CEL - Secondary Air System (Carbon Buildup)

[NWS4Guy]

As promised, here is the rundown of my story and work done (sorry for the delay, had a rough weekend with sick family).

Here's the rundown. About a 6 weeks ago, I got a CEL, and used my VCDS to pull the code. Secondary Air System fault, recorded 2 times. I cleared it and it didn't come back, so I figured I would keep an eye on it. Soon after, I went in for my 35K service, knowing I would get flagged with TD1 - I didn't really care and was not going to trouble with flashing to stock then back again. Got service and mentioned the CEL, they checked and it was not present since I cleared it - no biggie.

Come last week I got the CEL again, same code. I called the dealership immediately and made an appointment. The got me in last Thurs, and I dropped the car off, but the CEL was gone on it's own - but I didn't clear the code so they could pull it. The SA was going over things and said "looks like you got chipped at Achtuning?" to which I said "Yep." She said "You don't seem that concerned about it," and said "Note really, I have aftermarket intake, exhaust, front brakes, suspension brace, and a very noticeable Podi boost gauge on the steering column. The car is almost out of warranty anyway, and it's been pretty bulletproof." She said she understood that, but wanted me to know Audi has voided my powertrain warranty as a result, and I said I understood that, and have talked to a few people who have had to get things done, and Audi was pretty understanding overall if the problem was obviously NOT related to being chipped/modified.

They ended up having to keep the car overnight due to the length of work (see similar work on BMW M5 here, courtesy of ilspazzaneve - http://www.turnermotorsport.com/t-te...-Build-Up.aspx ). Friday afternoon I got the call to pick it up, and the SA went over things and we talked for a while. First of all, as mentioned in the above link, this can be abated by using Top Tier fuel, due to the better additives, which more completely burn, and the remnants that don't burn are less likely to gunk things up (supposedly). "Drive it like you stole it" was the exact phrase used - do more spirited driving, and ensure the engine is up to temp. Otherwise, there is nothing to actually prevent this from happening on all B8 S4's, it's just a matter of when it will occur.

I'll reiterate: This WILL OCCUR on your car, it might be like me at 36K miles, or it might be at 100K miles. I changed my driving habits substantially a year ago, by taking the vanpool to work 3-4 days a week. This meant that 4 days a week, it drove 5 total miles to drop off my oldest at preschool - and with the area of country I live in, there is no way the engine ever gets up to operating temp during that drive. I apparently need to drive it much harder when I do drive it at operating temps, something I will eagerly work on.

The work was done, and covered by Audi, since it was a known issue (TSB and description of work is in the image), though it was marked as being a "one time only due to being chipped." The cost of the work out of pocket would likely be in the $600-700 range. With the older 3.2's they had to drop the engine, but now they use some sort of new high pressure water jet to clean things out. I'm not certain of the how, the tech was gone already when I was asking, but they must have a way to keep it out of the parts of the engine it shouldn't be in. You can see that the work done involved:
- bumper removal
- coolant drain
- Supercharger removal
- all belts removed
- spark plugs removed
- power steering pump removed
- air filter/tubing removed
- exhaust removed

Looks like the heads were pulled as well, though it was not cited - there was a part use of head gaskets though.

[PitchS4]

According to your link the main cause of failure is a faulty SAI valve. Did the SA mention that at all? Also I am not sure the drive it like you stole it applies here since the damage is done during warm-up?

Thanks for the info. If I understand correctly, this is not carbon buildup as we saw it in the B7 RS4 but this will really just effect emissions and NOT performance. So back away from the ledge.

[Leor604]

Neal, thanks for the detailed post. Glad it worked out, even with TD1. Obviously a know issue being that there is a TSB and specialized equipment to deal with it.

We'll have to keep tabs on this and see if "driving it like you stole it" slows down the onset or, wishful thinking here, prevents it altogether. Is yours the first case we know of on the boards?

[theedge111]

Neal, thanks for the detailed post. Glad it worked out, even with TD1. Obviously a know issue being that there is a TSB and specialized equipment to deal with it.

We'll have to keep tabs on this and see if "driving it like you stole it" slows down the onset or, wishful thinking here, prevents it altogether. Is yours the first case we know of on the boards?

Here's the first case, and I know another Canadian who's going through the same process also.


http://www.audizine.com/forum/showth...ghlight=Carbon

[isles1]

Thanks for the detailed write-up OP.

I am surprised that Sunoco is not listed as a Top Tier fuel, but Exxon is. Sunoco is the only gas I have found locally that does not have that "up to 10% Ethanol" disclosure sticker on its pumps; the Exxon station does have the disclosure sticker. I know Top Tier refers to additives, and perhaps Ethanol content has nothing to do with the additives discussed re:carbon buildup.

I can get 93 Octane gas at most local stations, including BP, Hess, Sunoco and Exxon. All have up to 10% Ethanol except Sunoco. Only Exxon is listed as a Top Tier fuel.

Should Ethanol content be a concern to prevent the problem in the OP?

[NWS4Guy]

According to your link the main cause of failure is a faulty SAI valve. Did the SA mention that at all? Also I am not sure the drive it like you stole it applies here since the damage is done during warm-up?

Thanks for the info. If I understand correctly, this is not carbon buildup as we saw it in the B7 RS4 but this will really just effect emissions and NOT performance. So back away from the ledge.

The link was a BMW M5, not sure on the valve, and if it exists or is designed the same in the Audi - no mention of this, but considering it plagued the 3.2L (which our engine is very closely based on) so I have to believe that it's being engineered around/looked into closely. The specialized equipment Leo mentioned, has to do with no longer needing to drop the engine and being able to use a new device with high pressure water to clean (roto-rooter?) these channels out.

You are correct that this is NOT CB on the intakes, but part of the secondary air system that pulls unburned junk through ports in the top of the exhaust port area, piping it into the exhaust just before the catalytic converters, in order to speed up getting the cats hot and functional to lower overall emissions. B7 RS4 has extreme buildup on the INTAKE ports, due to direct injection and no injector spraying fuel over the back of the intake ports to wash them off. This issue does only impact emissions, but you cannot pass emissions with a CEL, so even if you clear it, should they sniff it, there might be an issue (though not likely since this only impacts cold startup).

The "damage" is done during startup, but getting the engine nice and hot, and a lot of air moving through it at high RPM's will bake most of this just off, and blow it out of the channels to some degree.

[PitchS4]

The "damage" is done during startup, but getting the engine nice and hot, and a lot of air moving through it at high RPM's will bake most of this just off, and blow it out of the channels to some degree.

See I disagree with this. If the combi valve is doing it's job it should seal off the ports after warm-up. It closes off the SAI system once the system shuts down (as you mentioned ~1min after cold start) so I don't think driving it like you stole it is the solution.

If the system is as it was in previous Audi's it is simply the hose that connects the airbox to the pump, the pump itself, and another hose that connects the pump to the combi valve which is bolted to the head. There is then a series of channels through the head which is where the issue is occurring. The combi valve is vacuum operated so once the car is warm enough it closes and nothing should flow back up those channels including hot gases which *could* help with the issue.

I actually wonder how much the aftermarket intake has to do with this. If the pump loses some PSI with the mini-filter attached vice being connected to the airbox as it would be stock (where the airbox has some air flow from the air intake of the engine) it is possible that the pump can't keep the intended positive pressure in the SAI system and exhaust gases travel back up the channels.

I am just speculating feel free to school me.

[Norm_S4]

The link was a BMW M5, not sure on the valve, and if it exists or is designed the same in the Audi - no mention of this, but considering it plagued the 3.2L (which our engine is very closely based on) so I have to believe that it's being engineered around/looked into closely. The specialized equipment Leo mentioned, has to do with no longer needing to drop the engine and being able to use a new device with high pressure water to clean (roto-rooter?) these channels out.

You are correct that this is NOT CB on the intakes, but part of the secondary air system that pulls unburned junk through ports in the top of the exhaust port area, piping it into the exhaust just before the catalytic converters, in order to speed up getting the cats hot and functional to lower overall emissions. B7 RS4 has extreme buildup on the INTAKE ports, due to direct injection and no injector spraying fuel over the back of the intake ports to wash them off. This issue does only impact emissions, but you cannot pass emissions with a CEL, so even if you clear it, should they sniff it, there might be an issue (though not likely since this only impacts cold startup).

The "damage" is done during startup, but getting the engine nice and hot, and a lot of air moving through it at high RPM's will bake most of this just off, and blow it out of the channels to some degree.

If I may add being out of this dilemma myself with my other thread that folks all chimed in and helped alot;

- Driving like you stole it will not change anything on this and I can confirm unless you do so when the car is cold and then believe me it'll be more than CB the problem for folks in the cold areas
- Its all with the engine running cold and the secondary system used to lower emissions which will build carbon on all S4 as NWS4GUY outlines
- My dealer has confirmed doing it on more than one S4 and some have now racked over 85K and did not need to go back (this is BS maybe from them as I cant validate).
- You will loose the car for at least 16 hours of labor because they basically have to pull the motor out as the system lies in the back of the motor resting on the FW
- On top what the test sheet here shows, in my case they did a pressure test before and after to corroborate "cleanlyness" once everything pull back together.

The dealer added that Audi is aware of this engineering challenge and are thinkering with it but its not something that can affect 100% of everyone everywhere on the globe thus not simple as if you do something one way this might get ugly the other way or do damage elsewhere.

I'm thinking that for folks in the cold belt, nothing much can be done except maybe let it warm up a biut more before pushing more gas/air in the system by driving it but this is a toss because on the other hand driving it would warm it up faster...

Damend if you do damend if you dont.

[NWS4Guy]

I actually wonder how much the aftermarket intake has to do with this. If the pump loses some PSI with the mini-filter attached vice being connected to the airbox as it would be stock (where the airbox has some air flow from the air intake of the engine) it is possible that the pump can't keep the intended positive pressure in the SAI system and exhaust gases travel back up the channels.

Yes it certainly could be either a faulty valve, or perhaps with the tune, boost is higher than engineered for, causing the valve to either fail prematurely or be forced open, though I doubt this, as the force of combustion is going to be worlds higher than the amount of boost from the SC.

As Norm says below, and as you can see from the before and after values in my paperwork, showing that once the cleaning was done, all values were in tolerance (where 1.0 would be a value equal to normal air pressure, you can see the values are within a few % of this on the Maximum Relative and Differential Pressure. Pre cleaning it was at 50%, after it was at 95%).

If I may add being out of this dilemma myself with my other thread that folks all chimed in and helped alot;

- Driving like you stole it will not change anything on this and I can confirm unless you do so when the car is cold and then believe me it'll be more than CB the problem for folks in the cold areas
- Its all with the engine running cold and the secondary system used to lower emissions which will build carbon on all S4 as NWS4GUY outlines
- My dealer has confirmed doing it on more than one S4 and some have now racked over 85K and did not need to go back (this is BS maybe from them as I cant validate).
- You will loose the car for at least 16 hours of labor because they basically have to pull the motor out as the system lies in the back of the motor resting on the FW
- On top what the test sheet here shows, in my case they did a pressure test before and after to corroborate "cleanlyness" once everything pull back together.

The dealer added that Audi is aware of this engineering challenge and are thinkering with it but its not something that can affect 100% of everyone everywhere on the globe thus not simple as if you do something one way this might get ugly the other way or do damage elsewhere.

I'm thinking that for folks in the cold belt, nothing much can be done except maybe let it warm up a biut more before pushing more gas/air in the system by driving it but this is a toss because on the other hand driving it would warm it up faster...

Damend if you do damend if you dont.

I'm being optimistic, as there are some people who have 100K+ miles on there and no CEL, so something is up. I do know mine needs a quart of oil right about the 5K mark, so perhaps the usage of oil plays into this some with blow-by at cold engine temps. I do have to say that the SA's stance was that there was no way to avoid this totally, just to keep it at bay longer.

I will say that my dealer used the aforementioned high pressure water cleaning, and if my car had been diagnosed and put in sooner, I would have only had it down a single day - as it was they didn't start on it till 8:30am one morning, and they started out with a test drive, error code pulling, then engaging Audi before finally starting the process of cleaning around 11am, finishing the next day by 11:24am. While it's better than dropping the engine, there is still a LOT involved.

[Norm_S4]

Yes it certainly could be either a faulty valve, or perhaps with the tune, boost is higher than engineered for, causing the valve to either fail prematurely or be forced open, though I doubt this, as the force of combustion is going to be worlds higher than the amount of boost from the SC.

As Norm says below, and as you can see from the before and after values in my paperwork, showing that once the cleaning was done, all values were in tolerance (where 1.0 would be a value equal to normal air pressure, you can see the values are within a few % of this on the Maximum Relative and Differential Pressure. Pre cleaning it was at 50%, after it was at 95%).



I'm being optimistic, as there are some people who have 100K+ miles on there and no CEL, so something is up. I do know mine needs a quart of oil right about the 5K mark, so perhaps the usage of oil plays into this some with blow-by at cold engine temps. I do have to say that the SA's stance was that there was no way to avoid this totally, just to keep it at bay longer.

I will say that my dealer used the aforementioned high pressure water cleaning, and if my car had been diagnosed and put in sooner, I would have only had it down a single day - as it was they didn't start on it till 8:30am one morning, and they started out with a test drive, error code pulling, then engaging Audi before finally starting the process of cleaning around 11am, finishing the next day by 11:24am. While it's better than dropping the engine, there is still a LOT involved.

Yeah well I got the bad side of it and they had to pull everything down.

I would also think that sludge would more easily be developed by the oil than the actual gas grade (although I'm careful) but there's no way to test gas each time. 0W40 is the gage I'm putting and I wonder if the 0W should not be more like 5W to slow down this process.

The problem with 5W is that the engine on startup will stress components du to higher friction to make it turn?

I dont know but I'll keep an eye on the error codes from now on.

[AofC_RR]

The secondary air thing is pretty common on the 3.2 with valve lift as well.

[Chestlock]

Great info Neal, thanks for posting

[NWS4Guy]

This is why when I start my car I wait 15 seconds and go.

Uhhh...ok, but that won't do jack, just so you know.

[helix139]

Thanks for the detailed write-up OP.

I am surprised that Sunoco is not listed as a Top Tier fuel, but Exxon is. Sunoco is the only gas I have found locally that does not have that "up to 10% Ethanol" disclosure sticker on its pumps; the Exxon station does have the disclosure sticker. I know Top Tier refers to additives, and perhaps Ethanol content has nothing to do with the additives discussed re:carbon buildup.

I can get 93 Octane gas at most local stations, including BP, Hess, Sunoco and Exxon. All have up to 10% Ethanol except Sunoco. Only Exxon is listed as a Top Tier fuel.

Should Ethanol content be a concern to prevent the problem in the OP?

Top Tier is political as much as anything. While you can't really go wrong going with Top Tier, it doesn't mean that gas that isn't Top Tier isn't just as high quality. Ethanol content is actually part of the top tier designation, and part of the reason Sunoco isn't listed is probably because it does not contain ethanol. FWIW, I'd stick with the Ethanol-free Sunoco over the alternatives.

[NWS4Guy]

Top Tier is political as much as anything. While you can't really go wrong going with Top Tier, it doesn't mean that gas that isn't Top Tier isn't just as high quality. Ethanol content is actually part of the top tier designation, and part of the reason Sunoco isn't listed is probably because it does not contain ethanol. FWIW, I'd stick with the Ethanol-free Sunoco over the alternatives.

Correct, you have to pay into the pot then submit to testing to be classified as "Top Tier" it's not independent testing, it's a club you pay to be a part of. There are likely some companies which have as good or better fuel than the Top Tier companies, however, you won't know that. Likewise, there will be many which are inferior to Top Tier companies, and you also won't know - you will know there is a standard the Top Tier companies do follow and adhere to, that is benefit.

[isles1]

helix139 and NWS4Guy: I appreciate the input. I pretty much stick to Exxon and Sunoco, so I guess no really worries with either. Thanks.

[helix139]

helix139 and NWS4Guy: I appreciate the input. I pretty much stick to Exxon and Sunoco, so I guess no really worries with either. Thanks.

You'll be fine with BP also, FWIW. Their gas is excellent quality (minus the Ethanol BS), they just haven't paid into the Top Tier group.

[PitchS4]

Back when I was doing regular logging of my B5 I saw better timing Sunoco vs. Exxon on a consistent basis so I've been a Sunoco fanboy. I attributed it to the Ethanol but this was also 3-4 years ago.

[NWS4Guy]

Yea unfortunately almost 100% of all stations in WA state use "at least 10% ethanol" blend. It's garbage, and actually makes you use MORE gas, ethanol releases harmful things like formaldehyde that the cats cannot remove, AND drives up the price of grains, making my bacon cost more too.

[helix139]

Yea unfortunately almost 100% of all stations in WA state use "at least 10% ethanol" blend. It's garbage, and actually makes you use MORE gas, ethanol releases harmful things like formaldehyde that the cats cannot remove, AND drives up the price of grains, making my bacon cost more too.

Same here in Florida. There are a couple of stations in driving distance that offer ethanol-free gas, but only in mid grade 89 or 90 octane. The only people E10 is good for is the corn lobby. I wish I had the option for ethanol-free premium, even if it was slightly higher cost.

[theKB]

Same here in Florida. There are a couple of stations in driving distance that offer ethanol-free gas, but only in mid grade 89 or 90 octane. The only people E10 is good for is the corn lobby. I wish I had the option for ethanol-free premium, even if it was slightly higher cost.

It's funny the only thing in BC that is ethanol free is the 94 octane from Chevron, everything else can contain "up to" 5% ethanol.

[Ynnekdude]

Glad things got covered under warranty. I'm assuming my car is susceptible to the same CEL in the future?

[Leor604]

It's funny the only thing in BC that is ethanol free is the 94 octane from Chevron, everything else can contain "up to" 5% ethanol.

I believe our fuels are "up to 10% ethanol". My car sees nothing but Chevron 94 (until I go to track days and use the craptastic WA and OR gas ).

[FatalBert]

V-Power!!!!!

[NWS4Guy]

It's funny the only thing in BC that is ethanol free is the 94 octane from Chevron, everything else can contain "up to" 5% ethanol.

Ours are up to 10%, and you guys don't know what bacon really is. I have tried yours and it's really only good on pizza. What do you call ham?

Glad things got covered under warranty. I'm assuming my car is susceptible to the same CEL in the future?

So it would seem, depending on fuel, temps, mileage, and other variables...

[s4bw]

I believe our fuels are "up to 10% ethanol". My car sees nothing but Chevron 94 (until I go to track days and use the craptastic WA and OR gas ).

Chevron says on the pump "up to 10% ethanol" on everything except 94 where it says "contains no ethanol" I hope this is a good thing for our cars here in BC because that's all I use as well.

[svander]

Ours are up to 10%, and you guys don't know what bacon really is. I have tried yours and it's really only good on pizza. What do you call ham?

Haha!

[Snyper886]

I believe our fuels are "up to 10% ethanol". My car sees nothing but Chevron 94 (until I go to track days and use the craptastic WA and OR gas ).

I also fill Chevron 94 as it's a seperate nozzle that has a sticker "Contains no ethanol". I've heard Shell V-Power 91 is also ethanol-free however sometimes it's on the same nozzle as lower grades.

[Vogz]

Yea unfortunately almost 100% of all stations in WA state use "at least 10% ethanol" blend. It's garbage, and actually makes you use MORE gas, ethanol releases harmful things like formaldehyde that the cats cannot remove, AND drives up the price of grains, making my bacon cost more too.

No shit. Illinois is all on the Ethanol bandwagon. In the case of E85 it can be an awesome alternative to race gas, but in the case of E10 and soon to be E20 in Illinois, it hurts much more than it helps.

[aaronz]

Yea unfortunately almost 100% of all stations in WA state use "at least 10% ethanol" blend. It's garbage, and actually makes you use MORE gas, ethanol releases harmful things like formaldehyde that the cats cannot remove, AND drives up the price of grains, making my bacon cost more too.

hahaha awesome post, love that all guys can somehow bring it back to Bacon!

[aaronz]

I am surprised there are no good "Gas to Get" threads out there. To second Vogz post, Illinois is all about the eth, and I cant think of one gas station near me (Western Suburbs of Chicago) that doesn't have ethanol. Would be curious if anyone knows of any?

[achilleas101]

i think some folks may not realize this, but gas between brands has pretty much no difference. The *additives* are pretty much the only difference, and we're talking about 1 qt of additive in an 8000 gallon tanker truck. All brands share the same oil pipelines. If you ever go by a tanker farm/fill up station, you'll see aaaalll different brands of tankers going in and out. They don't have their own individual pipelines feeding in there. They all use the same ones and fill up the same gas. So a Shell station can be using gas refined by Exxon or Chevron and vice versa. The difference comes in when one of the tankers fills up and then they add whatever additive detergent they want.

so you can go buy some cheapo 7-11 gas and then a bottle of Techron additive and you'll have the same, if not better detergents as you would from a Chevron station (and you don't even need to put a whole bottle of the techron in your fill up to match what you'd get at the station.. nowadays they sell the concentrated stuff that is supposed to be for ever 3k mile usage). The gas itself though will be the same.

[helix139]

I am surprised there are no good "Gas to Get" threads out there. To second Vogz post, Illinois is all about the eth, and I cant think of one gas station near me (Western Suburbs of Chicago) that doesn't have ethanol. Would be curious if anyone knows of any?

puregas.org

[aaronz]

puregas.org

Thank you sir

[westwest888]

I use Chevron 91 almost exclusively. Only 25k miles, mild climate, garaged, not daily driven, track beat 5x a year.

[Blake P]

Other than the random CEL, were there any other symptoms your car was showing? Not sure if any of this translates to the 2.0T, but I've been getting a rough idle at startup that sounds and feels like constant misfires, but as soon as the secondary air system shuts off (45 seconds or so) the car idles normally. I was starting to get CEL pretty often when it first started happening, but after using some fuel additives (Techron fuel system cleaner twice, followed by the strong stuff my dealer gave me), I haven't seen CEL in a while. The dealer wanted to try additive cleaning first, then move on from there if the problem persisted.

[Brooklyn]

I worked at a Gate gas station back in the 90's when I was in college. Same dude who filled our tanks filled the Texaco and another brand that I'm blanking on up the street.

[NWS4Guy]

Other than the random CEL, were there any other symptoms your car was showing? Not sure if any of this translates to the 2.0T, but I've been getting a rough idle at startup that sounds and feels like constant misfires, but as soon as the secondary air system shuts off (45 seconds or so) the car idles normally. I was starting to get CEL pretty often when it first started happening, but after using some fuel additives (Techron fuel system cleaner twice, followed by the strong stuff my dealer gave me), I haven't seen CEL in a while. The dealer wanted to try additive cleaning first, then move on from there if the problem persisted.

No symptoms at all on my car, the CEL would come on immediately at startup (when it was trying to get suction on the pump, as this system only works during the first minute or so of startup). It went away after a few days without clearing the code each time. Service tech sais sometimes it DOES cause a rough idle at startup like a misfire, but this would not cause a misfire.

[Blake P]

No symptoms at all on my car, the CEL would come on immediately at startup (when it was trying to get suction on the pump, as this system only works during the first minute or so of startup). It went away after a few days without clearing the code each time. Service tech sais sometimes it DOES cause a rough idle at startup like a misfire, but this would not cause a misfire.

Yeah, I figured it wasn't actual misfires but that's the closest thing I can compare it to. Did they say that the manual cleaning was your only option? Did they mention what the short/long term effects would be if you chose not to have it fixed? I don't plan on keeping this car much longer, so I'd rather not dump a bunch of money into having it fixed if I don't NEED to.

[Norm_S4]

Other than the random CEL, were there any other symptoms your car was showing? Not sure if any of this translates to the 2.0T, but I've been getting a rough idle at startup that sounds and feels like constant misfires, but as soon as the secondary air system shuts off (45 seconds or so) the car idles normally. I was starting to get CEL pretty often when it first started happening, but after using some fuel additives (Techron fuel system cleaner twice, followed by the strong stuff my dealer gave me), I haven't seen CEL in a while. The dealer wanted to try additive cleaning first, then move on from there if the problem persisted.

No symptoms at all on my car, the CEL would come on immediately at startup (when it was trying to get suction on the pump, as this system only works during the first minute or so of startup). It went away after a few days without clearing the code each time. Service tech sais sometimes it DOES cause a rough idle at startup like a misfire, but this would not cause a misfire.

Neither have I experienced rough idle. I just got the cell warning and brought it in. It was random and did it twice before I took it in. Mind you my warranty was almost up so no chance to take here. All the part about Ethanol is very instructive and might be the culprit but I'm not convinced.

One odd behavior while between cells warning, my car, when cold would have a very faint exhaust sound where it almost felt like drone/small backfires. I have the EOM system but once the car was warm this would amost go totally away but my memory being what it is i cant confirm. Then, once they pulled it apart and did the job, now its pure no drone/backfires whatsoever.

I will certainly test an occasional additive in the tank as even Canada is getting on the bandwagon of Ethanol mixes. We stand at 5% now but we're going up I think.