Quote:
Originally Posted by LDB
I can't read the site without paying but hope it's good news long term.
|
Bosch is claiming they can lower NOx through air flow, temperature control, and EGR.
I am guessing it is a lower compression engine like Mazda's SkyActiv-D. That one could meet most of the world's emission regulations without SCR, but couldn't be made to pass the EPA without compromising performance and/or efficiency.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Draigflag
This is a classic case of being misled and influenced by the media. The auto industry is really annoyed that people are being discouraged from buying new clean diesels, and sadly, C02 emissions have risen for the first time in the UK for decades as a result.
|
The diesel companies brought it on themselves with the cheating and lobbying for laxer emission regulations. The cheating broke the public's trust, and they don't want to live and work in smoggy cities.
It is a shame, because I think diesel engines are the best bet for going from petroleum to some renewable and sustainable fuel.
Quote:
Here's an interesting fact for you, discovered after real world testing just after the emissions scandal :
If you take the 10% cleanest diesels and compare them to the 10% dirtiest petrols, the N0X emissions of the petrol cars are double that of the diesels. There are no winners or loosers, if you don't like pollution, stop driving a fossil fueled car, and stop blaming diesel for pollution.
|
They had too find the worst petrols to compare to the cleanest diesels. Were the petrols also over 20 years old, and the diesels new?
Petrols do exceed the NOx limits when tested on the road. Generally it is around 10% or so more. Diesels generally exceed it by more. Sometimes a lot more, like multiple times the limit.
Diesel can be made clean, and petrols have areas where they can be improved. From the little said by Bosch, I have my doubts about their fix. A major truck company nearly went under chasing a non-SCR solution here. I also have doubts about Mazda's HCCI engine. Both sound too good to be true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LDB
In our little corner of the world diesel is about 9% higher priced than regular. That lessens it's advantage somewhat. I don't know why it is higher priced other than they can get away with it. My dad used to say the diesel fuel was the dregs from the oil barrel and cost less to provide than gasoline. My first memory of buying fuel was about 47 years ago. Gasoline was 27.9 cents a gallon when I spent a whopping 17 cents to fill my Honda CT-70. I don't remember exactly but diesel was less than twenty cents a gallon.
|
Your father was mostly correct. Getting gasoline from crude required more refining. Even when the crude source was rich in native gasoline, refining was needed because that gas was a much lower octane than what engines need. Getting diesel was mostly just distilling it off.
But things change. ULSD required more refining. The cost increase for that was small, but the diesel made by US refineries was now acceptable for use in other markets. Before there was an over supply of diesel in the US, with only seasonal price changes from competition with the heating oil market. Now that over supply is being exported. So prices have gone up as supply went down.
On top of that, the boom in crude production from fracking is a light crude. Great for gasoline, but poor for diesel. Getting diesel from it is technically possible, but with more refining like is used for gasoline now. This means we get less diesel from a barrel of it than a heavy crude, like Saudi and Venezuelian crude. There is also inefficiencies in refining it, because the Gulf coast refineries that it is easiest to ship this tight oil too were designed for processing heavy, sour crude.
Linear Mode
