Archives

I got an email a few days ago inviting people to share their ideas with the Obama administration and the top rated ones would be given to the President after he is sworn in.

I did a search and found one of the ideas being discussed was "Diesel Vehicles Could Be the Conservation Answer". They are discussing the problems with diesel pricing and availability and how it needs to be changed so that we can get high mileage diesel on the road in the US like they are in Europe.

Here is the link if you would like to go register and vote on this issue so that it gets presented to the President:

Diesel Vehicles Could Be the Conservation Answer (http://citizensbriefingbook.change.gov/ideas/viewIdea.apexp?id=087800000004nt3&lsr=0#comments)

With this idea, biodiesel would be right on the horizon...

Yes, diesel fuel must be the answer. It costs more than unleaded because of the laws of supply and demand. So it must already be in higher demand than unleaded. That's how the news would spin it.

Diesel also costs less than unleaded to refine (About 25%).

We are simply wasting 30% of our crude oil with the US gasoline refining structure.

Change refining or waste more crude?

How are we "wasting 30%" ? All of it gets used...

It gets used 30% less efficiently than it could be. "Waste" by any other name.

I suppose, though you could argue that the cleaner emissions are worth the trade off.

You can, but diesel is as clean or cleaner now than gas. For example, the carbon footprint of the VW TDI sportwagen is 6.2 vs. 7.3 for the gas model. 15% is pretty significant.

This is why europeans can't understand our infatuation with hybrids.

For other emissions, the Tier 2 Bin 5 standards are now same for both gas and diesel and it is likely that diesel will be getting even cleaner, particularly on a per mile basis.

While true, I don't think you'll be able to get to the PZEV level with Diesel.

I guess we'll have to wait and see because personally, I'd love to have something like the iCDTi. :)

Actually, BMW appears close to hitting SULEV ( http://www.dieselforecast.com/ArticleDetails.php?articleID=521 ), and thus PZEV since diesel fuel is essentially non-volatile (at least compared to gasoline), assuming it can meet the 150K mile requirement.

While true, I don't think you'll be able to get to the PZEV level with Diesel.

That's the problem with CARB and it's effect on the 49 other states!

Do we really need PZEV ("partial zero" emissions vehicles) in Peoria, Bangor, Bismarck or 99.5% of north america?

1.) While we transition to new propulsion systems over the next 20 or so years we will have to manage how to stretch oil. Given that oil will collapse relatively soon, the period of exposure to today's already greatly reduced emissions is small.

2.) It appears hydrocarbon (HC) emissions are more the cause to smog. Today's diesels are double-digit better % than gassers in HC emissions.

It also appears that NOX, diesel's weakness viz petrol emissions, is not as great a factor as once (CARB) believed (http://secure.awma.org/journal/Abstract.aspx?id=2017). (wxman, jump in here anytime.) With that, NOX levels are greatly reduced to the same standard as many effiecient cars (e.g. VW TDI to ULEV-II).

It's a question of managing the retreat from oil.

A couple of well meaning folks trying to manage something that affects us all and they're in way over their heads (http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/factsheets/2008zevfacts.pdf). What a mess.

That's the problem with CARB and it's effect on the 49 other states!

Do we really need PZEV ("partial zero" emissions vehicles) in Peoria, Bangor, Bismarck or 99.5% of north america?

1.) While we transition to new propulsion systems over the next 20 or so years we will have to manage how to stretch oil. Given that oil will collapse relatively soon, the period of exposure to today's already greatly reduced emissions is small.

2.) It appears hydrocarbon (HC) emissions are more the cause to smog. Today's diesels are double-digit better % than gassers in HC emissions.

It also appears that NOX, diesel's weakness viz petrol emissions, is not as great a factor as once (CARB) believed (http://secure.awma.org/journal/Abstract.aspx?id=2017). (wxman, jump in here anytime.) With that, NOX levels are greatly reduced to the same standard as many effiecient cars (e.g. VW TDI to ULEV-II).

It's a question of managing the retreat from oil.

A couple of well meaning folks trying to manage something that affects us all and they're in way over their heads (http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/factsheets/2008zevfacts.pdf). What a mess.


I completely agree. The peer-reviewed paper recently published in a respected scientific journal on air quality - Journal of the Air and Waste Management Association - the abstract of which is linked by flatty above, concludes that ALL major metropolitan areas in the U.S. studied so far experience the "weekend effect" and thus are "VOC-limited with respect to ozone formation" meaning that reducing ambient NOx levels relatively more than ambient HC levels will not only not reduce ambient ozone ("smog"), it has the potential to make it worse (see summary of paper at http://www.dieselnet.com/news/2009/01nrel.php ). Notice the last sentence in the "Implications" paragraph - "...The findings from this study suggest that timely attainment of O3 standards will require greater emphasis on reducing VOC emissions in major metropolitan areas."

The actual distinction between LEV II/Bin 5 and PZEV/Bin 2 NOx emission levels borders on being trivial anyway. If hypothetically 100% of the U.S. light-duty fleet was emitting at the Bin 5/LEV II FTP75 levels (0.06 g/mi - the approximate average between the 50K standard and the 120K standard) and was then hypothetically changed to 100% emitting at the Bin 2/SULEV emission level (0.02 g/mi), the reduction in all anthropogenic NOx emissions would amount to less than 1% (about 0.5 %) based on EPA's NOx emission inventory data from 2006 (latest data available).

how come a good ol boy can daily drive his 6.2L (or close to there) twin turbo dually pick up 4X4 giamongous cab with no people in it no cargo,
but mr save fuel cant have a diesel yaris because emissions arent there yet? am i missing something?

also i think americans need to get over their bad experiences with diesel and just buy some of them, they will love them, a friend of mine has a diesel bug and loves it

That's my question, too. It comes down to the trucks being exempt because they are "business vehicles". Too bad most of them are not used as such, but rather as commuters. Makes me mad.

makes me mad too