Before the rebate, LPG installs were about $1000 cheaper.

Still, while petrol is at $1.54 and LPG at 61.9c, I’ll recoup my $1000 out-of-pocket in a year or less. At those pump prices, the yoot costs 7.2c/km to run on LPG vs. 17.3c/km on petrol. $30 to fill the LPG (52L) as opposed to $72 for 46L of ULP, both to cover about 420km. That part IS a no-brainer.

Politically a unilateral snatch as part of the budget does seem to have been successful, as it has been largely lost in the noise.

But the manner in which it’s been done is pretty brutal.

I haven’t seen any comment from broking services and other analysis services I subscribe to, but in the last few years Woodside’s net after tax profit has been a bit over $1 billion, significant, but less than half our major banks. Investorweb has the forecasts for 2008 and 2009 at about $1.8b. So whatever the grab actually amounts to specifically it’s quite significant in terms of the bottom line.

That said most investors in Woodside would be investing for capital gain rather than the dividend stream. That’s pretty much how it’s priced with a yield around 2% and in future that will now become miniscule.

No discussion at all between the parties involved.Apart from being a tax grab from a large company what was the motive?

For Woodside I understand it is a hit of over $1 billion to the bottom line.

OK conditions have changed, and to put it into perspective Woodside’s share price went up yesterday by $1.62 to a new high of $63.02. So investors are not worried. Nevertheless it was poor form and reduces the trust business can have in Labor governments.

Glad to hear this from someone well placed to know.

Way back, I drove taxis night after night in LPG cars for two long years. As did every other taxi driver, since who knows how long (30 yrs?).

Loss of power is an urban myth. I was young and stupid enough back then to habitually overtake from the inside lane and I never felt at a disadvantage.

I fitted LPG through the 90s and recently opened shop again with an emphasis on alternative fuels, so allow me to address some of the assumptions made to date.

Price and performance
Pre ‘04 vehicles with a gas ring or air valve system can be converted for around 2-3,000, they work all right if you stay away from chop shops and keep the car well tuned, most problems are caused by worn spark plugs and faulty leads.

Post ‘03 vehicles with vapour injection would be around 4-5,000 and have no discernible power loss, there is no chance of the gas backfiring as it is injected in a measured dose rather than filling the intake (and waiting for the bang)

A well tuned and appropriate system will use around 5% more gas than petrol, maybe 10% on an old carburreted banger, any more and you need a better gas mechanic.

Safety
Safety switches close valves at the tank and under bonnet as soon as the engine stops turning or loses ignition and an excess flow valve cuts gas flow if a line is ripped open, this stuff is safer than petrol sitting in a plastic tank.
Tanks under vehicles are protected by a stone tray (I hope) and those in ute trays should have the same or a box cover to protect them from shifting loads, these are easily retro fitted.

Maintenance
An annual check and leak test along with regular servicing nips most problems in the bud, using a quarter tank of petrol per month stops the fuel going stale and keeps the injectors in good order.

Diesels
The earlier link to dieselgas.com shows what can be done with them, another no-brainer in my book, also worth a look is veggiecars.com -they have a dodgy looking website but a good product, he modifies the fuel system to run vegetable/ cooking oil direct rather than modifying the fuel with dangerous chemicals to make bio-diesel.

LPG is the cleanest, readily available fuel that we have at the moment but the future probably lies with natural gas for the plebs and electric for the well off.

Cheers
http://nakedmechanic.blogspot.com/2008/02/update.html

Of course, electric trolley buses running at night on wind power are low-emissions and low-noise. You could probably even take advantage of off-peak coal fired electricity tariffs to do it.

Could not be happier. The car still drives the the same, no lack of power, still heaps of space in the boot and great on long trips as with a full tank of petrol and lpg can get 1000k out of it.

It seems a no brainer, now that I can fill up for around $40 vs $80 - $90.

Perhaps the government should start buying back drivers’ licenses and the fuel-inefficient cars could be recycled into buses and bicycles.

Just don’t have those buses driver around at night or the middle of the day with one or 2 people in them. I’ve often wondered if running more smaller mini-buses would be better for the environment - and drivers would probably be cheaper as they wouldn’t need big vehicle licences (great job for uni students out of hours).

Then there’s all the other points that other posters have made regarding LPG conversions.

What would interest me in getting an LPG conversion, however, would be if I drove a diesel.

last I checked, coal profits were up

Sam - the coal miners are raking it in as you say. Thermal coal for power stations has increased in price by 50% this year - and has doubled in a year.

Australia’s surplus, future funds, education revolutions and child-care rebates are looking good.

Perhaps the government should start buying back drivers’ licenses and the fuel-inefficient cars could be recycled into buses and bicycles.

So the government’s probably just destroyed the Australian solar PV industry

I think you’re right, and although the PV rebate was never the smartest policy in the world, but this is unambiguously a bad move by Rudd.

But hey, the “clever country” has gone outta style. Non-resource exporters are being crushed by the dollar, manufacturers are on their last legs, so why not wipe out the solar industry too?

P.S. Didn’t we invent this stuff?

Re: the solar rebate - I too think they’ve pretty much killed the domestic market. It was only marginally economic with the rebate and the proposed feed in tariffs. I’m really surprised there wasn’t more immediate and vocal opposition to the decision - hopefully it won’t have negative flow on effects to the development of large scale solar farms.

Sam: that’s true, but If the government is throwing money around, I’m happy enough to take it. And for everybody who’s prepared to admit that they’re exploiting dumb government largesse, there’s a thousand who’ll just take the coin. If you’re annoyed about it, blame the policy, not me for exploiting it…

In any case, Chris is spot-on about another issue, the solar rebate is to be means tested. I no longer qualify for the rebate, the Victorian feed-in tariff is virtually useless for me. So forget the plan for solar panels on my roof. And, frankly, I doubt that there’s that many people with household incomes under $100,000 that are prepared to lock up capital in solar panels. So the government’s probably just destroyed the Australian solar PV industry.

As you know, I don’t think that’s such a bad thing. The MRET is still around, and has to be met somehow. It’ll just be met by wind, micro-hydro, biomass and possibly geothermal (cross fingers…).

Anyway, I’m going to have to do a post on the solar panel thing, thank you to Chris.